5.1.2014

I was initially delighted with this lens, but then another reviewer suggested that it was no good for landscapes; that it was not sharp on distant scenes. I doubted that this could be so, but after a series of tests decided that something odd was indeed happening, as I will explain below. Nevertheless, I use this lens most of the time now, though I avoid using it for landscape shots below about f/8. It's superb for video indoors or at night with the Panasonic Lumix GH2, giving sharp-enough noise-free results at f/2.0 though it is better stopped down when more light is available. Until now my favourite lens has been the Nokton 25mm f/0.95, but I'm loving the wider angle and the option of single-shot autofocus.Manual focus on the Zuiko is very nice, with just the right degree of precision and definite end stops (no need to keep turning against viscous resistance, as on the Panasonic 20mm Pancake lens which goes round and round and is much too fine) and I love the ring that pulls back to switch between manual and autofocus.I've also taken to using this lens on my Steadicam Merlin and got the best results ever - the extreme lightness of the setup makes it a joy to use. Camera and lens are almost too light, but with just the capping weights on front and bottom, and the arm cranked up fairly high, it can be balanced. Using a wide ange lens on a steadicam reduces sensitivity to residual movement, and I am finding both single-shot autofocus and continuous autofocus useful for the first time. I normally use only manual focus for video, but this this does not work well for steadicam because refocussing frequently is not an option - every time you refocus you disturb the balance and it takes some time to get the thing steady again. Autofocus is not ideal, but it's possibly the best option short of the professional one of remote focus control by a focus puller using a remote screen.Regarding the lack of sharpness on distant shots, I carried out a series of lens tests comparing the Nokton 25mm, the Panasonic pancake 20mm, and the Zuiko 12mm, taking photos of a leafless tree with fine twigs against the sky (not saturating), and moving the camera away according to focal length so that the tree just filled the height of the frame, ie the images were all roughly the same in appearance. I took photos at f2 f4 f8 f11 with each lens using tripod and time delay to avoid shake. The Zuiko gives max sharpness at f11 but is pretty good at f5.6. The Nokton is better, but degrades at the edges, while the Pancake is surprisingly good at f2 though best at f4 or higher. These lenses are of course not alternatives, having different focal lengths, but the test shows that significant loss of sharpness can occur on even expensive lenses unless stopped down under these conditions. These lenses are optimised for use at full aperture, which doesn't give such good results when stopped down as a less expensive smaller lens. However, it isn't distance that's relevant; and it isn't down to focussing error. These tests made me aware of an interesting fact: that trees with fine twigs against sky are more demanding than anything else because defocussed white spills over into black, degrading constrast on the fine black twigs (and I'm not talking about flare or scatter, just defocussed light), but night shots are much less demanding because black does not spill over onto white in the same way. Light only has positive values unlike audio signals, so that a lens like the Nokton can look good at night even on f1. Some lenses it seems can have quite good high spatial frequency response or MTF (modulation transfer function), while having significant loss at lower frequencies (a gradual rather than a sharp rolloff). This means the lens can resolve fine detail and look sharp on some scenes, yet look bad on bright landscapes where the unfocussed components of the bright sky land on the black detail and grey it out.The sad fact is that none of these expensive lenses comes close to achieving 4k resolution at apertures bigger than 5.6, and they barely achieve the full potential of 2k (HD video) even at this, falling far short of it at f2. That's not a criticism of the particular lenses, just a fact of life, and a reason to use large aperture lenses carefully. Nevertheless, shots at f1 on the Nokton can still look very nice, for other reasons, and shots with the Zuiko can still look very good, when you need the wide angle; but taking landscapes with large aperture lenses brings disappointment unless they can be well stopped down, because they all lack the necessary sharpness, regardless of price (though the Pancake is the best by a factor of about 2). Looking into this further it seems that lens specs in terms of lines/mm do not vary as much as you would expect; even on £50k lenses it's diminishing returns, and there probably is a real advantage in going to full frame or bigger because 100 lines/mm on full frame is twice as sharp as 100 lines/mm on M43 and you can use f4 and still get the equivalent of f2 in terms of DOF. Much as I have resisted this conclusion it seems to be true, though I've compared a 5D with the GH2, and for video the 5D quality is much worse.

