Olympus Pro lens sizes - my opinion

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by rfortson, Apr 9, 2016.

  1. rfortson

    rfortson Mu-43 Veteran

    I know it's not the common view around here, but I just picked up the 12-40/2.8. I've had the 40-150/2.8 for a while. First of all, I'm finding the 12-40 to be a great lens, and I like it more than I figured I would.

    Anyway, I hear many people complaining about the size, but I find the size for a f/2.8 pro lens to be very nice, not that heavy, easy to handle, and easy to travel with. Yes, you can go much smaller, but coming from Pentax (which was probably the smallest APS-C kit), the equivalent Pro kit from Olympus is still noticeably smaller and easy to carry.

    Considering the image quality I can get from the E-M5, grip and 12-40/40-150, this is a very handy kit.

    Discuss. ;) 
    • Agree Agree x 7
  2. The weight of the 12-40 is non-existent problem when coming from a 40-150 PRO. I do love them both, add a fisheye and it's all I really need, however the reality of the situation is much different.
  3. rfortson

    rfortson Mu-43 Veteran

    Not sure I understand what you mean here.

    And yes, the 40-150 is much bigger than the 12-40, but it compares well with the Pentax 50-135/2.8 zoom, and I think IQ is a little better.

    I was mainly comparing the 12-40 to my 12-50EZ. The 12-50 is much lighter, but the 12-40 is much better and not that much bigger in real world usage for me.
  4. The reality is that while I could get by with 3 lenses, I don't.:biggrin:
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 3
  5. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    My name is David and I'm a lensaholic :) 

    You're not the only one in that boat. Actually, I'd say it somewhat differently. I'd say "I do tend to get by with 3 lenses but I have quite a few more that I keep around just in case, even though it rarely is in case."

    I rarely seem to use anything other than one of the PRO zooms these days but I've still got the primes I used before I got the PRO zooms and sometimes I do want the faster apertures or the smaller size/lighter weight that they offer.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  6. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I think many of the folks who consider the Pro lenses too big are people who came to m4/3s because of the IQ:Size ratio, and who place a premium on (lack of) size. I would be one of them. I don't disagree that they are not "big" by DSLR standards, but that is a different thing altogether. m4/3s is big enough for all us. Pun intended.
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 2
  7. jimr.pdx

    jimr.pdx Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    near Longview ~1hr from PDX
    Jim R
    I wish more lens makers would bring out new f/3.5-4.5 zooms (APSc as well as :mu43:). Many of those zooms were very good in the early days of non-constant f/ratio zooms. Personally I don't find much need for f/2.8 zooms, I prefer primes for my fast lenses.. and even then I seldom seek f/1.x or faster speed.
  8. NY Gadget Guy

    NY Gadget Guy Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 17, 2016
    The P12-35/2.8 is smaller than the O12-40/2.8 and produces good images. The only annoyance is that the bayonet hood can get loose. (I would up getting a 3rd-party one that screws into the filter threads.)

    "Too big" is often in relation to constraints imposed by one's current camera bag / backpack...
  9. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 20, 2014
    Sorry to divert this a little, but I have 3 pro lenses, 7-14, 12-40 and 40-150 and love them all, but I'm finding the 12-40 zoom ring to be quite a bit stiffer than the others. Is this normal? It's been like this since new.
  10. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler Subscribing Member

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Mine wasn't stiff (I also have the 40-150Pro) until Precision Camera got ahold of it (for another reason).

  11. rfortson

    rfortson Mu-43 Veteran

    Yeah, mine isn't stiff either. I bought mine used.

    BTW, I'm really enjoying this lens. Adding the 7-14 Pro would make an awesome kit. I'd love to get the 300/4 but can't justify the cost.

    Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk
  12. Mine was used and also very smooth.

    I would love the 7-14, but having the 9-18, I'm not sure I how much I would use it. The 300/4 will be mine soon.

    Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 mobile app
    • Like Like x 1
  13. vbi

    vbi Mu-43 Regular Subscribing Member

    Apr 15, 2014
    Cape Town
    Personally I love the solid feel of the PRO lenses and coming from Canon FF it seems almost weightless. I find that the balance of the PRO lenses on the EM1 is just right, the IQ is superb, the f2.8 aperture covers most eventualities.

    Couldn't be happier.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 3
  14. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 23, 2014
    Yes, I'm one of them too.
    I also find that f/2.8 is not fast enough for me, so I prefer having smaller zooms, because anytime I want something fast, I'd pick a prime anyway.

    However, I'm not complaining about the size & weight of these lenses, I just don't buy them.
    I'm just a bit disappointed that Olympus seems not wanting to developing compact lenses anymore
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. I bought mine used, it felt a bit gritty for a while until it smoothed out with more use. I suspect in my case though the previous owner probably got some particulates into the zoom extension that then made their way out with use.
  16. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I'm one of those who thinks the "Pro" lenses are too big - esp the 40-150. I have the Panasonic trio of 7-14, 12-35 and 35-100 and these are my personal limits on size. The primes are all very nicely sized of course.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I could deal with the size of the 12-40, but the 40-150/2.8 is a bit absurd to me. It's amazing to me how the 35-100 can weigh less than half has much. Maybe not quite the optical equal, and obviously with a smaller range, but the packaging is astonishing. Likewise, the difference between the 7-14/4 and the 7-14/2.8. The latter is obviously a benefit for astro and in inclement conditions, but the price, weight, and size are big disincentives by comparison. I think Panasonic should refresh their 7-14/4 with weather sealing and a rear filter holder for Olympus users.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Joe Smith

    Joe Smith Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 6, 2016
    I don't get it. There's no free lunch. The "pro" zooms are just that: Pro quality in build and optics for those who need or want this. If the 40-150 pro is too big and heavy for you, then nothing prevents you to buy the "normal" 40-150, which is small, lightweight, optically good and very affordable. But of course not "pro", as there's no free lunch. So instead of complaining, you should be glad that there are options.
    • Agree Agree x 6
  19. Carbonman

    Carbonman Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jul 10, 2014
    Vancouver BC
    If they put a UV-absorbing layer in their coatings or adhesives there would be no need for a rear filter holder for Olympus users.
  20. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    And if Olympus put a UV-absorbing layer on their sensor stack there would be no need for a rear filter holder either, but obviously things have developed as they have for a reason.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.