Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm F4 IS Pro Lens, suitable for all MFT cameras (Olympus OM-D & PEN models, Panasonic G-series), black

Product Information

The resolution of the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12–100 mm f/4 IS PRO was additionally tested on RAW files generated by the Olympus E-M5 Mark II camera and below we present the results in the frame centre and on the edge. They confirm precisely the results we got by analyzing RAWs from the E-PL1. The 12-100mm f/2.8 Pro features its own 2-Axis image stabilisation system. It also features Sync IS, which allows it to work with the excellent 5-axis system in any compatible camera body, like the OM-D E-M1 Mark II that we tested it with, where it offers an amazing 6.5 stops of compensation, surpassing any other camera that we've ever tested.

Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 12-100mm f/4.0 IS Pro Review

Experience of cameras and lenses teaches us some rules-of-thumb about image quality. Cameras with larger format sensors generally produce better than those with smaller ones, for example. That fixed focal-length prime lenses are sharper than zooms is another. Tipping the scales at 561 grams and measuring 116.5mm in length and 77.5mm in diameter, the Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 12-100mm f/4.0 IS Pro is a substantial zoom lens, but given the constant f/4 maximum aperture, that's perhaps no surprise. When it's zoomed out to 100mm, it measures nearly 16cms in length. The lens has a very versatile focal range. At the 12mm end, the diagonal angle of view is 84°, i.e. the same as that of a 24mm lens in a 35mm system. Crucially, though, the 12-100mm is compatible with Olympus’s Sync IS, in which the lens’s optical stabilisation and the in-body sensor-shift stabilisation work together for increased overall effect. As a result, when used on the OM-D E-M1 Mark II, the system is rated to provide 6.5 stops of stabilisation, and when it’s mounted on the OM System OM-1 the stabilisation is boosted to up to 7.5EV. With older OM-D and PEN cameras, however, the stabilisation won’t be quite so marked.

To be honest I don’t remember a zoom lens with the multiplication ratio over 8 which didn’t have any weaker spots on the edge of the frame. It seems Olympus exploited the potential of a small sensor to the full and showed that producing such a lens is actually possible – a round of applause! In this case it might actually increase. At shorter end of the range of focal lengths the performance is splendid and it remains very good at the longer end too. What’s more even at the weakest focal length the MTFs at the maximum relative aperture are fully useful.

Olympus Mzuiko 12-100 F4 Pro - The do it all lens? Olympus Mzuiko 12-100 F4 Pro - The do it all lens?

There is only a minimum of light fall-off in the corners at f/4, which you will probably not even notice in your real-world photos, and distortion is commendably kept well under control too. Most of the 12-100’s use last year (90%) was on the Olympus E-M1 which I have owned since it was first introduced some four years ago, and 10% of its use was on the Panasonic GX80/85, a camera that I acquired last summer. I enjoy both cameras, but for me this 1.2 pound lens balances better on the E-M1, especially with the RSS L-plate/grip attached. The total weight of the camera, grip, and lens is 2.6 pounds. 2.6 pounds Though there are times I’d prefer the option for a shallower depth of field for people photography, I nevertheless enjoy the no-brainer ease of just shooting wide open at F4. For me that is usually candid family photography. @ 57mm @ 100mm (All images at ISO 200-800 except this one at 3200) I like that the rings (focus and zoom) are metal, not rubber. They do not show wear, which I think will be helpful when (or if) I sell the lens. Metal focus and zoom rings.Not sure whether this is best asked here on in Native Lenses, so forgive me if it's in the wrong place!] The Olympus 12-100mm F4 PRO zoom (24-200mm equivalent focal length) has been a well-used and well-loved lens for me this past year. I see that it has even relegated my Panasonic 14-140, a favorite from the prior year, to my lens drawer. Though the 14-140 is a “sharp enough” lens, the 12-100 is “more than sharp enough” and importantly has a few additional features, albeit at a significantly higher (2x) price point. I'm also not convinced, having not used it, that the 12-50mm wouldn't serve me almost as well for video purposes, between the electronic zoom and the reduced size/weight arguably giving less need for the extra IS… though admittedly this does contradict the "one lens glued on it for the whole trip" thing.)

Olympus 12-100mm f/4 PRO vs. 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO – The complete Olympus 12-100mm f/4 PRO vs. 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO – The complete

The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro is an optically-stabilised 8.3x superzoom lens for Micro Four Thirds cameras and one of the best Micro Four Thirds lenses. Ditto aperture – I've got plenty of low light lenses to use when the sun goes down, indoors etc. So the minor aperture difference between these two is of little practical consequence.

