Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70 review at DxOmark.
Kirk Tuck picks the E-M1 as camera of the year.
Modifying Yongnuo RF-603 to work with Olympus (to trigger flashes) at Betterfamilyphotos.
Modifying Yongnuo RF-603 cable to trigger the camera itself at Betterfamilyphotos.
M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 with an OMD EM5 at Samudranil.
E-M1 field test images at Outbackphoto.
Sam: “Not really a rumor, but the Meike extension tubes (http://www.amazon.com/Meike-Automatic-Extension-Olumpus-Panasonic/dp/B00BY0F0P0/ref=pd_cp_p_2) in conjunction with the Olympus body cap lens yield some surprising macro results. See more at: http://samgoldphotos.blogspot.com/2013/12/meike-extension-tubes.html”
Marc: “I’m a big fan of 43Rumors as a user of an Olympus OM-D and and EP-2 and look at your blog every day. On the off chance that you might do a readers round up I wondered if you might like to feature my photography blog. I’ve just done my 200th blog post and that will stay as the current one for a week or so now. http://marcprovins.blogspot.co.uk”
Stefan: “This is not a rumor per se, it´s a tale of my experience after buying Olympus EM-1 and the PRO kit-lens 12-40mm f2,8.
A month ago I decided to expand my Olympus family and let the kit with the EM-1 and that tasty 12 – 40 mm F2.8 lens join my loved EM-5. I knew Olympus had a hit with the EM-5 and I belive they have an even grater hit with the EM-1. I just love it!
Just because I love it so much I was really shocked when I pulled the camera out of its bag to shoot pictures of my son as he was making tricks with his kickbike in an actioncenter. At first I simply refused to belive my eyes, the lens was litterally dangling from the camerabody and I could see the electronics inside. How on earth could that have happened? I had mounted the lend on the body and put the camera into a small tamrac-bag which it fit perfectly in. In fact, this whole summer I have been wearing this bag when I was hiking and biking with the EM-5 and my Voigtländer 17,5 mm F0,95 has been with me everywhere. Granted, it’s not the lightest lens to mount but I adore it and try to use it as my “normal” lens.
Imagine my shock when I pull out my camera after a 25 minutes walk and the lens is, in every sense of the word, broken!
I mean, come on! This is the PRO-lens we have been waiting for. I was actually already saving up for the 40 – 150 mm lens but that is cancelled right now in my mind. I actually have returned the lens to the shop and they are baffled.
They told me that I should contact the Olympus premium support since I have all my gear registered with Olympus but I felt that I simply had to show them what had happened. They need to know.
What worries me the most is that when I examined the lens I could easily see that the bayonett was only secured to the lens with four screws. That in itself does not need to be so bad, what is bad however is that these four screw are tightened into plastic sockets and from what I can see in my lens, three of the four plastic sockets inside has broken from just carrying the camera in a padded bag. It amazes me that a lens this heavy has such a weak construction. It totally belies the tactile feeling you get when shooting with it. It feels like it’s built like a tank! I’m sorry to say that it’s not.
Olympus tells me they will repair the lens at no charge, that does nothing to instill confidence in the lens though. I want to know how they will improve the construction! I wish that they would use metal in the lens instead of plastic. This is not a lens that you should need to leave at home because you are afraid it will break in the bag! This should be the lens you pick when you are going out in a blizzard to shoot pictures, or put in your backpack when you plan to go mountainbiking or trekking. This is THE lens that is meant to be in your pack when you fear for the life of all your other lenses!
I can’t see how I will have my confidence in this lens restored.
There is two reasons I write to you in what must be described as despair. First off, I just found out that other people have had the same misfortune as me so I’m not alone. (See http://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=56256 for example).
Secondly, I feel that you are a positive force online and in the photo community. I love your site and I wish that this will sort itself out somehow without all of us having to return the lens to Olympus for a refund.
I am hoping that you have a good solid relation with Olympus and can bring this to their attention. I’m hoping they will revise the construction and turn the lens into the PRO-lens we all expected.
I have taken a few pictures of my lens but *I find no way to attach them to this message.“
65 Responses
All of you FF fanatics and trolls – check out Kirk Tuck’s blog. Great reality check for you, and why the E-M1 is the camera of choice. The power of m43 continues.
