[ Review ] My impressions of using the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and E-M1

[bousozoku]

Today, I had the chance to extensively use the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, alone and with a Olympus chaperoned group on a photo walk.

My first impressions of the lens are that it’s quite amazing compared to any other micro Four-Thirds zoom lens and as good as the 14-35 f/2.0 and 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 lenses. It’s well worth the US$999.99 that they’re supposedly asking for it. The manual focus clutch mechanism was as odd and brilliant as it is on the the 12mm f/2.0 lens.

The E-M1 is not as clearly or easily great.

Yes, it’s very fast. There is no half-press of the shutter release. I got a photo every time. The Super Control Panel is different but still amazingly useful, easily beating my GH3’s Quick Menu, for me anyway.

Holding it is uncomfortable. Rather than curves like the E-5 or GH3, it has angles. This should not be a problem with the micro Four-Thirds lenses, including the 12-40mm f/2.8 because they’re so incredibly tiny and light. I can see it as a problem using my light (for Four-Thirds) 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5. I hold my current camera bodies one-handed by the grip at times. I don’t think that would last long, as the angles would work into my hand. I can appreciate that they wanted to make the body as small and light as possible, but professionals will be using it for hours on end, most likely. It shouldn’t be designed as a casual tool.

That brings me to the next issue. The rear display seems to be on most of the time, and of course, it’s not fully articulated, so you can’t turn it inward. It would show me the photo I just took, even though that drains the battery and isn’t what I would want. The clarity of the display is very good. The EVF is much, much better than the EVF of the GH3. Since I wasn’t able to photograph sports, I don’t know if it’s fast enough for manual focus in that situation. I suspect it will be okay, whereas the GH3’s EVF is not so good.

The controls are not exactly easy to understand, coming from the E-1, E-5, or GH3. The exposure compensation was not at zero when I was handed the E-M1 and it took some time to be able to change it. Sure, taking time to acclimate myself to it would do wonders, but it’s not intuitive, as the E-1, E-5, and GH3 are.

Since Phase One Capture One doesn’t yet support the E-M1, I only shot JPEG files and I find them to be quite good.

I’d say that it’s better than a casual camera body, worse than a professional model but it takes photos as well as a professional model. Hopefully, the next body will be re-designed for comfort, instead of being an assemblage of already available parts to keep costs low.

 

[chongster]

i am quite sure you can turn off the lcd display, and turn off the photo review. you can do that on the omd 5 already, cant imagine otherwise.

 

[tomboy87]

Possible for some samples taken using the 12-40mm lens? :0

 

[bousozoku]

i am quite sure you can turn off the lcd display, and turn off the photo review. you can do that on the omd 5 already, cant imagine otherwise.

I'm certain that there would be. I didn't find the menu options in the time that I had.

Possible for some samples taken using the 12-40mm lens? :0

I will certainly attempt to make them available. I took some earlier shots with the ZD 14-35mm f/2.0 on the E-5, so perhaps, it will be possible to compare them. I was quite happy with what I got, mostly. Nearing sunset, it was interesting, though.

 

[wonglp]

Today, I had the chance to extensively use the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, alone and with a Olympus chaperoned group on a photo walk.

My first impressions of the lens are that it’s quite amazing compared to any other micro Four-Thirds zoom lens and as good as the 14-35 f/2.0 and 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 lenses. It’s well worth the US$999.99 that they’re supposedly asking for it. The manual focus clutch mechanism was as odd and brilliant as it is on the the 12mm f/2.0 lens.

The E-M1 is not as clearly or easily great.

Yes, it’s very fast. There is no half-press of the shutter release. I got a photo every time. The Super Control Panel is different but still amazingly useful, easily beating my GH3’s Quick Menu, for me anyway.

Holding it is uncomfortable. Rather than curves like the E-5 or GH3, it has angles. This should not be a problem with the micro Four-Thirds lenses, including the 12-40mm f/2.8 because they’re so incredibly tiny and light. I can see it as a problem using my light (for Four-Thirds) 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5. I hold my current camera bodies one-handed by the grip at times. I don’t think that would last long, as the angles would work into my hand. I can appreciate that they wanted to make the body as small and light as possible, but professionals will be using it for hours on end, most likely. It shouldn’t be designed as a casual tool.

That brings me to the next issue. The rear display seems to be on most of the time, and of course, it’s not fully articulated, so you can’t turn it inward. It would show me the photo I just took, even though that drains the battery and isn’t what I would want. The clarity of the display is very good. The EVF is much, much better than the EVF of the GH3. Since I wasn’t able to photograph sports, I don’t know if it’s fast enough for manual focus in that situation. I suspect it will be okay, whereas the GH3’s EVF is not so good.

The controls are not exactly easy to understand, coming from the E-1, E-5, or GH3. The exposure compensation was not at zero when I was handed the E-M1 and it took some time to be able to change it. Sure, taking time to acclimate myself to it would do wonders, but it’s not intuitive, as the E-1, E-5, and GH3 are.

Since Phase One Capture One doesn’t yet support the E-M1, I only shot JPEG files and I find them to be quite good.

I’d say that it’s better than a casual camera body, worse than a professional model but it takes photos as well as a professional model. Hopefully, the next body will be re-designed for comfort, instead of being an assemblage of already available parts to keep costs low.

Very nice summarized writeup, I believe Spidey will agree much on the handgrip, personally, the grip works well for me as I have rather small hands for a guy. Though I do find GX7 grip to be slightly better, as it's more rounded than angled as you mentioned.

I am very impressed with 12-40mm/2.8, I have the P12-35, the 12-40/2.8 is just a notch better in terms of the built, and the close up shot at 40 has better magnification as well vs 12-35. Had owned the 14-54mm mk1 for quite a while, really brings me back to those days of using it especially miss the versatility of using that close up. Haven't owned the 14-35 f2, so can't comment on the IQ. For the 80g difference vs 12-35/2.8 and the fact I had to change out all my filters to 62mm if I upgrade i think it's still worthwhile. On a body like EP5, i think this lens would be a problem with ergonomics. The L-fn is pretty useful too, I set it to MF/AF, very convenient I feel.

Olympus viewer 3 takes the raw file, if that helps.

 

[wonglp]

Possible for some samples taken using the 12-40mm lens? :0

Will be posting more on the review

 

[bousozoku]

Very nice summarized writeup, I believe Spidey will agree much on the handgrip, personally, the grip works well for me as I have rather small hands for a guy. Though I do find GX7 grip to be slightly better, as it's more rounded than angled as you mentioned.

I am very impressed with 12-40mm/2.8, I have the P12-35, the 12-40/2.8 is just a notch better in terms of the built, and the close up shot at 40 has better magnification as well vs 12-35. Had owned the 14-54mm mk1 for quite a while, really brings me back to those days of using it especially miss the versatility of using that close up. Haven't owned the 14-35 f2, so can't comment on the IQ. For the 80g difference vs 12-35/2.8 and the fact I had to change out all my filters to 62mm if I upgrade i think it's still worthwhile. On a body like EP5, i think this lens would be a problem with ergonomics. The L-fn is pretty useful too, I set it to MF/AF, very convenient I feel.

Olympus viewer 3 takes the raw file, if that helps.

After owning the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8, I wasn't about to put a lot of money into another merely adequate Panasonic lens. I'm glad I waited, as the 12-40mm f/2.8 is that lens. Concerning the 14-35mm f/2.0 and the 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5, I think the 12-40mm f/2.8 is between them, as it is between them in price. The handling was a huge improvement for me over other micro Four-Thirds lenses, save the manual focus ring trick. It seemed to work well on my GH3.

I'm sure the small models like the GX7 are wonderful for people who use them, but I've never been good with a (film or digital) point-and-shoot, and that probably has some relevance on my dislike for the handling of the Pen series. I just wouldn't do well with them.

I'm still uncomfortable with the mushy shutter release button. I never did get a half-press.

 

[bousozoku]

Photos are at https://picasaweb.google.com/bousozoku/OlympusAtRoberts20131003

They aren't in the correct order, due to a problem with the camera body not continuing to number after I had a problem with the expensive SD card, replacing it with the cheaper card. Also, Google's Picasa software wasn't a help, even after I renamed them manually.

They're all JPEG files, only re-sized for the web album. I made no corrections of any kind. I used the 12mm f/2.0 and 12-40mm f/2.8 for these photos.

 

[keithwee]

I am very impressed with 12-40mm/2.8, I have the P12-35, the 12-40/2.8 is just a notch better in terms of the built, and the close up shot at 40 has better magnification as well vs 12-35. For the 80g difference vs 12-35/2.8 and the fact I had to change out all my filters to 62mm if I upgrade i think it's still worthwhile.

12-40 .... Waiting for it too,
seems like so far it's been all plus-es regarding it heard and experienced so much till I realized my original notion of its main plus against the 12-35 with IS is xtra reach seems to be invalid.

Against the 12-35, IQ alone are they similar ? I only experienced handling the 12-40 thus could only compare by handling and build & never did manage to compare the IQ for both lenses properly.

Only worry is as u said; the ergonomics on smaller bodies like the Pen and GX coming to using this lens. Can't even imagine using the 40-150/2.8 Pro on these bodies later.

Will prob run this lens on the Pen for a few weeks and see how the ergonomics go; if really have issues then it's time to go body shopping again.

 

[bousozoku]

12-40 .... Waiting for it too,
seems like so far it's been all plus-es regarding it heard and experienced so much till I realized my original notion of its main plus against the 12-35 with IS is xtra reach seems to be invalid.

Against the 12-35, IQ alone are they similar ? I only experienced handling the 12-40 thus could only compare by handling and build & never did manage to compare the IQ for both lenses properly.

Only worry is as u said; the ergonomics on smaller bodies like the Pen and GX coming to using this lens. Can't even imagine using the 40-150/2.8 Pro on these bodies later.

Will prob run this lens on the Pen for a few weeks and see how the ergonomics go; if really have issues then it's time to go body shopping again.

I should have taken a photo of either my ZD 35-100mm f/2.0 or ZD 14-35mm f/2.0 attached to the E-M1. That would make you smile. :bsmilie:

It was amusing trying to balance the ZD 35-100mm with the E-M1. I don't even use it with the GH3.

 

[tomboy87]

Will be posting more on the review

cool!

 

[ricohflex]

Seen the shots.
Am I the only one who feels this 12-40 ƒ2.8 lens is ordinary?
Any Tamron or Sigma lens can do that image quality which is not spectacular.

 

[keithwee]

I should have taken a photo of either my ZD 35-100mm f/2.0 or ZD 14-35mm f/2.0 attached to the E-M1. That would make you smile. :bsmilie: It was amusing trying to balance the ZD 35-100mm with the E-M1. I don't even use it with the GH3.

Is the ZD35-100 much larger than the 12-60?
I only have the size impression of the 12-60 as a comparison.

Hmm, my thoughts are one KPI if EM1 is to bring back the FT users into the fold so I'll expect it to take the FT lenses well (ergonomics) with the HLD7 if needed.

 

[bousozoku]

Is the ZD35-100 much larger than the 12-60?
I only have the size impression of the 12-60 as a comparison.

Hmm, my thoughts are one KPI if EM1 is to bring back the FT users into the fold so I'll expect it to take the FT lenses well (ergonomics) with the HLD7 if needed.

ZD 35-100mm Dimensions = φ96.5 x 213.5mm
ZD 12-60mm Dimensions = φ79.5 x 98.5mm

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/telephoto.html#i_035-100mm_f020_olympus
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/standard.html#i_012-060mm_f028-040_olympus

I've never even held a 12-60mm lens, but yes, they are a bit different. In fact, the ZD 35-100mm has a graduated barrel similar to the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 and unlike the 12-60mm.

 

[tsammyc]

I'm sure the small models like the GX7 are wonderful for people who use them, but I've never been good with a (film or digital) point-and-shoot, and that probably has some relevance on my dislike for the handling of the Pen series. I just wouldn't do well with them. I'm still uncomfortable with the mushy shutter release button. I never did get a half-press.

