# Olympus OM-D E-M1 and Olympus M.Zuiko 12-40m/7mm-14mm f/2.8 Pro lenses announced



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

Thought it deserved a thread of its own as it's a bit of a tasty number. The lens looks ruddy great.






Press release and specs: http://www.wirefresh.com/olympus-om-d-e-m1-and-olympus-m-zuiko-12-40mm-f2-8-pro-lens-announced/

Video:


----------



## dweller (Sep 14, 2013)

I like Blunty's videos.
Here is his review.
Looks a flipping tasty camera.


----------



## editor (Sep 28, 2013)

Impressed again.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 29, 2013)

I like the underwater test.

How much is the camera?


----------



## editor (Sep 29, 2013)

Loads. Over a grand at least.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 29, 2013)

Body only seems to be £1300 generally in the UK. It is pro kit though.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 29, 2013)

I think I paid £1,300 about for my Fujifilm S2 about 12-14 years ago. If I amortise that over the 12-14 years it hasn't cost so much. But I would like water and dust proof.

So I suppose that is what about IP64?


----------



## editor (Sep 29, 2013)

I'm off to the States in December, and I may well be tempted to get that 12-40mm lens although its ruddy expensive..
It's had ace reviews; http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2424824,00.asp



> Pros
> 
> - The best build Micro Four Thirds zoom lens that we’ve ever held
> 
> ...


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2013)

I'm hoping the price of that 12-40mm lens will come down at some point because it's perfect for my needs.  But £900? Aaaiiee!

The Panasonic H-HS12035E Lumix G X VARIO 12-35mm lens isn't much cheaper at £800 either


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 14, 2013)

The m43 lens lineup has always seemed a bit of a game to get you hooked tbh. (Which isn't that surprising, kind of how this stuff works.) There are some really nice lowish-price lenses covering "standard" ranges - I only really know the Panasonic ones but they have several that are great value. So you think "oh this is a good system, I'll invest time and money here", and then after a while you think "hey I reckon I'll move up a step" and look at the prices and go "bluhbluhbluh".


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The m43 lens lineup has always seemed a bit of a game to get you hooked tbh. (Which isn't that surprising, kind of how this stuff works.) There are some really nice lowish-price lenses covering "standard" ranges - I only really know the Panasonic ones but they have several that are great value. So you think "oh this is a good system, I'll invest time and money here", and then after a while you think "hey I reckon I'll move up a step" and look at the prices and go "bluhbluhbluh".


Some are hideously expensive, but the Olympus 45mm f1.8 (90mm equiv) really is an astonishing bargain for £210. It's a superb lens.

You can't see it from this picture, but the room was really dark.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 14, 2013)

The lens in the OP is extraordinarily expensive, but on the other hand it is sealed. The other impressive feature is that the max aperture remains constant throughout the range. Not bad that.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 14, 2013)

£210 for that Olympus 1.8 is really good - I might look into that.

I think the Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5 also fall into the "terrific lens and also affordable" category. The Pana 45-150 is also supposed to be nice and is under £200. In fact even the kit 14-42 that I have for the g2 is way better than it should be. Just when you need a fast and/or wide zoom they really seem to sting you.


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> £210 for that Olympus 1.8 is really good - I might look into that.


It's a really superb lens.


----------



## dweller (Oct 15, 2013)

To carry on the slight lens detour. 
The 45 1.8 and 14 2.5 are probably my next lenses.
I'm also interested in the very sharp sigma 60mm 2.8 for only £149.
Now just about to come on the market is a new panasonic kit zoom the same size as the panasonic 
 14mm pancake. 12-32mm 3.5-5.6 zoom not fast but very compact 
 and a good way to get that 24mm (35mm fl equivalent) that I miss from the LX3. I may even go for it instead of the 14mm pancake,
 depending on price and quality.


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

I've got the Olympus 12mm f2, 17mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8 lenses, plus three zooms: 9mm -18mm f4-5.6, 12mm - 50mm f3.5-6.3, 14mm - 150mm f4-5.6.

