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

O60 or O75

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Chrisnmn, Mar 18, 2013.

  1. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Chris
    Ok guys, here goes another one!.

    Im the kind of guy that sold the O45 because i barely used it, not because i didnt like the IQ or the lens. But I love my P100-300 for tele landscapes, birding, and what not. And currently dont have anything in between my P25 and my P100-300.

    And i would love to get one of these for thin DOF, some portraits and really get some stunning resolution "short-tele" landscapes.

    Lets say both have the EXACT same IQ which one would you pick and why?.

    I know one is a macro lens. And is one stop slower

    Then the other is one stop faster but doesnt double as a macro, but is longer so compresses the background more and maybe creates "creamier" bokeh?.

    Also one is plastic yet weather sealed while the other is metal and not weather sealed.

    Basically my bottomline is, which one would you think is a more versatile lens? that would have more than use?.

    Ive only personally tried the O60. loved it. Havent tried the O75 but theres no one in Google (world) that could say a bad word about it maybe the only thing is that is TOO long?. thats why i dont even want to go into the IQ discussion. this is more about use than "quality".
     
  2. Rudy

    Rudy Mu-43 Veteran

    449
    Jan 24, 2013
    Oakland, CA
    I'm not sure why you would be using either one more than the 45, only you can answer this. The 45 fills the gap better than either one.
    The focal length of the 60 and 75 are close enough that in most cases you could reframe by taking a few steps, so it comes down to the 1.5 f-stop advantage of the 75. It's more a question of low light speed if you ask me. In most cases (for portraits) you would want to stop the 75 down a bit as the wide open DOF is actually too shallow to get both eyes in focus, when tightly framed.
    I currently have all three lenses, trying to figure out which I like best or if I want to keep them all :tongue:
    The 45 is so small, it fits into a pocket to make a bag free two lens combo.
    The 60 is weather sealed, nice if you have an OM-D. The macro function can be disabled with a switch, improving the AF speed.
    The 75 just feels really nice to handle and calls you out to go shooting, but I don't think I would get one I were to carry the 100-300 with me at the same time.
    Sorry, reading what I just wrote, I don't think I helped you out at all :rolleyes:
    Rudy
    p.s. love the images on your web site
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Livnius

    Livnius Super Moderator

    Jul 7, 2011
    Melbourne. Australia
    Joe
    Use not quality ? Ok.

    Is macro something you would do often ?

    1. YES
    2. Once in a while/infrequently.
    3. NO

    1....get the 60.
    2....get the 75.
    3....get the 75.

    I recently purchased the awesome Kenko macro extension tubes as a trial, I love viewing macro images so I wanted to find out if I liked actually shooting macro, the Kenko tubes were a cost effective way to figure that out. I kicked around with them on my O45 and O75 for a few runs to see. The plan was if I got really into it I would sell the tubes and get a dedicated macro lens. Turns out although I like viewin macro images in reality, it wasn't something I got into doing myself. Sold the tubes. I still enjoying viewing other people's macro stuff.

    Have you considered the PL45 ? Sits nicely between 25 and 100.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Azon

    Azon Mu-43 Regular

    131
    Jan 6, 2013
    If about use as 60 much much more versatile lens. Macro+ mid tele and nice portrait ability in one bottle.
    75 is a strange focus range but much faster in AF action and unbeatable for portrait work if you have space to sep back. Also I used it ones with Raynox 250 and results for my test pretty good however far from O60 and usability with this setup not much convenient.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    I have the 75... I have briefly tried the 60... bottom line is that one is a designed primarily and is marketed as a macro and the other is designed and marketed to be the flagship lens of the system... the sticker price reflects this

    Personally I have found the 75 to be a remarkably flexible and capable lens, especially its ability to work beautifully wide open.

    The jump from 60 to 75 is a noticeable change in FOV. I personally haven't found it 'too long', I have used to to shoot whales, flowers, street, pretend fashion :) and live music.

    Olympus 75/1.8 - a set on Flickr

    could I have done the same on the 60... maybe... but I do think I would miss the 1 and a 3rd stops. I know I have railed against others on this forum about pursuing ever faster lenses... but 1.8 is a pleasant sweet spot that is both useful and manageable.

    k
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    oh just looked at your shots.... you absolutely need/deserve/will smile every time you shoot with the 75

    K
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    I'd go with the 75mm (in fact, I did - I had both and sold the 60mm). Granted, I have the PL 45mm still for macro, but ultimately I looked at it this way:

    * Both are great sharp longish primes, so there's a certain amount of overlap
    * 75mm's larger f/1.8 aperture is more versatile especially for say, indoor events, concerts etc. or subject isolation
    * 75mm can be used with a close-up lens or I can use the PL 45mm for macro (and I don't shoot much macro anyway)
    * Weather sealing: great! But realistically, when would I want a mid-telephoto prime in poor weather, except maybe on a wildlife boat tour, or doing macro work outside in the rain? Especially since if it's raining, I'm highly unlikely to want to change lenses. Much more likely I'd be using the 12-35mm or some other wide->normal lens in most scenarios.

