Lenses Like the 75 That Make You Say Wow?

[tjdean01]

I've heard a lot of reports from users of the 75 that they are just amazed. Sure, I can see the great pictures people have post online but it's not the same as actually using the lens yourself. The same is said about Sony's new 55/1.8 for the A7 line. On the sharpness scores the lens looks mediocre but people love it. I'm just wondering if any other lenses have had you guys amazed because they're just that good. Does the 45 fit the bill? The 60/2.8? With my list of low-priced lenses I can't really say that I've really been amazed. My favorite lens to use is still the first one I bought: a niffy fifty. Sure, the fisheye is remarkably sharp as is the 30/2.8. But I can't really say I've had and "amazing shooting experience" like people are claming with the 75 or that Sony. Hopefully 45 will when I get it!

 

[Gillymaru]

The Nokton 25mm 0.95 always makes me say wow. It has a special character that I can' t get with any of my other lenses

 

[bigboysdad]

the pictures are amazing that I can see online but it's not the same if you're not taking the picture.

Sorry, can you explain that again? Not sure I understand. Thanks.

 

[swede]

I just recieved the oly 25 1.8.... It made me feel wow at once, compared to my previous normal lens (nikkor 50 1.8G) it really is wow....

 

[janneman]

The biggest wow to me was the Samyang 7.5mm. The 'wow'-part is probably caused by the difference between what I expected. Its a a cheap fish eye, so I expected it to be not that sharp to begin with, with worse corners, and a limited use because of the strong distortion.
What I got was a lens that was as sharp as any other prime, included the 45, and a lot more use because the fish eye effect is tunable with composition and even software correction in PP. All in all not the gimmick lens I expected, but a serious tool that I prefer to have with me at all times.

I think expectancy has a lot to do with how people see lenses. After so many people prising the 'humble' 40-150 F4-5.6, I was just disappointed by it. It was not bad, but I expected more. In my case Samyang was exactly the opposite.

 

[jrsilva]

For me the ones that have wow factor are prime lenses.
The Oly 75mm really have that wow factor. It is the lens that I like the most.
But before that (and I still have and use them) the Pana-Leica 25mm, the Oly 45mm and Oly 60mm also made me say wow.
The Oly 60mm Macro was my poor man's 75mm for some time. It was a good surprise, because people don't talk much about it but it is as sharp as the 75mm and have same color rendering, only does not have the same bokeh, but very pleasant bokeh any way.
I think micro 4/3 system have so many good lenses to choose from.

 

[manzoid]

For me is probably the Panasonic 12-35mm. Not that it is better than my primes, but because is the first zoom I've had that seems great wide open to my eyes. (Note: is also my first premium zoom)

 

[wjiang]

IQ-wise, PL25 and 7.5FE. Inexplicable enjoyment factor - 12-32 pancake.

 

[nstelemark]

14-35

 

[Deleted member 20897]

For me, 99% of the m43 primes - regardless of maker have had that effect on me. The only one that did not was the Oly 17/2.8

 

[wushumr2]

You might have had a bad 75mm. I've had two and both times they've been great. 135mm F2.8 lenses for SLRs have usually been very very good lenses, and the 75mm is very much in that vein. If you're mainly shooting indoors you might not be nailing focus; I know with contrast-only focus in low light (mainly with slower lenses) it can be slightly off depending on what you're shooting (I have Rottweilers, so dark fur with brown spots against much lighter backgrounds indoors doesn't make CDAF happy at ALL).

 

[kwalsh]

The 42.5/1.2 is a definite "wow" lens, perhaps even more so than the 75/1.8. Unfortunately the very first "wow" you get out of the 42.5 is the price tag!

Being a zoom it has more compromises of course, but I've gotten some "wow" from the 12-40/2.8 as well. Doesn't seem like a zoom should be that great wide open, excellent micro-contrast and bokeh. But it is sort of a qualified "wow" in that it is "wow, that's from a zoom".

 

[Vivalo]

I have had many good prime lenses but all of them have compromises wide open, mostly Ca and corner softness. The 12-40 2.8 zoom has been a real "wow"-lens for me since the only compromise seems to be its size and 2.8 max aperture.

 

[darrellc]

Out of the lenses I have or have had, these wow me:

Best ever lens I've had, by far:

Sony RX1's 35/2 Sonnar


m4/3:

Oly 75/1.8
PL 42.5/1.2
PL 25/1.4 (not on par with above, but remarkably good)

And on a7/A7s

Sony FE 55/1.8
Leica R 50/2 at f/2.8 and above
Nokton 35/1.2 v2 at f/1.8 or so and above
Leica Summarit 90/2.5
Zeiss ZM Sonnar C 50/1.5 (not technically, just delivers amazing color and character that always stands out)

 

[Wisertime]

I think the 45m, 60mm Macro, either of the panny/oly 25mm fit the bill. The 12-40 is impressive too. I never owned it, but the 150mm F2 was one that was a definite notch above the other fabulous HG lenses like the 12-60, 14-54, 11-22.

I have photos with the 60mm that I wouldn't be able to tell apart from the 75. I can't decide which one to sell. I do love them both, but it's kinda silly to keep both.

The 35-100 looks solid too, but gets no love around here...but I don't have any experience with it personally.

 

[Gonewest]

Back in my film days my Zuiko 100mm/f2.8 was a wow lens. I never really got on with the focal length, but the lens was so small and sharp I always carried it with me.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

The 75mm is optically beautiful, but I didn't like how it would hunt focus at closer distances. If it came with a focus limiter, then it would be perfect. Strangely, I'm getting more joy out of my Sigma 60mm 2.8 DN due to it's faster focusing, ridiculous sharpness and CHEAP price!

 

[Turbofrog]

I think the 45m, 60mm Macro, either of the panny/oly 25mm fit the bill. The 12-40 is impressive too. I never owned it, but the 150mm F2 was one that was a definite notch above the other fabulous HG lenses like the 12-60, 14-54, 11-22.

I have photos with the 60mm that I wouldn't be able to tell apart from the 75. I can't decide which one to sell. I do love them both, but it's kinda silly to keep both.

The 35-100 looks solid too, but gets no love around here...but I don't have any experience with it personally.

Yes, the form factor of the 35-100 is incredibly impressive. I've heard some downers about its OIS performance during video, but I don't film very much, so that doesn't bother me a lot. But the price tag is more than I can justify. Right now I'm using a Canon FD 50-135 f3.5 with a focal reducer, giving me a ~35-100 f2.5. But it's obviously bigger, heavier, manual focus, and ultimately won't match the sharpness of the native lens. But it does the trick for me at the moment.

 

[mattia]

The FE 55/1.8 - sharp, great rendering, all-round wonderful lens. Other 'special' lenses for me remain Canon's 35/1.4 and especially the 135/2.0 L lenses. I also have a soft spot for my Zeiss Contax 50/1.4. It's not super sharp wide open but it 'draws' in a unique way..

 

[Neftun]

The first true "wow" for me was with the tamron 90f2.8, unstabilised version. But in m43 world it was the oly 45 that I tried just for kicks on my ep1. That one made me take the system seriously, and not think of it as a fun toy-format anymore. I took one home the same day I tried it Some of my definitive favorite portraits and landscapes are with the 45, which cleanes up beautifully even from f2,0.

But my PL 25 and oly 75 are always in my bag. Best lenses I've ever had.