The 14-150mm is a great carry everywhere lens. 

I'm going to sell these if anyone's interested: 
14mm f2.5 Lumix 
20mm f1.7 Lumix 
14mm-42mm Olympus
14mm-42mm f3.5 - 5.6  Olympus
40mm-150mm f4 -5.6 - Olympus


----------



## George & Bill (Oct 29, 2013)

The 12-14mm f2.8 (24-80mm in 35mm terms) lens is the real sign here that Olympus are serious about this system, as this is the workhorse lens for most jobbing photographers - have manufacturers other than Canon and Nikon made such a lens prior to now? $1000 seems competitive, though obviously it's pro kit so not cheap. 

If the 40-150mm f2.8 is any good then that is a very impressive lens too!


----------



## George & Bill (Oct 29, 2013)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The lens in the OP is extraordinarily expensive, but on the other hand it is sealed. The other impressive feature is that the max aperture remains constant throughout the range. Not bad that.



Not really - I don't think you would find an f2.8 zoom from another manufacturer for less than that...


----------



## editor (Oct 29, 2013)

God award for the E-M1 on Dpreview:


> The final word
> 
> Without even knowing Olympus' positioning of the camera, you'd imagine just looking at it that the E-M1 is something of a double act. It attempts to be two things - the almost pro-level 'DSLR' and the lightweight, carry-it-all-day camera Micro Four Thirds has been giving us for years. And that's exactly what the it's intended to be - successor to the E-5 and step up from the E-M5.
> 
> ...


----------



## editor (Oct 29, 2013)

Looks like the quality is right up there too: 


> The E-M1 provides the excellent image quality that you'd expect from a camera of its semi-pro level. Its Four Thirds sensor is smaller than the APS-C imagers of its Nikon D7100 and Canon EOS 70D peers, but we think the difference it makes in real world shooting is hard to spot. You need to put the E-M1 up against a full frame camera to really see a significant difference in image quality.


----------



## editor (Oct 31, 2013)

I'm liking it more and more:


----------



## editor (Nov 5, 2013)

Hmm.. I'm more than a little tempted to flog off my Pen E-PL5 and go for this combo when I'm in the States.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 5, 2013)

I've been more than a little tempted to get one for my birthday on interest free credit. Problem is that if I'm going to buy on credit I might as well go for a full frame. And I can get the GX-7 for £500 less which makes for a lot of extra lens, or travel expenses.


----------



## editor (Nov 13, 2013)

Another rave review: http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/olympus_om_d_e_m1_review/


----------



## editor (Nov 26, 2013)

Good video showing off some of its features here: 



And a mighty impressive set of test shots here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/terakopian/sets/72157635476408572/


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2013)

An advantageous exchange rate and a few more of my photos sold recently meant that I cracked and bought this camera/lens combo and my oh my it feels like a real, high quality combination.

I'll try and take it out for a spin tomorrow but first impressions are very positive indeed. It's a beautifully built camera and the lens exudes quality.


----------



## editor (Dec 11, 2013)

I also bought the Olympus 75mm f1.8 lens and it's every bit as good as the reviews suggest. 






http://www.urban75.org/blog/photos-of-union-square-farmers-market-and-holiday-market-new-york/


----------



## editor (Dec 12, 2013)

E-M1 gets Camera of the Year award from Steve Huffington



And Stuff Mag too
http://www.stuff.tv/gadget-awards-2...ounced-these-are-22-best-gadgets-year/feature

Incredibly, the EM-1 also outperforms the ASP-C Canon EOS 70D






http://www.43rumors.com/e-m1-beats-the-aps-c-canon-dslr-and-new-gm1-review/


----------



## what (Feb 12, 2014)

Editor. How are you getting on with the 12-14mm f2.8?

I have a chance to buy a second hand one and wondered if its worth it.