Love it.
hahaha, the only fanatic fanboy troll here (and on mirrorlessrumors and sonyalpharumors) is you 😀 😀 😀 Did you ever even take a picture or are you just celebrating your favourite camera you can’t even afford.
I was never keen on the E-M1 styling but after reading Kirk’s post and the accompanying comments, I wonder if I would feel differently after handling one.
Try it. I bought mine after I held it for 10 minutes in a store. The quality is really good and far above of Em5, as long as ergonomics. If you look for a camera to put in a pocket, go GM1 without any regret (perhaps my only regret are the touch screen controls, I can’t get used to them), it’s a cool little camera. Buy it orange: nobody will ever say no to a random street portrait and will smile to you. 😉
lol, CC look at an comparison RAW file the a7r is ahead in every single image quality criteria that matters. I know you mFT guys like “features” lol over image quality , wonder why that is. Oh yeh I remember the itty-bitty mFT sensor cant even compete with the APS image quality from Nikon,Pentax,Sony , Fuji.
Do yourself a favor download the respective RAW files for each camera.Stop drinking, take off your rose tinted specs, look at the differences in image quality, then STFU and save yourself a lot of embarrassment. mFT has a lot going for it small compact system with great lens options, but don’t get too carried away.Before the men in white coats actually carry you away
I personally think Kirk Tuck nailed it. I had the same feeling when I picked up the A7. The E-M1 runs circles around it, with the exception of image quality that has to be seriously pixel peeped to tell the difference. Pixel peeping means nothing in real world photography. A well composed, properly exposed photo with a compelling subject from an iPhone can be better than any run of the mill full-frame photo. That being said, you’re not going to see too many of them from iPhones because it’s very difficult to get the shot with an iPhone. When you get up to the larger sensor cameras, even the Nikon 1’s, that problem starts to go away. It’s only a matter of time before that speed and accuracy even reaches an iPhone. Don’t think it can’t happen.
m43 will always “lag” full-frame, but it will always be right behind it, and not very far behind it. The pixel race is just about over. The dynamic range race will be over soon, as well as the ISO race (short of night vision). That then leaves portability, build quality, customizability, speed and other performance.
When a photograph resonates with people NONE of them says, that must be a full-frame shot. There are a small percentage of situations where a full-frame sensor has an absolute advantage, AND there are a small percentage of situations where a smaller m43 sensor has an advantage. Everything else falls in between, and then it really comes down to who is holding the camera.
There was a time when the image quality argument held a lot more weight. However, as the technology improves, that argument has become more laughable.
CEROTE
Sunlighter…
I wonder if you own a camera?
I have a Sony A7, a Canon 5D and a Panasonic G1 and I can tell you that it’s perfectly possible to get a lovely picture out of all of these cameras. The “FF” cameras do give a “better” image but only obviously so at the higher ISO settings. Other than that you really have to look very closely indeed to see any realimage quality differences.You have to look so closely in fact that whan I conducted my own little tests with MFT, APS-C and FF images on screen and prints up to and including A3 I found that after processing to get the best out of each shot people couldn’t tell what camera took which image at anything better than chance.
So, I suggest you stop fixating on kit and try to get the best from whatever gear you do own.
My comments were aimed at CC and his typical Olympus fanboy bull.No one is saying that the E-M1 is not a fantastic picture taking machine, with a fraction of the gotchas of the A7 or A7r.
The claim posted in the link { Kirk Turk } that and I quote “”it also trounced the more expensive camera (discernibly) in image quality “” .Is absolute nonsense with regards to every single image quality criteria , DR,resolution,high ISO,shadow noise,tonality,colour depth.This is a post in the Ken Rockwell school of attracting views to a blog by spouting ludicrous nonsense that fanboys like CC lap up.
I own the GH3 a truly wonderful video device unparalleled for the price anywhere with essentially the same sensor quality as the E-M1.I also own a D800e ,with essentially the same sensor quality as the a7R.So I am fully conversant with the “real life” differences in image quality. The A7r does not appeal to me at all too many compromises for the sake of a smaller body.
