" The Olympus Holy Trinity.": Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (2024)

8

When you have these, you have the devil by the tail!

15

Would you mind listing the lenses and maybe giving a brief description of what you get from each, or from the combination? I'm not good with visual ID of lenses I probably don't have, nor reading your mind about what you like (which I'd be interested to hear).

https://youtu.be/3MCHI23FTP8

11

boxerman wrote:

Would you mind listing the lenses and maybe giving a brief description of what you get from each, or from the combination? I'm not good with visual ID of lenses I probably don't have, nor reading your mind about what you like (which I'd be interested to hear).

If you inspect the image you can clearly read the labels. The three lenses are the f/2.8 PRO 7-14 , 12-40, and 40-150 f/2.8. A match made in heaven (or Vietnam more likely).

1

Weegee wrote:

When you have these, you have the devil by the tail!

Exactly. f/2.8 all the way everyday....

7

ToxicTabasco wrote:

Weegee wrote:

When you have these, you have the devil by the tail!

Exactly. f/2.8 all the way everyday....

Unless you are shooting isolation portrait photography and low light photography then 2.0, 1.8, 1.4, 1.2, 0.95 all the way everyday

28

mchnz wrote:

boxerman wrote:

Would you mind listing the lenses and maybe giving a brief description of what you get from each, or from the combination? I'm not good with visual ID of lenses I probably don't have, nor reading your mind about what you like (which I'd be interested to hear).

If you inspect the image you can clearly read the labels. The three lenses are the f/2.8 PRO 7-14 , 12-40, and 40-150 f/2.8. A match made in heaven (or Vietnam more likely).

Thanks. While I could (barely) see the 7-14 and 40-150, I could never find the 12-40 marking, though I could guess (because I do have that one). On a small screen, I'm pretty sure many readers would have a terrible time identifying.

What I was really suggesting was that the OP should tell the poor readers what it would take the time and effort for most of them to individually discern, especially readers who don't know that much about the Olympus Pro series. Those readers probably need this kind of post most, but I bet to a person they'd just skip to the next thread.

I tell my students always to "help the poor reader." Authors should take some often trivial time for them and save hundreds of readers (hopefully) each a similar amount of time.

Then there's the question of why I should pay attention to anyone who happens to love three "random" lenses for no provided reason. Not that they aren't great, but if I don't already know, I would like to hear something about that. Personally, I know how great the 12-40 is and have written about what it gets me (I sill bear the scars of the 12-50 this one replaced). I know exactly what the 40-150 would be for in my collection, and I'll buy or rent it if/when I need that. The 7-14 is too big for what it would do for me. For my needs, I think the Laowa rectilnear 7.5 is better suited. I also have a Rokinon 12 f/2, which is also better suited to my needs as an astro lens. Super big premium on f-stop for astro, and, as suggested above, I do favor light kit, if it'll do the job.

25

the 17/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8???

1

boxerman wrote:

mchnz wrote:

boxerman wrote:

Would you mind listing the lenses and maybe giving a brief description of what you get from each, or from the combination? I'm not good with visual ID of lenses I probably don't have, nor reading your mind about what you like (which I'd be interested to hear).

If you inspect the image you can clearly read the labels. The three lenses are the f/2.8 PRO 7-14 , 12-40, and 40-150 f/2.8. A match made in heaven (or Vietnam more likely).

Thanks. While I could (barely) see the 7-14 and 40-150, I could never find the 12-40 marking, though I could guess (because I do have that one). On a small screen, I'm pretty sure many readers would have a terrible time identifying.

What I was really suggesting was that the OP should tell the poor readers what it would take the time and effort for most of them to individually discern, especially readers who don't know that much about the Olympus Pro series. Those readers probably need this kind of post most, but I bet to a person they'd just skip to the next thread.

I tell my students always to "help the poor reader." Authors should take some often trivial time for them and save hundreds of readers (hopefully) each a similar amount of time.

Then there's the question of why I should pay attention to anyone who happens to love three "random" lenses for no provided reason. Not that they aren't great, but if I don't already know, I would like to hear something about that. Personally, I know how great the 12-40 is and have written about what it gets me (I sill bear the scars of the 12-50 this one replaced). I know exactly what the 40-150 would be for in my collection, and I'll buy or rent it if/when I need that. The 7-14 is too big for what it would do for me. For my needs, I think the Laowa rectilnear 7.5 is better suited. I also have a Rokinon 12 f/2, which is also better suited to my needs as an astro lens. Super big premium on f-stop for astro, and, as suggested above, I do favor light kit, if it'll do the job.