9.9.2013

In fact I would like to have given 4½ stars. With one reservation, the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0 is a superb lens. It is very sharp but the rendition is very smooth not at all wiry and even to the very edges. That certainly is true at f/5.6 and I believe virtually as good from f/2.8, though I have not tried that yet. To put this lens through its paces, I soon made a panorama after buying it by stitching together four horizontal shots (two up/two down) and the end result at 6717 x 4305 or almost 29 mp after trimming to a rectangle is fantastic - if you are interested about that, see [...]My only criticism unless you go for the very best of the top professional lenses that cost a fortune,is that it has rather wild barrel distortion if you shoot RAW as it is not auto corrected then. Besides, trimmimg to get the corrected result, you lose the edges of the frame, so you have been robbed of a few millimetres. To my intense dismay, distortion seems to apply to most lenses these days unless you go for the very best of the top professional ones and even then only the best of those which cost an absolute fortune.I found that the distortion usually was not noticeable but, on some occasions it can be very bad indeed. Of course, if you shoot JPEG it is auto corrected and RAW developers such as Olympus Viewer 3 do offer correction for that afterwards. However, I am using a RAW developer that I chose for its excellent tonal mapping and that does no such correction. However, I can put up with that as I always spend a lot of time on the processing of my best shots and usually end up throwing the rest away as I set myself a very high standard. If you are interested, have a look at some of my work at [...] but head for the album link, as some of my stuff there is about technique rather than pictures per se.I gave a long review of the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-f/5.6 suggesting ways around the fact that its edge definition is not that great if you are critical. Nevertheless it is a nice lens if your standards are a little more moderate. And, unlike what two people said about that review of mine, I did try it in a store who obligingly let me take my time and study on screen images via Photshop from RAW from both that and the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0.I would have been happier with a wider angle than 12mm on Micro Four Thirds but I am reconciled to the fact that the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0 with that one reservation about the distortion is superb and the extra work to deal with that or to generate a wider angle by stitching together a panorama from it are offset by its otherwise superb performance. Since for landscapes I often like between 120° and 150° to give the sweep that your eye takes in of the real world, I often have to do it anyway, as no rectilinear lenses are that wide. It takes a lot of skill and experience and I am only a beginner with panoramas. However, increasingly it is becoming a preoccupation as I want in a pictures as near to the like of the content one typically sees in an oil painting.

21.6.2012

Finally, a fast wide angle lens is here for the Micro Four Thirds system. The other two lens that can shoot at 12mm are the Olympus 9-18mm and Panasonic 7-14mm, both start at f/4.Build quality for this lens is excellent. It is full metal with a smooth finished surface. It weighs 130g, just slightly twice that of the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens. It's also twice as tall but still smaller than the kit zoom lens. As wide angle lens go, this is as small as it can get - the beauty of the Micro Four Thirds system.The lens doesn't come with a lens hood which you have to pay (heavily) for.There's a 46mm filter thread, similar to the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm. I have a 2-stop ND filter that I can re-use here.Nice.Autofocus speed is snappy and operates silently.The focusing ring is great. It can be pulled back to go into manual focus mode instantly, and push back to go back to auto-focus - no need for menus if you're using a touchscreen camera. When it's at the back, it reveals a distance indicator. This lens can focus from 0.2m to infinity. So you can either manual focus with the distance indicator (fast), or manual focus the focus-by-wire way (slow), I prefer the former.The optical performance is remarkable. At wide open, it's sharp at centre and corner. It's sharpest at f/2.8 though, but the difference between this and f/2 is possibly visible only at 100 per cent view. Chromatic aberration and vignetting are not really noticeable. Distortion is controlled really well, even for faces near the edge of the photo.I'm using this lens more for landscape (typically buildings) and street shooting. The f/2 is a huge advantage when shooting inside buildings (tight spaces) where lighting is low most of the time. f/2 can give you some depth of field but only when your subject is very close, in-your-face close. In typical usage, the depth of field is minimal.Composition with this lens is challenging, but you can always crop, which will be most often the case if you don't get close enough. If you don't like shooting so close to people, you might want to use a lens closer to 35mm or the 50mm equivalent.I find that a zoom at wide angle is more flexible, for me anyway, but sometimes the low light just hinders the chances at getting shots. I was once in a bar with the 7-14mm and I had to put the camera on the table to get non-hand-shaken shots at high ISO, at least now, I can get two stops of advantage with this 12mm lens and not shoot off a table, or tripod.Yes this lens is pricey, but it's worth it. If you need the low light wide angle lens, you have that option now.At a glance+ Excellent build quality+ Small, light & portable, relative to DSLR equivalent+ Very good sharp image quality+ f/2 aperture is great for low light shooting+ Fast and silent focus+ Focusing snap ring can be used to get into manual focus instantly+ Accepts 46mm filters+ Worldwide warranty- No lens hood included (I recommend a cheap alternative rather than the original)- No lens pouch included- Pricey but worth it