The claims that fly about here and other forums,where usually Olympus fanboys live gets awfully boring. mFT does not even match the best APS models { D5300,D7100,K3,Nex,Fuji}let alone FF. The difference is not small the D7100 has 1.3 stop better DR than the E-M1 with better shadow detail and noise.mFT has been a financial disaster for Olympus and Panasonic losing them hundreds of millions of dollars. The latest figure show that worldwide sales of mirrorless are down a little more than worldwide sales of DSLR [data link below for those interested in reality]. 82.5% of all interchangeable camera sales being DSLR.
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201310_e.pdf
The remaining 17.5% being shared amongst Olympus,Panasonic,Sony,Fuji,Nikon,Pentax & Canon.This { best case scenario} gives mFT aprox 8% of the interchangeable lens camera market shared between Olympus and Panasonic. There is no break down of the share between Olympus and Panasonic. But best guesstimate gives at best 5% of the interchangeable lens camera market to Olympus. At the peak of FT they had nearly 10% of the market.
You’re forgetting Samsung. In the US, Nikon and Sony vie for first and second spot in mirrorless, with Samsung coming up third. Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic, Canon, follow. Samsung??? Jeez, that tells you how much of a niche the mirrorless is.
Olympus has maybe 2% at best of the US interchangeable lens market. With the ad barrage for Nikon and Canon APS DSLRs the last month in the US, I really hope Olympus can expand or at least hold that market share.
Sunlighter…
“The claims that fly about here and other forums,where usually Olympus fanboys live gets awfully boring. mFT does not even match the best APS models…”
And there you go again.
You seem to be on some sort of Crusade to prove that MFT is inferior to The Rest but it’s as interesting as going on about DoF equivalence.
If MFT isn’t for you and you do own the cameras you claim to own, move on. Simples.
I don’t think anyone cares about APS-C or FF when MFT currently produces professional results. MFT was not a respectable format until the hacked GH2, the introduction Sony’s stellar 16MP MFT sensors and the introduction of high-end primes and professional zooms by Olympus and Panasonic at better price points in more manageable sizes. Not to mention the superior versatility MFT affords given the format can accept any lens on earth with an appropriate adapter. No other format affords so much versatility with high quality, professional results.
Professional photographers all over the world are using mirror less cameras as a backup camera, or replacing their DSLRs altogether, and yes, professionals are also replacing DSLRs with MFT. What’s beautiful is that regardless whether one preferrers MFT, APS-C or FF, soon all DSLRs will go the way of the dinosaur in favor of mirror less hybrid media devices.
The DSLR sales stats you cited ignore the fact DSLRs have seen a 10-15% decline in sales worldwide and are dwarfed by the likes of Apple, Samsung, Google and Nokia. Most photos are taken with camera phones, not DSLRs. Every three months, DSLRs loose over 15 million shipments. DSLRs are a niche market and no amount of bitching, whining or calling people “fanboys” will stop mirror less being the new standard, period. MFT was the first to truly meet this market change, and will continue to grow until camera manufacturers accept this fact and adapt. It will be a sad day when Nikon gets bought by Google or Apple in the next 8 to 10 years.
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/10/05/point-shoot-collapse-why-big-camera-companies-are-the-next-blackberry/?__lsa=04d1-7705
Kirk Tuck is working photographer and, as it happens, a pretty good writer whom I have followed for some time. I never got the impression that he was playing up to his audience. Note, there is more to an image than dr, iso etc. not saying he is right per se but…. I think I prefer the tones from the nex6 to that of the a7, despite dxo numbers. It’s a question of taste if we disregard the dof/focal plane differences. Cheers.
DoF…
depth of field is king on FF, then APS-C, lastly M43. Looking at photos from my Canon 6D makes all my M43 pics look flat, and that’s with shooting with the 40mm pancake!
however, on a cold day like this, I had a long walk with my GX1 in my coat pocket. M43 has a purpose, being small and getting great pics. It’s still a sacrifice though, but it has its place. -Until I go Fuji…
Some like Shallow DOF some don’t , it just a matter of taste. for me for most subject shallow DOF look boring , there is no 3D depth, no effort of composition with the environment. you can’t say that FF is king of DOF , cause when you need a picture to have deep DOF it is difficult to achieve with FF.
Put on an APS-C lens on the FF sensor and there you go. A7 can show crop APS-C area in full view on the viewfinder. DOF is mostly a matter of focal length and with the same focal length the DOF is the same on all systems regardless the sensor size.
DOF is mostly a matter of focal length?
– absolute aperture
– subject distance
– magnification of final presentation
– viewing distance
Please get a clue.
I’m talking about the same scene with same subject distance of course.
– absolute aperture > minor influence than focal length.
– subject distance > right, of course compare at the same distance
– magnification of final presentation > bullshit
– viewing distance > bullshit
Please get a clue. > or maybe you?
Here, go educate yourself:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm
Cambridge in colour articles have almost as many mistakes /errors /miscalculations as a C.C post lol
How about addressing issues with the article (if any) instead of trying to shoot the messenger?
Through I haven’t checked their calculations, their explanation is pretty much spot-on.
I’ll highlight the following little bit, as it explains a large part of the confusion about focal length and DOF:
“Longer focal lengths may also appear to have a shallower depth of field because they enlarge the background relative to the foreground (due to their narrower angle of view). This can make an out of focus background look even more out of focus because its blur has become enlarged. However, this is another concept entirely, since depth of field only describes the sharp region of a photo — not the blurred regions.”
But oh well, you could obviously try this with a DOF calculator, or by (gasp) actually taking pictures and verifying the info for yourself.
Fair enough. I was talking about subject isolation, so the relation between foreground sharpness and background unsharpness. Sorry if we got that one confused, but that’s what the orignial post of MRallcaps was trying to say.
He was?
This is what he said:
“DoF…
depth of field is king on FF, then APS-C, lastly M43. Looking at photos from my Canon 6D makes all my M43 pics look flat, and that’s with shooting with the 40mm pancake!”
Oh, and then something about cold days and taking his m4/3 camera…
But eh, thats clearly about DOF…
And regardless, subject isolation has to do with angle of view, but also with the difference between subject to background distance and subject to camera distance.
It just so happens that (within a system or format) changing focal length both changes magnification (and hence DOF) and angle of view (and hence the ability to isolate subjects).
Thin DoF has its place, but like with early HDR effects, it can be overused and overdone, like Michael Bolton Honda adverts.
maybe your problem is the piece behind the lcd…. lol….
what a shame canon… http://goo.gl/pTvgI7 & http://goo.gl/4CGcOE
incredible, those canons look like my father’s EOS 650 film camera from the 80’s. except for some round corners one can’t tell the difference… bizarre!! THAT is innovation… lol… why innovate, since some smart guys still buy them…
M43 was invented to decrease the size of camera and lens system in a mirrorless body. This was true in 2008 as the real competitors back then where fat APS-C DSLRs with big lenses. 2010 Sony came with even smaller bodys but bigger APS-C sensors. Fast lenses where bit bigger than M43 but pancake lenses (and zoom) also exist.
Now Sony made a camera of the same size and less weight than the M43 flagship EM1 and put an even bigger FF sensor inside, still being in the same prize range (A7).
Here a short size comparison of the fastest 35mm eqv lenses (most important focal length for most photographers):
http://j.mp/1bsWXCM
The A7 is is lighter and just about the same size as the 43 combo, but resulting pictures are much better and DOF way thinner. The NEX7 with the relatively big Zeiss 24 1.8 is a bit larger but weight is the same as both the other systems. DOF of this lens is the absolute same as the Sony A7 with 35 2.8.
I think every blind person can see why the Sony A7 is called a “game changer”. However it’s not perfect yet and the FE lens System just starts building up. In the meantime all Sony E-mount APS-C lenses can be used or any lens of any other system despite M43. In 1 or 2 years entry level FF E-Mount cameras will be available below 1000$, shutters will be full electronic and AF even faster. Bigger sensors will always be better than smaller.
I just try to be realistic and for professionals and enthusiasts I see Sony going in the right direction. The results just speek for themself. M43 has it’s place for sure in consumer cameras in the future as well as in video. But it’s no longer the smallest and lightest system as it was made for at the beginning.
“Here a short size comparison of the fastest 35mm eqv lenses (most important focal length for most photographers)”
So who do you think you are to come here and tell photographers what the most important focal length is for them?
1. Personally, I do a lot of portraiture, approx 90mm is THE most important focal length for me, I seldom if ever use 35mm. I’m pretty sure others have different requirements based on what they do.
2. That 35mm lens has totally crap corner performance, come back with something that at least performs reasonably well optically. Oh wait, you can’t due to the totally crap design of the mount (too narrow for the size of the sensor).
Go get a clue someday.
Get a life fanboy
Oh yes, I’m such a fanboy for pointing out that your claim about 35mm lenses is rather silly. Lets not even get to the pretty well documented issues with that 35/2.8 and wider lenses, and the basic physics that cause those issues.
I’m actually going to get me an A7(R) sometime next year, but its a very good idea to know what you get into before buying one, as it is a mighty interesting, but far from perfect camera.
No sir, I’m afraid the fanboy here is you, judging from things like:
“I think every blind person can see why the Sony A7 is called a “game changer”.”
I actually think ONLY a blind person will see it that way…
“However it’s not perfect yet and the FE lens System just starts building up.”
Judging from NEX, it is going to take a decade before its anywhere near a complete system, if Sony didn’t change its mind before that and just drops it. Sorry yes, past experience of Sony dropping products at random isn’t exactly unique to me, they have ‘a bit’ of a reputation in this.
“In the meantime all Sony E-mount APS-C lenses can be used”
Ah yes, there are so many of those, especially ones that provide any kind of optical performance.
“or any lens of any other system despite M43.”
I suggest doing a google on “Sony A7 RF wide angle” or things like that. Yes, you can use almost any lens, but the results won’t always be that pleasing.
“In 1 or 2 years entry level FF E-Mount cameras will be available below 1000$”
Oh sure, going by past experience, Sony will keep introducing new bodies, pushing down the price, but won’t be introducing the lenses that make a system for many years.
“, shutters will be full electronic”
Well thats a good thing as the current one sounds like firing a big gun.
“and AF even faster.”
Thats not going to be very difficult. AF on the current ones is not very fast to put it mildly.
“Bigger sensors will always be better than smaller.”
Bigger is always better, no?
Go buy a phase-one instead.
Better is not a matter of higher numbers on charts, but of being better suited to an application.
“I just try to be realistic”
Maybe you try, but you are not at all being realistic.
You make a size comparison based on one flawed lens example. This is a lens of a focal length and construction that is totally optimized for being as small as possible, with the to be expected consequences in peripheral illumination, color shifting, corner softness and so on.
As soon as you want a 24mm lens, you are just out of luck because it cannot be made without severe compromises for this mount (mount to narrow and flange distance too shallow, so you either have an angle of incidence that won’t work well, or you’ll just be blocking light due to the too narrow mount), and longer lenses will inevitably be large as a function of their focal length.
Hence, your size comparison is far from realistic, it is (exactly as Sony intended) based on a one-of, best case scenario for the A7 (of which you fail to understand the compromises).
“and for professionals and enthusiasts I see Sony going in the right direction. The results just speek for themself.”
The results mostly keep reconfirming that pictures are made by the person behind the camera, and that for as far as quality is concerned, that is a matter of camera + lens.
“M43 has it’s place for sure in consumer cameras in the future as well as in video. But it’s no longer the smallest and lightest system as it was made for at the beginning.”
As a matter of fact it still is, and in fact 1″ does even better in this (through with a slightly different compromise)
Sorry to say, but your failure to understand the direct relation between media size and lens size is why I again will say you are simply clueless.
What compromise works best for you is your choice, but at least try to understand the issues involved instead of blindly falling into Sony’s “fool frame” marketing trap.
So you are going to buy the Sony A7 but calling it a fool frame Sony marketing crap at the same time? That’s pretty weird. The inferiority complex seems to be deep rooted in M43 users heart.
No need to comment the rest of your daily struggle against reality.
People who think an A7 allows for a similarly small setup as say a m4/3 or 1″ system are indeed fools being framed by Sony’s marketing. I’m sorry to see that you didn’t get that little wordplay.