I agree with you on the 7-14. I just purchased the Laowa 7.5 and I'm getting some nice results. If you're serious about the 7.5 mm, see the following discussion concerning the accuracy of its aperture ring:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62964787

It might not be an issue for you, but I know I would have prefered to know before my purchase.

9

Art_P wrote:

the 17/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8???

I was thinking a similar thought but was expecting to see the 17 1.2, the 25 1.2 and the 45 1.2

2

Weegee wrote:

Those f/1.2 are great, but come up short in the wide angle and telephoto department.

No. Problem is, that people are very different and have different priorities and needs.

2

Art_P wrote:

the 17/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8???

I didn't get the memo, so I went with: 12/2, 20/1.7 and 45/1.8. My back and shoulders thank me for this.

2

Or you could just carry the 12-100.

I felt the OP was trying to show off a photo that I particularly don't like. The post itself was pointless, as the follow-up questions illustrated.

4

HRC2016 wrote:

Or you could just carry the 12-100.

I felt the OP was trying to show off a photo that I particularly don't like. The post itself was pointless, as the follow-up questions illustrated.

Not pointless. Nikon has long been touted for their "holy trinity": 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8. For many years. (ask any experienced music photographer). Those who know this understood Weegee's reference.

The comments illustrate lack of knowledge of some "photo gear trivia", not the pointlessness of the OP. These three Oly lenses offer an even wider range of fields of view at f2.8 than the Nikon trio.

I have the three of them but use the 7-14 very little. Just not that into wide angle photos.
I have a Sigma trio as well..
16.f1.4, 30 f1.4 and 56 f1.4. They're great.
Have 25 f1.8 Panasonic and 45 f1.8 Olympus.

mchnz wrote:

boxerman wrote:

The 7-14 is too big for what it would do for me. For my needs, I think the Laowa rectilnear 7.5 is better suited. I also have a Rokinon 12 f/2, which is also better suited to my needs as an astro lens. Super big premium on f-stop for astro, and, as suggested above, I do favor light kit, if it'll do the job.

I agree with you on the 7-14. I just purchased the Laowa 7.5 and I'm getting some nice results. If you're serious about the 7.5 mm, see the following discussion concerning the accuracy of its aperture ring:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62964787

It might not be an issue for you, but I know I would have prefered to know before my purchase.

Thanks for the warning. That's really annoying about the Laowa. I'll have to think about how it will affect my usage.

1

2

....create perspective if used correctly. They give the impression of being in the scene. Hard to use but very effective in the right hands.

Gary Martin wrote:

Art_P wrote:

the 17/1.8, 45/1.8, 75/1.8???

I didn't get the memo, so I went with: 12/2, 20/1.7 and 45/1.8. My back and shoulders thank me for this.

I like to mix and match. PL8-18, PL25, & Siggy 56. Sometimes just one lens. My Lumix 20 pancake. Or PL15. To me, they all epitomize the spirit of m4/3. Small, light, excellent IQ.

My first m4/3 lenses I bought when I jumped into the system, were the Lumix 14 f2.5, Lumix 20, and Lumix 25 f/1.7. Of which I still own all I think it's a little bit of a shame that m4/3 stopped bundling the 14 pancake as a kit lens, robbing a lot of new owners of the enjoyment of using a nice, simple prime.

Variety is the spice of life after all

The Lumix S9 is Panasonic's newest full-frame mirrorless camera. It allows users to create their own custom looks for out-of-camera colors and is the first full-frame Lumix camera aimed squarely at social media content creators.

The Sony a9 III is the world's first full-frame mirrorless camera to feature a global electronic shutter with simultaneous readout. After extensive testing of this 120 fps sports camera, to see what you gain (and, perhaps, lose).

Fujifilm has announced the X-T50, a mid-range 40MP APS-C mirrorless camera that gains image stabilization, subject recognition AF and a host of high-res video features.

The Fujifilm X100VI is the sixth iteration of Fujifilm's classically-styled large sensor compact. A 40MP X-Trans sensor, in-body stabilization and 6.2K video are the major updates, but do they make the camera better?

The Panasonic Lumix S5II launched the second generation of Panasonic’s full-frame mirrorless camera system and was the first Panasonic to feature phase detect autofocus. As our review reveals, it’s a heck of an all-around camera for both still and video shooters.

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.