6.5.2014

I tested the 12-40mm on a GX-7 body. First thing that hit me was just how solid this lens feels, it's every bit comparable to a pro grade lens from other makers. It's also a lot lighter and more compact than the Canikon equivalents. Though will probably feel at home perfectly on the E-M1 body best (I only had the GX-7 on hand)A quick summary of good and bad points after some field testing.Pros:+ Stunningly sharp across the range even wide open, corners are good and get to excellent levels just stopping down a bit+ Very useful range of 24-80mm equivalent with f2.8 across the board. Capable in low light too+ Top notch build, this isn't a cheap lens and it touted as a pro level lens for micro 4/3 users,it feels extremely well made with tight tolerances on the focus and zoom ring, built to last. Impressive+ AF is very fast and quiet, accuracy was spot on with the body I used+ Weather sealed, dust, moisture and splash proof, I didn't test this but it's nice to know you can use the lens in less than ideal condition+ Out of focus rendering I found to be good (7 blade circular aperture), mostly smooth and pleasing "bokeh"+ Not a bad close up of 0.3x, it's not a macro but ok for a lens like this+ CA wasn't a serious issue at all, and very good flare control even without the hoodCons:- Some vignetting at the 12mm end improves stopping down to f4 and over. Tele end has less fall off not as notable. An easy fix though so hardly a deal breaker- In lightroom and ACR distortion is corrected, but in software that doesn't support lens correctionsthere is quite a lot of wide angle correction going on (esp the 12mm focal length), it's not likely a problem for most users if you use mainstream raw software. Worth a note though- It's fairly pricey, however on balance it's not badly priced if you look at something like the NIkkor 17-55mm f2.8 (which is over £1000)Filter size is 62mm, not the most common but easy enough to get hold of filters. Weight isn't that heavy really, not for an f2.8 zoom it's just over 380g. I like the L-FN button which you can use for focus hold or customise it on an Olympus body. And the slide back manual focus ring (which shows the focus distance when pulled back) is a very nice handling touch making MF a breeze.Opitically the lens performs very well, it's extremely sharp even at f2.8 and I would not hesitate to use it at that aperture setting across the range, dropping it down to f4 and it's super sharp. Contrast and detail rendering are spot on with some excellent rendition. At this price and range of lens you expect great build and super optics. Olympus have really outdone themselves on this offering. It's a genuine pro level lens which I really enjoyed using and can happily recommend.

