The M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm f/1.8 is Olympus’s premium medium telephoto ‘portrait’ lens for Micro Four Thirds. It’s beautifully made, with an all-metal barrel, and the autofocus is fast and essentially silent. Image quality is excellent too, blending impressive sharpness with attractively blurred out-of-focus backgrounds.
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 75mm f/1.8 Lens (Micro Four Thirds)
Already own this?
This item is in your gearlist!
- 75mm focal length
- 150mm equivalent focal length on Micro Four Thirds cameras
- F1.8 maximum aperture; F22 minimum
- 58mm filters
- 0.84m/33.07" minimum focus
- Micro Four Thirds mount for Micro Four Thirds interchangeable lens cameras
|Lens type||Prime lens|
|Max Format size||FourThirds|
|Focal length||75 mm|
|Lens mount||Micro Four Thirds|
|Number of diaphragm blades||9|
|Aperture notes||Circular aperture diaphragm|
|Minimum focus||0.84 m (33.07″)|
|Full time manual||Yes|
|Weight||305 g (0.67 lb)|
|Diameter||64 mm (2.52″)|
|Length||69 mm (2.72″)|
|Filter thread||58 mm|
|Hood product code||LH-61F (Optional)|
Amazing lens, incredible sharpness
Day light, olympus pen e-p5 75 mm 1.8 New to th micro 4/3, Coming from Pentax 645d, Nikon D4, D800 and skeptical of the smaller sensor size of the M4/3. I bought the olympus e-p5 with 5 primes for the size factor. the olympus 75mm 1.8 is simply amazing. Size, build quality are superb. Sharpness, bokhen and colors are unbelievable. of the 5 primes 12mm,17mm,45mm,75mm Olympus and 25 mm Leica, the 75 mm is my favourite of the group. 150 mm f 1.8 is a good portrait range with exceptional ...
Utterly amazing results, but takes some getting used to
I bought this lens after seeing a friend's amazing portraits taken with it, checking samples on Flickr, and reading the praise it has received in online reviews. I also wanted to get some great shots of my baby daughter while she was still an infant, and getting in too close distracts her too much - she stops doing whatever makes the image worth taking :) Also, I did some concert photography for a band and found myself having to get in too close because my brightest/fastest lens was not a zoom. ...
If you think you have a use for this lens...
Just buy it. I can't really add anything that hasn't already been said. The lens excels in everything you would want it to excel in. Razor sharp. very low in optical aberrations, coma, astigmatism, and distortion. Absolutely wonderful bokeh! If you can justify the cost based on your style of photography, get one.
If you shoot people, pair it with the 45
As one reviewer said just buy it. Another said "if you have a use for it". If you shoot people, landscapes night street scenes, indoor sports, theater and other performance art, you HAVE a use for this lens. To let some pictures do the talking first ... Some people samples .. Kids Littlies .. Some Low (sometimes extremely low) light samples Music - I couldn't even SEE some of these musicians esp the camera tech lady, I saw only a silhouette. THe OMF VF to the rescue. Footloose The 75 (and ...
What fast 35mm eqiv. lens would you recommend for m43?
I'm considering buying a 35mm equiv. fast prime for my m43 bodies. My plan is to shoot weddings with 35mm, 85mm and 150mm primes on three bodies - 2x GX7 and E-PL5. Most times I may be using only two bodies with 35 and 85mm. My current prime setup is 12mm f2, 25mm f1.4 and 45mm f1.8 (now is 42.5mm f1.2). I'm seeing three options: 1. m.Zuiko 17mm f1.8 - appears to be tremendously mediocre in terms of sharpness except in the absolute center 2. PL 15mm f1.7 - looks sharper, but I really would have liked it to be further away from 12mm so that I don't feel like I've cropped 5% off my 12mm lens - I'd prefer a 35mm equiv instead of 30. 3. Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95 - as I hear it's very sharp, but weighs way too much and I'd rather have AF instead of straining my eyes with the dynamic nature of weddings. From the options I seem to have I'm disappointed because the Oly and Pana lenses just don't seem to be what I want. The Zuiko is closest to my preferences but when put next to the Nocticron ...
Read the reviews of the 17mm 1.8 with an understanding that this lens was reviewed after such gems as the 75mm, 12mm, and the (ridiculously cheap for what you get) 45mm were released. It may have suffered by comparison........It is 1/2 the price of the first two, and produces beautifully rendered photos. I have never found the sharpness to be an issue with this lens Continue Reading
Voigtlander hands down should be the best as it is fast and sharp, rendering is fantastic. With a little practice, focusing can be very quick with the help of focus peaking. As long as you're not trying to photograph kids running around you should not have difficulty focusing. Beyond a few feet the focus range moves quickly on the lens, no need for lots of turning. Maybe try manual on one of your existing short FL lenses and see how it works for you. Continue Reading
Remember that you can use zone focusing with the Voigtländer 17.5mm's distance scale. Since you hit infinity at 4 or 5 feet it's quite easy. Often I'll set the scale dead-center on the infinity mark, with the aperture on f5.6 and shoot from the hip. It's a truly special lens! Continue Reading
Your thoughts and experience: Oly 75mm or Pana 35-100?