That the A7 can be quite a useful device when you understand the pros and cons of it is another story.
“The A7 is is lighter and just about the same size as the 43 combo”
Only if you can manage to use it without mounting a lens.
Depth of field is king in Nikon 1″, followed by micro 4/3. While I use 135 format, DoF is a problem one constantly must deal with.
“Sigh”…. Fanboys are so selective with their reading. They read a title, and run with what they think is Word.
Let me repeat what was said…
“The VSL Five Star Award of the Year goes to a camera I don’t (currently) own. The Olympus OMD EM-1”
A camera he doesn’t own.
However, he also said:
“Happy to share that my favorite camera of the year is also the cheapest one I bought all year. The G6.”
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.be/2013/12/happy-to-share-that-my-favorite-camera.html
Kirk Tuck’s FAVORITE CAMERA OF THE YEAR is the Panasonic G6, NOT the E-M1.
But, spin it the way y’all want. It’s what y’all always done. -Kinda like the spin the fanboys are gonna put on the Olympus 12-40mm “Pro” *snicker* Lens.
This “pro” plastic fantastic aluminium cover lens? It’s a nice lens optically for sure but such things really scare me :/
http://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=56256
What I find curious is how that post dates from november 28th, and the poster said he’d contact Olympus about a repair. One month passed, but no word about how that went.
LOL best post ever. You just committed the exact same error you were accusing others of.
His VSL Five Stars camera of the year award did in fact go to the E-M1. Yes, he did admit that he doesnt own it (yet), but that makes the award even more impressive because a typical fanboy would just tout whatever he owns rather than looking objectively at all the options.
If you would take the time to read the article linked in this post you would have found that the g6 won the award for best “economy priced” camera, a category he cited as an example of “silly awards for cameras I think brought cool stuff to the table”.
I could go on about fanboyism and spin, but I will let your post speak for itself.
Great write up by Kirk Tuck…I have not handled an E-M1 just yet…but I am sure that everything that Kirk says is true. I know because I decided to buy an EP5 (w/VF-4)..I had not owned a Pen before….Well ….in using the E-P5…I was SURPRISINGLY overwhelmed by how fluid the shooting experience was after setting the camera up to my needs. VERY flexible set-up.
The experience with the camera was so profound that I unloaded my E-M5 within a month as I had stopped using it. It ashamed that this camera is soooooooo overlooked and given bad press from DPReview…(I have experienced no shutter shock with any of the 10’AF lenses that I own).
Kirk rightly praises it at the level it deserves…now perhaps I SHOULD get my hands on an E-M1?!?!?!
AND like a FISH, you took the bait.
Again, like the typical fanboy here, you like to spin what someone wrote. When he mentioned “Silly Awards”, he was aiming for the E-M1. Where did he mention “silly” anywhere in the G6 write up?? Where?
In fact, let me copy his first paragraph of the G6 write up:
“I was going to write some long, drawn out narrative about choosing one camera from a list of many to make my “camera of the year” until I decided that the camera one chooses as “their” personal camera of the year is a singular and illogical choice based on so many individual factors that there’s no way to choose one universal camera for everyone. We can dance around the Sony products or the further distilled Olympus uber camera but in the end it all comes down, for me, to which camera gives me the most pleasure to hold, shoot, play with and drag images out of. And, which one is the best value for the amount of imaging fun it delivers. This year, for me, it’s hands down the Panasonic G6.”
“Personal camera of the year”?
“Hands down, it’s the Panasonic G6.”?
“I would note that this is the first camera that has made me appreciate, even enjoy! ”
“This is the first camera I’ve owned that makes exposure compensation flawless. Absolutely flawless.”
He even mentions “Favorite camera of the year” in favor of the G6 a couple times, you should stop being in denial, and actually READ the write up. It’s well written, I might add.
Reading is FUNdamental.
Hahaha it looks like you cant help but make a hypocrite out of yourself. If reading is so fundamental, how did you manage to overlook the dates of the blog posts? Have a look again to see what his final evaluation was.
Actually read the writeup before you post. It helps a lot!
You’re Seriously SLOW.