24.8.2016

I am ashamed that I rarely write a review of products bought from Amazon (and as I generally live in countries where things are difficult to get hold of, I must be one of Amazon's best international customers for anything from household to camera equipment). However, just once in a while an overwhelming urge comes over me to write a review. As was the case with this 12-40 mm lens. It is the most exceptional piece of glass I have ever had the pleasure to use. It is so sharp and, when using with the magnification feature on the PEN F (a much underrated feature if you don't have a macro lens to hand), tiny bugs that I couldn't see with my eyes are picked up. Colors are just awesome too.I am a very recent convert to the 4/3 system (I tried the GF1 when it first came out and it didn't do it for me all those years ago) and thought I was a Canon girl through and through. But I think I am about to be converted to an Olympus girl, leaving the MKIII with its large family of L lenses in the studio. Or maybe, if I get the courage one to part with my 'babies', Ebay. Yes, this lens is expensive (and I did get into this 4/3 mindset resenting paying similar to L lenses (misguided btw), , and it does increase the weight and balance of the Pen F (I am currently awaiting a grip which may improve that) but worth every cent and even with its additional weight (in comparison to some of the 4/3 lenses available), makes light work of shooting wherever and whenever. I am surprised that Olympus etc don't make more of an effort to target female and photographers who travel a lot - as the whole set up makes it so much easier for those of us without Olympian muscles to operate, with the results being generally (IMHO) on a par with a full frame dslr and sometimes, as with this lens, exceeding. If anyone is serious about their photography, and buys just one lens for their F (and I can only talk about that camera as have no other knowledge of other modern 4/3 units) this is definitely the one as it will do most things from landscape to portraiture to macro (with that underrated magnifier option on the F and an incredibly close focusing ability). I bought the Olympus 60 mm lens at the time as the camera and that is good too (in fact, when compared with the Canon 100 mm L it is exceptional - although its small size and weight is a bit of a shock when it comes out of the box, as one thinks it can't possibly do the job but it does). But not as well, again IMHO, as the 12-40 mm if you want an exceptional 'do (almost) anything, go anywhere) lens. PS Sorry Amazon, didn't buy from the site. Now live in a country where up to date equipment is available, and although 30% more expensive, prefer to support local suppliers :)

9.7.2014

Well, what can I say? Off on holiday in a few weeks and the idea of taking my 5d mkiii and a large lens seemed like a bit of a weighty chore. my attention turned to my E-pl5 that hadn't been used since last year (with the Panasonic 14-45). A great m43 body but the lens was too slow and not of the best build quality for me. In steps the 12-40mm f/2.8; I normally use Canon L glass and wanted something close to the quality of those lenses. Luckily the price these days has gone down somewhat and I picked one up for just under 600 pounds, a bit of a risk I thought as I hadn't really taken the micro four thirds system that seriously. After one day of shooting both raw and jpeg I am very happy indeed.

20.8.2014

Based on use of this lens as a wedding photographer.First impressions:On unboxing this lens I was impressed by the build quality. It came with a hood in the box, and a lens cap operated by a centre pinch (a good thing, as the cap is unlikely to be removed by knocks in the bag). It is a weighty lens by m4/3 standards but still very portable. It has a solid build quality, I do not anticipate it falling apart without a significant drop.A nice feature if the focus clutch. When in its normal position, the focus ring is deactivated and the lens is used in autofocus mode (most of the time), but on occasions where manual focus is preferred (e.g. in the dark for long exposures?)

4.3.2013

Purchased after first trying the 9-18 zoom as my wide angle. The 9-18 is OK, but this 12mm is a bit sharper and less prone to softness in the corners or edges, even when wide open. It's less flexible than the 9-18 in that you need to move your feet and/or change lenses for different distances, but much more flexible in that seems to do a good job right from wide open, possibly peaking at about f5.6 as far as I can tell to date, but still good at f8 and f11. Although some reviewers seem to think you can't get shallow depth of field with wide angle or with micro four thirds (and certainly not with both), my observation so far is that that's rubbish. If you have any idea what you're doing,

27.5.2017

This lens confirms the old photographers adage of having to pay more for good glass than a good camera. Yes, it is an expensive lens but this is partly offset by it's versatility and quality. My main use for the lens is for garden photography; the 12mm focal length provides sufficient width for most landscapes and it appears to be sharp at all focal lengths up to 40mm. Probably the most useful feature though, is it's capacity for close up photography, allowing detailed shots of flowers and insects. Before I got this lens, I used to carry around 45mm and 17mm lenses, along with an olympus macro converter. While the lens is nice and sharp,