Olympus PRO Advantage Registration

The build quality of the M.Zuiko is certainly impressive. The tightly assembled, weather-sealed body is mostly made of metal. While the lens extends quite a bit when zooming toward the tele end of the range, there is no wobbling of the inner lens tube. The zoom- and focus-control rings operate smoothly. Some interested readers expressed their concern about the size and weight. Yes, it is certainly not the smallest zoom lens in the Olympus line-up but, honestly, it can't be and it shouldn't be. First of all - bigger is usually better in lens land and this lens is supposed to deliver a superior performance over the usual 14-150mm gang. Plus it has a constant aperture of f/4 throughout the range (vs f/3.5-5.6) and that limits the amount of downsizing compared to its more compact cousins. The MSC AF motor is pretty fast and silent. As usual manual focusing works "by wire" but you barely notice the difference compared to a mechanically-coupled system. In fact precise manual focusing is probably easier than on most conventional lenses because the focus path is longer. But most of my images are landscape and travel images. The lens has been perfect for that, as I dislike changing lenses. Even if the 12-100 were glued to the E-M1, and therefore I had no other choices, I think I’d be happy. @ 12mm @ 60mm @ 29mm @ 28mm @ 20mm So, as an outdoor do-everything-under-every-condition lens, I'm inclined to think that the extra 50mm(/100mm) reach and reduced size/weight with the 14-150 will be far more useful than the additional sharpness and aperture of the 12-100. I guess I need convincing that the Sync-IS on the E-M5ii is made of awesome and that the extra length and weight really aren't an issue! There's a chance that I may do some video blogging. This makes the Sync-IS of the 12-100 very appealing, but I don't know if the Sync-IS is as super duper when pairing with the E-M5ii as it is the E-M1ii.

Olympus 12-100mm f/4 - Focus Review Review Olympus 12-100mm f/4 - Focus Review

The 12-100 is all I need for car photography, which I have enjoyed on a few Saturdays each summer on the lawn of the Larz Anderson museum near Boston. Again, I typically shoot wide open. @ 100mm @ 25mm @ 100mm @ 21mm The performance at the shortest focal length deserves just one word: revelation. Not only the maximum MTFs are reached already at the maximum relative aperture but also the result in that place is really close to the record value, exceeding slightly 82 lpmm. This capability has served me well for flower and food photography. I have owned the Olympus 60mm macro lens since its introduction, but now hardly need it for flowers and food. @ 70mm @ 100mm @ 34mm @ 100mm @ 100mm A big zoom range is fun, but it won’t do much for you if the image quality of the shots is not good. Olympus has pulled out all the stops for this lens to perform as well as possible. It has 17 lens elements in 11 groups and a whole series of special glass types. And you see all that effort in the performance. Those are very good. In the RAW files, the sharpness in the wide-angle setting, at 12mm, is already optimal in the center at full aperture. The corners are reasonable then, but those become better after stopping down one stop, and then they are good as well. At f/5.6 and f/8, the center sharpness is a bit lower than at f/4, but the shots are truly sharp from corner to corner. At 18mm and 25mm, the center sharpness at f/4 and f/5.6 is maximal. The corners are already good at full aperture, but they get a bit better at f/5.6. If you zoom in further, then the quality of the lens slowly decreases at full aperture. It does not make much difference, but those who want maximum quality at 100mm are best off stopping down one stop. Now, under normal circumstances this would be an easy putt for the 12-100. However, some considerations:At the 100mm end, the angle of view is 12°, i.e. the same as that of a 200mm lens in a 35mm system. Wydawc Bokeh is a word used for the out-of-focus areas of a photograph, and is usually described in qualitative terms, such as smooth / creamy / harsh etc. In the M.ZUIKO Digital 12-100mm f/2.8 Pro, Olympus employed a seven circular-bladed diaphragm, which produces some very nice bokeh, at least in our opinion. However, recognising that bokeh evaluation is subjective, we have provided a few examples for your perusal. This body and lens combo is lighter than the lenses alone would be for a full frame Canon shooter (the two F4 lenses required to cover the equivalent focal range would total 3 pounds) or Sony shooter (the two lenses would total 2.8 pounds). Yes, I do realize that this is not an apples-to-apples comparison because the depth of field is shallower with the full frame gear. On the other hand, if you are mostly a landscape photographer who might shoot a scene with a full frame camera at, say, F16, you will only need F8 with a mFT camera to get the same depth of field, assuming the same equivalent focal length and the same focusing distance. Depending on the light available, this might be an advantage for the mFT system by allowing lower ISOs. Chromatic aberrations, typically seen as purple or green fringes along contrasty edges, are only really noticeable by their almost complete absence from our test images.