What matters more, What he actually said, or Dates when he said what he said?
I’m done with you. You are officially enshrined in the “Do not reply to any of his Comments” Hall of Fame.
Congratulations.
“You are officially enshrined in the “Do not reply to any of his Comments” Hall of Fame.”
Will you extend that to all.
Please.
Every brand has arrogant fanboys I’m okay with them, but I can’t stand Panny fanboys’ stupidity 🙂
I’m still waiting for a full-control bellows for µ43… 🙂
Bloom….zzzzzzz
Those four plastic mounting points in 12-40mm were a really poor design choice. Hopefully Olympus will fix that ASAP. Somebody got lazy.
It is perplexing. I used a pre-production sample, as did a number of other people in a group. I had it mounted to my GH3 and their E-M1 and we swapped lenses quite often, so that we all had a chance with the equipment.
I could imagine someone being hasty with removing the lens and straining the mount, but we should have seen some failure, unless of course, the materials were different. Could someone have saved money by shipping incorrect parts and no one recognized the problem, and the lenses were simply assembled with what was available?
just open the 4 screws and you know it 😉
Looking at the cut-through 12-40 image, the plastic screw posts are part of the lens barrel, and they are not separate add-ons. Precision parts like a lens barrel cannot be substituted by “incorrect parts” or “assembled with what was available.” Defects (casting, materials, processes) can happen in manufacturing, but a design that looks iffy may well be iffy. Time will tell.
The fact that the bayonet is sitting on top of merely 4 plastic screw posts is unsettling. The bayonet must remain in perfect plane-parallel and centric alignment with the optics. Affixed to four plastic posts, whether it is reinforced resin/fiber etc, lateral forces that are applied to the bayonet or the lens barrel can and will shear the posts off, if sufficient force is applied. The metal shims (washers) between the posts and the bayonet don’t bode well either. Of course, considering how chock-full with electronics this lens is, I can’t imagine finagling a solid metal base for the bayonet mount into that lens. Miniturization has its price.
I’ll keep using my 12-60. That’s the one that sometimes has the front element fall out for a similar reason (3 plastic screw posts and a retainer, which connected to the lens shade bayonet, hold the front element in place.
Let’s hope Oly won’t ever make a lens that spontaneously falls apart at both ends simultaneously. 😛
Well, my ZD 14-35mm f/2.0 and E-5 fell onto a pool deck and I picked them up and continued to use them and there hasn’t been a problem, although the FL-50 didn’t work consistently after the fall.
For that matter, some jerk picked up my camera backpack and shoved it over the front seats, to land in the back seat of my car and I haven’t seen any problem there, either.
The dpreview discussion on the possible 12-40 issues seems to have been censored – can’t have Amazon sales interrupted
Regarding Stefan’s post about the 12-40mm above I have no doubt about this lens breaking ( he does not mention how the bag was handled and if it had any mishandling -possibly- in any way). I am interested in this lens..but these reports put me off about it. Especially at the $999 price point.
I did send an email to LensRentals to inquire about any reported damage regarding the lens and I promptly (great outfit!), received a reply stating how much they liked the lens and that of their 22 copies of the lens, which are actively rented and shipped everywhere, that they have had no incidence of this kind of catastrophic failure.
Perhaps there is a bad batch of lenses out there that were not assembled properly? When I look at the images of the broken lenses…the situation looks to me like a pretty obvious design-flaw/money-saving situation. The design has an obvious weak point where torque will be applied during the use and abuse of the lens. No?
Not sure what to think about this…but I am delaying my decision to purchase this lens for now.
Ugh. I’ve had similar self-destructs among a couple OM manual focus lenses used with an OM4t back in the 90s. Jewels of lenses, wonderful light handling, but made me think just maybe a little too delicate. Made me switch to another brand.
Dear Stefan
Get a grip. I once dropped an OM4-Ti with a Zuiko 35-80mm f2.8 zoom mounted to it. They were in a padded camera bag and the drop was about 60cm on to frozen ground.
Guess what happened? That’s right, the all metal pro grade zoom had to go off for repairs.
I will bet your lens didn’t just break from normal handling.
Hi “Stig”!
I just walked with the lens mounted on the camera in my bag for about 25 minutes. The bag is a small one for just the camera and one lens and it is designed to have the camera placed in the bag with the lens pointing downwards.
I really lke this bag since you just open the top lid and lift up the camera in a very natural way, ready for action. Apart from the bouncing every camerabag endures when you´re out walking with the bag on your hip, nothing happened to it.
As I said before, i was truly stunned!
I have sold off all my “old” Canongear and have invested everything into Olympus M43 cameras and lenses and apart from this accident I have bee very satisfied with my gear and I recommend The EM-1 to everyone who asks about it.
Cheers!
Stefan, sorry to hear about your misfortune. Did you already contact Olympus about it? I’d be very interested to hear how they handle warranty issues like this. Hopefully their service is as good as Fuji’s, although that’s a tall order knowing how well Fuji customer service works.
I also own this lens, and will continue to rely on it as my only travel kit. If it breaks under my normal, very non-pro use, shame on Olympus. If I drop it and it breaks, shame on me, I don’t expect it survive that unharmed just because it reads Pro on the side.
Does the bag support the camera by the lens or by the body with no pressure being put on the lens?
Did you contact Olympus, and if so, what do they say?
I hope it works out for you quickly, and in your favor.
I remember all the Canon 300D bodies with the 18-55mm lenses with the plastic lens mount still attached to the body while the optical part of the lens had detached itself. I never thought I’d see Olympus equipment do that, especially the higher priced equipment.
Did you put the camera in the bag before going out and then took it out and it was broken or did you grab the bag and go?
If it was the former, then I would have to wonder if it had received a knock without your knowing and the lugs were pre-cracked.
If the latter, then would it have been possible that someone dropped it in the house or it got knocked without your knowing?
Same style bag was involved in my little accident too.
This one seems to be the only site WW accepting posts on this issue.
I remember the lens wass recalled ( or stopped) immediately after the announcment.
May be this has someting to do with the concern.
I traded the Panny 12-35 for this lens and now I do not use it because of doubts.
Why ” Mr. Terada” usually very efficient to promote his products is not answering here?
If the current production of this lens follows the logic shown here, the only possibility is to replace all the sold units.
And this in short time an paying some fee to the damaged customers.
Unless PRO means Product Ruined Originally.
Regarding Stefans 12-40 Pro lens,
There is no way in hell that the lens just miraculously seperated from its mount in a padded bag!!!!
I was a camera tech for 4 years and heard every cock and bull story out there when people refused to accept the responsability that they misused, dropped, or dunked their equipment, and tried to blame damage on the manufacturer to get out of paying for repairs.So many people also reported their 12-60 SWDs front assembly falling apart also. This is not a design flaw but a rough.
handling issue especially if Roger Cicala is not reporting issues!
Stephan- your damn lucky Olympus is being so generous as to repair it N/C.
why this can’t happen? with every product you can have some troubles, especially if it’s a new product.
I have a friend who had his Olympus 12-40 attached to his EM5, while in a case. This is not posted elsewhere, so it is “another case”. Very minor drop of the case, the the same thing happened. **Review is clobbering all comments and threads about this issue. It would be nice if the moderators would recognize that there are legitimate questions about the durability of this lens, and that the users of said forums have a legitimate right to discuss and compare notes.
Based on my experience in that “other” forum, I will think hard before l buy any more gear from their connected sites. They are doing a dis-service to their customers.
Recently my E-PM2 dropped from a bus seat to the bus floor, falling about 60cm. I do not care about the scratches, but the body has a crack now.
I thought the body should be just a little more rugged.
To my knowledge it is industry standard that handheld devices should stand a fall from a table (83 cm) without more than superficial damage such as light scratches.
……………
Btw, the ongoing, all-dominating discussions (with permanent repetition of arguments exchanged for thousands of times already) here about FF vs. APS-C vs m43 are boring and tend to make the forum quite uninteresting.
I’ve had mobile phones, laptops, cameras, mp3 players and what not break after falling from a table to the ground, I’ve also had them survive such drops, way more often. I don’t know what makes you think there is such an industry standard, but evidently many devices don’t comply.