5.7.2012

I have a panasonic GF1 with the excellent Olympus 12mm F/2, Panasonic 20mm F/1.7 and Olympus 45mm F/1.8 lenses. I chose this lens because I wanted a wide angle with very large aperture, and was not willing to make a compromise with the much smaller and cheaper 14mm F/2.5 from panasonic. It works very well with the GF1, which I personally think is best suited to fast prime lenses rather than the slow and bulky 14-45mm kit lens originally sold with the camera.Likes:- The fastest wide angle prime lens available for micro 4/3rds- Excellent picture quality (very sharp)- Excellent build quality (feels great when you are using it)- The diameter (46mm) is the same as the 20mm F/1.7 lens, so filters,

25.9.2014

Original *** reviewI seem to be going against the tide here.Beautiful bit of kit, lovely to use, zoom smooth, focus quick, manual focus override a great feature BUT:Sharpness noticeably worse than my primes, particularly away from the 12mm end, which appears to be the lens' sweet-spot. Okay, that's what you'd expect and a fair penalty to pay for the convenience of a zoom.However, the killer blow is that it is also noticeably less sharp than my old Panasonic 14-45 zoom at equivalent focal lengths and apertures. How can nearly £800 worth of 'Pro' lens be less sharp than the kit zoom from one of the first micro 4/3 cameras released?The wider reach is nice, as is the constant f2.8,

3.2.2014

Olympus are really stepping up their game with the release of the em-1 and this, their first 'Pro' lens. The 12-40mm range gives a slightly longer zoom than the traditional 12-35mm/24-70mm equivalent offerred by Panasonic. I own the Panasonic lens too (soon to be sold), and can say that they're both fantastic optically. From what I've read there's not a great deal between them optically, and from my quick testing, I'd say I probably agree. Both are damn sharp.So why buy the Olympus? In my case it was a number of small but cumulatively important factors.The extra 5mm reach is quite a lot on a m43 camera.True weather sealing when mounted on an em-5. The Panasonic does have some sealing but I'm not 100% sure how effective it is.

6.3.2014

As a user of olympus m4/3 since the EP1, I looked forward to the introduction of the olympus pro lenses which would allow lens quality similar to my canon L series. Image quality wise, I have been very happy, with minimum focus distance better than I had expected but I've only given 4 stars on the basis of a problem I have found with the lens barrel ring which switches from auto to manual focusI wanted to take shots of my granddaughter but the camera wouldn't autofocus when I had taken it out of my camera bag. I knew that when I had put the camera away a few hours earlier it had been in the auto setting and I hadn't changed that, but on using it again, I couldn't get auto focus to work,

18.9.2015

Beautiful jewel of a lens! I have the 12-40 F2.8 so was hesitant about buying a focal length I already had covered. But this lens has twice the light gathering ability as the zoom and is really small so great for taking out when you don't want anything bulky.I always feel well designed items should not only perform well but look great too, and this looks beautiful on the camera which is a bonus to it's stunning image quality. I bought the lens hood too, which is for me a must at this length to stop stray light softening your photographs. The Olympus hood is not really plasticky like some say, it's somewhere between plastic and metal and feels really nice.

24.10.2012

Boy I love this lens! I had bought the 9-18mm but tried it one morning and wasn't that impressed with the edge-to-edge sharpness, so I returned it and got this instead. I took it to Jordan for a week and in the end it became my most-used lens.I've still not worked out the sweet spot for the 12mm but most the time I'd set my aperture to f/10 and just got on with things. I could have got away with a lower aperture, which is probably where the sweet spot it, but looking back through my pictures of Jordan I don't have any problems with this setting.I'm not sure the pull-back manual focus ring is essential on this lens. I'd much prefer to see this feature on the normal primes,

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0 - Reviews

Info

Analysis

Detail