1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

'M. Zuiko 75mm ƒ1.8 Is Not Really That Expensive'

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by RT_Panther, Sep 10, 2012.

  1. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    this is just going to spur up comparisons to various 85mm designs. and then arguments for DOF. And then arguments for physical vs FOV comparisons. And end with buy it if it makes you happy =P
     
    • Like Like x 7
  3. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    This would be the answer to any "should I buy this lens?"
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. LeoS

    LeoS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    517
    Aug 6, 2012
    That will just change the question to 'Will this lens make me happy?'
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    And then on the other hand,
    The cheap M. Zuiko 17mm ƒ2.8 is not well accepted by many Micro Four Thirds shooters.....:smile:
     
  6. jeffg53

    jeffg53 Mu-43 Veteran

    270
    Aug 22, 2012
    Sydney, Australia
    Jeff Grant
    Actually, I have owned the Canon and Sony in the past and now own the 75. They are all excellent lenses but I wouldn't want anything other than the Oly on my OM D so I wonder what the point of the question is.
     
  7. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    The point is....
    1) M. Zuiko has a 35mm effective focal length of 150mm....

    2) So if you were shooting full frame and you wanted a fast prime with +100mm focal length, you're going to pay quite a bit more than the cost of the M. Zuiko 75mm...

    :smile:
     
  8. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    got a 3" f1.8 kinotel... for $20.
     
  9. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
  10. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Why are you asking a question that you already know the answer to? :wink:
    (See, I can be sarcastic too) :biggrin:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    RT, this is like a religious argument in the end. Some people don't accept the idea that it's an apples to apples comparison, and there is some logic to that point of view. If you had a megazoom pocket camera with a 1/2.5" (tiny) sensor and an outstanding stabilized 500mm EFL f/2.8 (fast) zoom, you wouldn't expect that camera to cost as much as a Canon 500mm f/4L IS lens.

    I think all of these discussions reduce too much to the EFL and lens speed. The quality of the lens optics, build, etc, are ultimately very important. Even QC has a major effect on price. When you pay $3,000 for a Leica 35mm f/2 lens, you're not getting a fast lens, and based on all these inter-system comparisons you are getting suckered big time.

    In the end, you pays your money, and you takes your choice.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    priceless because they don't exist =P
     
  13. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    I'll buy this :smile:
     
  14. troutgeek

    troutgeek Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Aug 15, 2012
    Madison, WI area.
    I'm not sure if I agree with all of this. A 75mm is a 75mm. It should be compared to a 75mm. It does not have the reach of a 150mm. It has the crop factor that makes it fill the sensor as if it's a 150mm, but not the reach of a 150mm. That said, if it were waterproofed, it would be an L class lens. Some day I'll own one, and it will make me feel good.
     
  15. jeffg53

    jeffg53 Mu-43 Veteran

    270
    Aug 22, 2012
    Sydney, Australia
    Jeff Grant
    One of the things that I like about M43 is that there are some seriously good lenses around at reasonable prices, and the 43 HG and SHG are also available, provided you can live with the AF. Actually, it all looks cheap when you compare it to this: Hasselblad Telephoto 210mm f/4 HC Auto Focus Lens for H 30 23210

    I think that the Oly 75 would stand up well against the others. The only Canon lense that I ever really liked was the 300 2.8. The Zeiss 135 is beautiful but I suspect that the Oly would give it a very good run any time.

    I guess that the point for me is that M43 has so many good things going for it that I have no interest in DSLRs any more. Another thing is that there doesn't appear to be the '******ism' with this gear that there is in the DSLR world. Maybe its down to the M43 standard but it's very pleasant.
     
  16. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    I can agree with that..........
    And,.... "ƒ1.8 is ƒ1.8" regardless of lens size or mount....
     
  17. cmpatti

    cmpatti Mu-43 Veteran

    263
    May 8, 2011
    Berkeley, CA
    So it's interesting to compare the Oly 75mm 1.8 to similar spec lenses in different mounts. Take the Canon 85mm 1.8, for example. That lens is bigger, covers twice the image circle and costs less than half as much as the Oly 75. On the other hand, testing results I've seen suggest that the Oly has way better image quality from f/1.8 to f/5.6. People seem willing to pay thousands for the supposed better image quality of Leica lenses, so who's to say it's not worth it in this case?
     
  18. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Nowhere near all L glass is weather sealed.

    I'd be interested to know how people who have owned the 135L (and used it on a fullframe) feel the 75 holds up. If it's close to the same league of what is probably my favourite portrait lens ever, it may very well be the next purchase...
     
  19. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    Bangkok
    rob collins
    The Olympus 75 1.8 does look pretty expensive when compared to the Canon and Nikon 85 1.8s both of which have (I believe) excellent reputations for being extremely sharp.

    However, there is no doubt that the 75 1.8 is an exceptionally well built lens and is not a US$500 lens for sure. But dont take my word for it. Rodger Cicala at Lensrental.com took the lens apart and basically concluded that you get what you pay for.

    LensRentals.com - The Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is Expensive Because It’s Worth It.
     
  20. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Yes...and folks also seem to forget about the amount of "ED" glass that's in the 75 compared to other M. Zuiko lenses...:wink: