Legacy 4/3 Lenses?

[bob_cook]

<p>Here's a quote posted Nov. 14 on the Luminous Landscape:<br>

"The family of Olympus Zuiko High Grade and Super High Grade lenses are among the best zoom lenses ever made. Originally designed for the Four Thirds format, they now have new life and a new home on the just shipping Olympus OM-D E-M1 due to its use of on-chip Phase Detection autofocus as well as Contrast Detection AF. These lenses are expensive, but for anyone who wants the best possible glass, yet who values the versatility of zooms, there are none finer."<br>

So, I've already ordered an E-M1 and the new 12-40 Pro zoom plus the adapter for 4/3 lenses. That will be a nice, compact package. For a longer zoom I'm willing to sacrifice the compact m4/3 size if there are some high performance zooms out there. What lenses are being referenced in the LL quote?<br>

I'm not real knowledgeable about Olympus other than the used E620 and kit zooms I bought from a friend several years ago.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

<p>This is one list, Bob: They refer to the High Grade and Super High Grade Lenses primarily. The HG zooms are particularly good at their price levels. The SHG get in rarified price territory. I myself own the 12-60 SWD and the 50-200mm SWD zooms--paid under $1000 for each, and like both a lot as to build and crispness. Not to mention the nice EC-14 teleconverter which works with both at one stop loss. And I still use my older ED 50mm somewhat for macro work, a nice size lens for your EM-1....</p>

<p>http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/products/dslr/lenses/<br /> I would personally not describe these as "legacy lenses" per se as they are still supposed to be in production or at least in stock at the large distribution dealers of Olympus. Although they are designed for the 4/3 E mount dating to 2003 with E-1 etc and not the new micro four thirds mount per the EM-1 and siblings from Panasonic and Olympus in micro four thirds, different size and depth to sensor and the big difference in technology used to autofocus (gets into detail you can research if you are interested) Adapters solve that dilemma, a long awaited hardware adaptation per the EM-1 which employs two distinct autofocus modalities. Clever huh? "One beautiful system" is likely arguable, and yet to be tested out, but the lenses are darn good and worth using and hold value for those who bought them...i think of them in same class as Canon's L series lenses with exotic and aspheric glass and pretty good corrections made in the Japan plant for Oly lens lovers :-) The cognoscenti rave about the 150 mm and the 35-100, too rich and heavy for my taste but sweet optics. <br /> gs</p>

[bob_cook]

<p>Thanks Gerry. I was thinking of the 50-200 SWD, I guess. Seems like a good range for when i need something significantly longer. Not a lot of use for me, but occasionally I need it. Do you have a suggestion for a "better rather than worse" super wide for the m4/3? My most favorite lens in the Nikon system was the 17-35 2.8 used on a full-frame D700.</p>

[Aoresteen]

<p>Like Gerry I have the 12-60mm & the 50-200mm SWD zooms. Top notch lenses. I also have the 150mm f/2.0 which is a fatastic lens. The 150mm is the most expensive lens I have ever bought in 35 years - more than my Hasselblad lenses. It is worth every penny I paid ($1,685 used).</p>

<p>The 4/3 lens have a 2x crop factor - the 12-60mm is the same as a 24-120 on a FF camera. The 7-14 Olympus would be a 14-28mm on a FF camera. It's next on my list to buy - used copies run about $1,300.</p>

 

[bob_cook]

<p>Thanks for the follow-up Anthony. I may decide to go for the Oly 7-14, perhaps instead of the 50 - 200. For most of my work I need something pretty wide - wider than 24mm. The lenses are expensive, as you noted. I just sold all my Hasselblad, Rollei and Nikon stuff to commit to something lighter and easier to carry around. I finally got too tired of all of the hassle with medium format film, developing, scanning etc. I think I'll be happy with the E-M1 both as a walk around with the m4/3 lenses, and with the original 4/3 lenses for when I need them.</p>

[harveysteeves]

<p>I think you will find that the SHG lenses are not that much smaller than their full frame counterparts. Its the m4/3 lenses that got shrunk.</p>

[bob_cook]

<p>I'm sure that's right, Harvey. But I think the entire kit, including a couple of lenses, will be less heavy and bulky than my H'Blad, Nikon D700 or Pentax 67II stuff. There's no question I may have made a mistake making this switch, but it will take me a while to figure that out. I think the IQ will be adequate for what I'm shooting these days; it's the handling and post that may be problematic for me. Especially considering my lack of knowledge about post processing; fortunately I have a friend to help with that. I try to remember that this is just a hobby for me, although important.</p>

[john_photos]

<p>Bob,<br>

The EM1 is a good purchase with one caveat. Print size. If you were pushing medium format to very large print sizes via drum scanning then I would proceed with caution. If your maximum print size is 16x20 then you have made the correct decision. I have shot many medium format cameras over the years along with an Olympus E-30. Using the 12-60mm and 50-200mm lenses I was very happy with the output excepting the ugly distortion of the 12-60mm. I absolutely love the 4/3rds aspect ratio. The EM1 is even better (significantly better at high ISO) than the E30 but remember its only 16mp and if you want to print large megapixels do matter (I say this respecting your reasons for using medium format film equipment in the first place..). The 7-14mm Olympus E system wide angle optic is by all accounts an incredible optic so I am sure you are very excited. <br>

I am interested to see if the new "pro" zooms for micro four thirds stack up. The panasonic fast "pro" zooms were a disappointment. They simply are not that sharp yet cost as if they are something special. As it stands, only the 75mm for dedicated micro four thirds is optically in the same league as Oly HG/SHG glass. This is a fact. Micro four thirds people have little notion of how sharp and beautiful some of the E system glass really is. Frankly, even the panaleica 25mm for micro four thirds is nowhere near the optical quality of the panaleica 25mm standard four thirds lens. Must be the tele centricity requirement. Yes, bigger optics but sharper optics too.. <br>

Happy shooting. </p>

[john_photos]

<p>After a bit of web browsing viewing lens tests.<br>

Neither the new Oly 12-40mm or panasonic 12-35mm show much promise if one is used to the <br />regular HG/SHG level E system performance. <br>

If I were going to purchase an EM1 I definitely would adapt a 12-60 or 14-54 (mk2) lens. Optically micro four thirds has been a big disappointment in my book. Its clear there are limitations from engineering perspective. Definitely not a "pro" system. </p>

[bob_cook]

<p>John,<br>

Your print size observations are correct, I'm sure. Not an issue any more; I can't imagine even printing 16X20 anymore, so I think I'll be fine. My choice of medium format for many years was as much for the more deliberate process it required, in addition to quality.</p>

<p>Hopefully the new Olympus 12 - 40 will work for me. We'll see.</p>

[john_photos]

<p>Bob,<br>

I think you have picked the correct system if you are not printing big. The OM-D is a great camera by all accounts. U definitely are going to enjoy the lack of bulk vs some of the other cameras you mentioned. <br>

Enjoy your new camera and happy shooting!</p>