----------



## editor (Feb 12, 2014)

what said:


> Editor. How are you getting on with the 12-14mm f2.8?
> 
> I have a chance to buy a second hand one and wondered if its worth it.


It's a marvellous lens. Surprised you're able to get it secondhand so quickly as it hasn't been out long. How much as they asking?


----------



## what (Feb 12, 2014)

Looking for £700 it seems only a couple of months old and in mint condion


----------



## editor (Oct 12, 2014)

Interesting piece here: 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/cameras/two_weeks_with_the_olympus_e_m1.shtml


----------



## editor (May 19, 2015)

Updated title to include the new 7mm-14mm f2.8 lens. It looks amazing. 


















Review: http://robinwong.blogspot.it/2015/05/olympus-mzuiko-7-14mm-f28-pro-lens.html


----------



## George & Bill (May 19, 2015)

Olympus are SO close to creating something I could trade in my Nikon kit for - I imaging that 7-14mm would make a more than adequate replacement for my 16-35mm (being 14-28mm in FF terms) - except for its bulbous, filter-incompatible front element; the amount of schlepping the Nikon lens has seen, it'd be scratched to pieces by now if it wasn't for its clear filter.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2015)

Mm. Anything below about 21mm (equivalent) is too artificial for me. Even 21 is a bit much; 24 is about the widest I'd go on a regular basis.


----------



## editor (May 19, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Mm. Anything below about 21mm (equivalent) is too artificial for me. Even 21 is a bit much; 24 is about the widest I'd go on a regular basis.


Oh, I don't know. You can really capture something of the drama of a scene you're seeing when it comes to landscapes. This was taken a few hours ago at 18mm.


----------



## editor (May 26, 2015)

"One of the finest lenses I've ever used on any system..."



*want!


----------



## editor (Aug 18, 2015)

I want the wide angle zoom even more after watchiing this video:


----------



## Virtual Blue (Aug 18, 2015)

I'm into ultra-wide angle and was looking at the Lumix 7-14mm f/4
Has anyone tried it?

Would love the f/2.8 but why the hell are they so expensive?


----------



## editor (Aug 18, 2015)

Virtual Blue said:


> I'm into ultra-wide angle and was looking at the Lumix 7-14mm f/4
> Has anyone tried it?
> 
> Would love the f/2.8 but why the hell are they so expensive?


It's the f2.8 throughout (and weather sealing) that cost so much. I've currently got the older Olympus 7-14mm which is pretty good but nowhere near as fast.


----------



## Virtual Blue (Aug 18, 2015)

editor said:


> It's the f2.8 throughout (and weather sealing) that cost so much. I've currently got the older Olympus 7-14mm which is pretty good but nowhere near as fast.



yes - the old Olympus is a hefty piece of kit - unsure if it is as portable...

do you have other samples? i believe the image quality is the same as the Lumix (except the Lumix is much smaller in size).


----------



## editor (Aug 18, 2015)

Virtual Blue said:


> yes - the old Olympus is a hefty piece of kit - unsure if it is as portable...
> 
> do you have other samples? i believe the image quality is the same as the Lumix (except the Lumix is much smaller in size).


I'm not sure if you're thinking of the right one here - ah, my mistake - I'm using the Olympus  9-18mm which packs away very small.


----------



## Virtual Blue (Aug 18, 2015)

I think I'll miss out on the 'pro' lenses for now (besides, I'm only running on an GX7 and that's not weather-sealed). Will probably try and pick up that Lumix 2nd hand on the bay.

If I had an extra £800, I'd definitely pick up that Olympus. Beautiful bit of kit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2015)

Virtual Blue said:


> I'm into ultra-wide angle and was looking at the Lumix 7-14mm f/4
> Has anyone tried it?
> 
> Would love the f/2.8 but why the hell are they so expensive?



Because a wide-aperture zoom is a much more complex (and therefore expensive) optical proposition than a zoom whose aperture varies with focal length.


----------