Hi everyone. I'm ready to purchase a new tele lens for my m4/3 set-up (GX1 and E-PM2, Pana 7-14, Pana 20, Pana 12-35, Oly 45). Thing is, I'm really torn between the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 prime and Panasonic's 35-100 f/2.8 zoom. My question relates to the real-life situations in which you have been using those lenses, and not to any sharpness/depth-of-field/image-stabilization issues - as you've noticed I have both Pana and Olympus bodies, I'm well aware of what kind of depth of field I get with m4/3, and for my usage most of the system's lenses at this level are plenty sharp and well-corrected for aberrations. Plus I've got Photoshop. I was thinking hard about getting the zoom, but then I researched a bit and realized that for about $400 less, if you figure the OEM lens hood in, the Olympus 75 does look like an appealing lens that would complement my set-up so that I could get roughly the same photography I'd get with the 35-100 zoom. *Roughly*. I already have 70mm equivalent covered ...
I own both. They are both phenomenal lenses, and the 75/1.8 might be the finest optic overall I've ever owned. However, if I could only keep one, it would be the 35-100 hands down. They are both very sharp lenses with great renderings, but the versatility of the 35-100 wins out for me. I bring my 75/1.8 in my bag when I know I'm going to be shooting portraits, or if I know I'm going to want telephoto with much shallower depth of field, but my 35-100 is in my bag EVERY day I bring my OM-D. Also, I use the 35-100 over the 75mm when in a studio setting, as I'm usually shooting at around f/5.6, and there the 75 is really no sharper, so I simply gain flexibility and lose nothing. It is very sharp at all focal lengths and all apertures, autofocus is extremely fast and accurate, and it's weathersealed. I've done reviews of both, if you're interested: 75mm: http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-olympus-m-zuiko-75mm-f1-8-ed-msc/ 35-100: http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-panasonic-lumix-g- ... Continue Reading
I have both and there is almost no similarity in use. The 75/1.8 is used when I know I'll need a bright mid tele, such as concerts, shows etc. Aslo I also like to shoot primes when I fancy the challenge of a single focal length to help develop my seeing eye (and trust me, it needs help). The 35-100/2.8 is a walkabout lens for when I expect to need a variety of focal lengths from shot to shot. I went to temple fund-raiser on Friday and took the 7-14/4, 20/1.7 and 35-100. The temple was dull, essentially still in the planning stages and nothing to photograph. So I took a walk around the surrounding bushland and kept the 35-100 on the whole time: Here's a few images from the walk, not as a recommendation for the lens, just an example of the varying FLs on the walk: 100mm 93mm 68mm 35mm 46mm 100mm 100mm For the last two, even the 100mm wasn't enough and the images are cropped. I like having both lenses. If you feel you may eventually want both lenses, my advice would be to go ... Continue Reading
It seems to me that your decision mostly boils down to the convenience of the Pany 35-100mm lens versus the speed of the Olympus lens -- they are both razor sharp, and in real world use a viewer couldn't tell whether an image was captured with one or the other using the same aperture. I don't own the 75mm, but I do own the 35-100mm -- because I shoot mostly corporate events, and portraits professionally. The zoom make way more sense for my needs. I do a lot of head and shoulder portraits and being able to get consistent in-camera crops without moving my tripod around constantly is a no-brainer for me. I don't like shooting commercial portraits any wider than f/2.8-f/4 anyway, because I don't want a client's eyes in focus and their nose out of focus. Also, I shoot a lot of low light, ambient boardroom/classroom sessions where flash would be a distraction and my moving about needs to be at a minimum -- the 35-100mm combined with the high ISO performance of my E-M5 allows me to ... Continue Reading
Oly 25mm F1.8 / Oly 12-40?
Good afternoon all, Having got into Mft through a secondhand EP-3 to complement my wonderful E5, I fell in love with the primes. I have the Oly 45mm f1.8, a little marvel, and the 75mm F1.8, an amazing piece of kit, complete with the Pana 14 F2.5! I have now taken the plunge and just bought an E-M1 c/w 12-40mm. I am still learning, but this camera is already delighting me, and confusing me, and giving me plenty to learn! :-) My question: I am really taken with the idea of supplementing my primes with the Oly 25mm F1.8. For those who have both zoom and primes, do you find that you are not using the primes due to the quality of the 12-40? I appreciate the size/weatherseal/wider aperture differences, just wonder about usability? I hope that makes sense. Apologies in advance if this has already been asked. My ability to search this forum needs to improve. Regards Paul
Hmm yes... depends on the amount of people and the room of course. However, I don't like how 12mm starts to distort faces, specially of people close to the border of the image. Nothing dramatic, but I kinda dislike that... that's the main reason why I prefer the 17mm or 25mm for people group shots :) People look more natural. Continue Reading
Only because it has yet to me mentioned, because you now have the E-M1 you can shoot the fast primes in sunlight without ND filters, which extends their usefulness. Like some of the others, I have both the 12-40 and 25, and find there are times for each. The 25 is much fun to use and my eye does seem to like the "standard" focal length for general shooting. Seems quite sharp, too. This shot, while at f:2.8, could also have been taken at 1.8 w/o blowing the highlights. DOFs become quite shallow, putting an emphasis on focus accuracy. The 25 @ 1/8000, f:2.8. And they throw in the hood! Cheers, Rick Continue Reading