The GX7 is actually about the same size as the OMD and is much thicker with a large grip. Perhaps you don't like the P&S "look"

 

[keithwee]

ZD 35-100mm Dimensions = φ96.5 x 213.5mm
ZD 12-60mm Dimensions = φ79.5 x 98.5mm

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/telephoto.html#i_035-100mm_f020_olympus
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/standard.html#i_012-060mm_f028-040_olympus

I've never even held a 12-60mm lens, but yes, they are a bit different. In fact, the ZD 35-100mm has a graduated barrel similar to the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 and unlike the 12-60mm.

213.5mm ?? going into SLR territory for me liao.

One issue bugging me has always been that MFT was brought alive with the notions of SLR quality in a smaller quality package, but looking at the EM1 w/HLD7, 40-150/2.8 Pro. Hmm...maybe I'm just too stubborn la haha.

Wong... if u r reading this.. organize an outing for us to 'molest' some FT lenses? Pls.

 

[bousozoku]

The GX7 is actually about the same size as the OMD and is much thicker with a large grip. Perhaps you don't like the P&S "look"

You mean the E-M5? It's too small and there is barely a grip, so if the GX7 is about the same size, it's too small. The E-M1 is about the size of the GH3, which is the small camera body I use and that's comfortable. I should upload the photo of my hand gripping the E-M1, because it was not great in my hand.

213.5mm ?? going into SLR territory for me liao.

One issue bugging me has always been that MFT was brought alive with the notions of SLR quality in a smaller quality package, but looking at the EM1 w/HLD7, 40-150/2.8 Pro. Hmm...maybe I'm just too stubborn la haha.

Wong... if u r reading this.. organize an outing for us to 'molest' some FT lenses? Pls.

Four-Thirds bodies are dSLR bodies.

Put the Nikon D7100 and the 70-200mm f/2.8 alongside the E-M1 and 40-150mm f/.8 when it's available and tell me that they're too large. :bsmilie:

The HLD7 was useful but so light that it didn't help with balance.

 

[Agrivar]

The GX7 is actually about the same size as the OMD and is much thicker with a large grip. Perhaps you don't like the P&S "look"

Err. The look is "Rangefinder". Not p&s. Only noobs would think p&s

 

[keithwee]

You mean the E-M5? It's too small and there is barely a grip, so if the GX7 is about the same size, it's too small. The E-M1 is about the size of the GH3, which is the small camera body I use and that's comfortable. I should upload the photo of my hand gripping the E-M1, because it was not great in my hand. Four-Thirds bodies are dSLR bodies. Put the Nikon D7100 and the 70-200mm f/2.8 alongside the E-M1 and 40-150mm f/.8 when it's available and tell me that they're too large. :bsmilie: The HLD7 was useful but so light that it didn't help with balance.

Thanks for sharing abt the HLD7
I didn't bother to try it while playing with the EM1.

 

[wonglp]

Seen the shots.
Am I the only one who feels this 12-40 ƒ2.8 lens is ordinary?
Any Tamron or Sigma lens can do that image quality which is not spectacular.

If Sigma/Tamron makes a m43 optimized equivalent lens, I would gladly test it. By optimized it means the lens image circle is designed for m43 rather than APSC mirrorless, which seems to be the path Sigma has adopted for mirrorless cameras.

213.5mm ?? going into SLR territory for me liao.

One issue bugging me has always been that MFT was brought alive with the notions of SLR quality in a smaller quality package, but looking at the EM1 w/HLD7, 40-150/2.8 Pro. Hmm...maybe I'm just too stubborn la haha.

Wong... if u r reading this.. organize an outing for us to 'molest' some FT lenses? Pls.

Maybe you haven't seen the IQ yet for 40-150/2.8 or compare with FF equivalent to appreciate the size, though the size does look a tad bigger than P35-100, I would hope it to be just good as FT 50-200f2.8-3.5 lens which is excellent lens. I suppose it's designed as sort of balance & differentiate between P35-100 reach vs 50-200 so as to entice more FT users to move to m43. Just a guess.

I was hoping to do it this week for outing but I don't have it now, returned a week ago, hope to do it next week. I do have GX7 with 20mm which I'm enjoying alot with, more than my ep5 actually