    So I'm with Livnius - if you're shooting a lot of macro, get the 60mm because it's more versatile in that respect and can pinch-hit for portraits. Otherwise, the 75mm is going to be more versatile as a low light + portraits + telephoto lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. dcassat

    dcassat Mu-43 Veteran

    272
    Nov 16, 2011
    Cloverdale,CA
    But, the thing is...

    They're are not the same IQ, I'm not convinced just how much it matters but the 75mm is so incredibly sharp - it is the sharpest lens you can buy for this system.

    For quality of image the 75mm
    For versatility the 60mm.

    It's already been said but maybe if I say it again it will be more true. :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. mkee

    mkee Mu-43 Regular

    122
    May 9, 2012
    Long Beach CA
    I have both and they are both amazing. I would say of you never have shot the 75 get the 60 and here is why. The 75 is just too good. It makes me feel that all my other lenses are sub par (which is not the case). It's one of those things that once you have it, it makes it hard to go back hehe.

    I digress, the 60 is great and cheaper and in my opinion a more useable focal length. I think if I would have got it before the 75 I think I would of stuck with just the 60. Now that I have seen the sharpness of the 75 it makes it just to hard to part with.

    That's just my thought process on it at this point (I'm sure that will change when the gas kicks in ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. SpecFoto

    SpecFoto Mu-43 Veteran

    314
    Aug 28, 2012
    So Cal
    Jim
    You don't want to hear this, but get both. Really different uses.

    If you want to shoot portraits, compression landscapes, small depth of field photos, or creamy bokeh get the 75mm. It is far superior to your 25 in these regards, except for the shallow depth of field.

    If you want to shoot macro, get the 60mm. That is what it is built for. Closeup photos of small objects. Can it be used for the types of photos the 75 excels at. Yes, but the results will most likely not be as dramatic.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    O75 today. Adapted 50mm macro tomorrow?

    You probably want to manually focus for those anyways.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Chris
    Hey guys thanks y'all for taking the time to help me out with this.

    Also thank @Rudy and @Kevinparis for the compliment about my photos! cheers guys!

    Certainly some of your answers really made me wonder, why i want this lens. and came to the conclusion that first of all, im not a macro shooter, and in the same style as Joe, i love watching macro shots, but never do too much macro stuff. I like taking close shots but not macro shots i.e. the eye of a fly. I do want creamy portraits, and landscapes, and short tele shots.

    I do appreciate the weathersealing on the 60mm compared to the 75mm.

    I also care about the $300 dollars difference in between the two.

    yet, im stunned with the IQ of both. Ofcourse the 75mm i believe brings that "FF" dof-feel back to m43, so thats also a plus. If you like that. which i believe we all somehow do.

    I wouldnt be shooting under the rain and such, BUT I do shoot mainly outdoors, and thats the type of photography i like to do. So soft rain, breeze, sand, dust, humidity is part of my shooting.

    @Kevin thanks for your examples with the lens, that photo of the Dog and some of the whale ones are stunning examples!.

    So the 75mm will be then.

    thank you guys! :dance2:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    thanks chris

    hope you will enjoy it as much as I have

    K
     
  14. iGonzoid

    iGonzoid Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Feb 6, 2011
    Tasmania, Australia
    My 5c:
    I recently bought the O75 and it now lives on my OM-D unless I am shooting macro, when I switch to the P/L 45 plus Kenko tubes.

    I was considering the O60 macro but on reading a comparison review of the too, I decided to stick with my P/L45, which rated the P/L45 as having better resolution — my prime consideration.

    The O75 really is a lens to die for... in quality comparable, for me, with my P/L 25 and Voigtlander Nokton f1.1 50mm. I like your line about using the 100-300 for landscapes. A long-ish tele such as the O75 is very good at landscapes too:

    3060020Mures6Mr13OMDZk75f8S500Is4001250.

    Hobart waterfront at dawn. Photo © Giles Hugo 2013. OM-D, Olympus 75mm f1.8; @ f8, 1/500s, ISO400.

    I have shot macro with the O75 plus the tubes —

    2250140Grapes25Fb13OMDZk75Tb26f1_8S640Is2001250.

    Grapes. Shot with OM-D Olympus 75mm f1.8, 26mm extensions tubes; f1.8 1/640s, ISO 200.

    I can't wait to try the 075 at a rock gig.

    Getting a long longed-for lens can be a joy. Test it to the limits, use it for unintended purposes and learn. Whatever you get, enjoy.
     
    • Like Like x 2