Roving the webby Intertubes for bits related to the Olympus 12–40mm lens led me to National Geographic photographer Jay Dickman's Firstlight Workshops website, which I'd never seen before. He uses the OM-D E-M1, even underwater (in a housing). At the link, I particularly liked the polar bear with his front feet in the water and the last one of the wave and the iceberg. There are a lot of E-M1 shots on the site, but you kind of have to wander around looking for pictures (it actually took me a surprisingly long time to figure out what Jay's last name is—it's barely mentioned on the entire site).
Worth a visit, especially if (but not exclusively if) your taste runs to...well, Nat Geo type nature/travel photography.
(I have a tough time researching cameras and lenses because I always get sidetracked by photographers and their photographs.)
Mike
Original contents copyright 2014 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
No featured comments yet—please check back soon!
I still go back and forth between this lens and the Panasonic 12-35, likely for no good reason one way or the other. Looking at the charts, I like the fact that the Panasonic is quite sharp both wide and long (though it's less long). It also has a more classic sharpness curve, getting better as you stop down until f4, then slowly worsening. The Olympus has sharper edges, and starts at its sharpest, and immediately starts softening a little as you stop down. So the sweet spot is wide open.
Finally, I have the 12-60, and it's really quite good, but heavy, so there you go...
Posted by: John Krumm | Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 07:16 PM
This has nothing to do with the lens that got you searching, but photographs by - and links to - Jay Dickman and many other National Geographic photographers can be found at:
http://thephotosociety.org/members/
Just beware that one or two of the thumbnails are likely NSFW.
Posted by: Ken | Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 08:20 PM
I thought there was a whole makeover coming to this blog... I waited and waited... and nothing. Same old blog. What happened? Did I miss something?
[Still workin' on it, Morey. I'm a one-man band here, and things always go slower than you want. --Mike]
Posted by: Morey | Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 09:08 PM
I know it's just me but there's something lately about these overly colorful and almost too perfect digital photos that are starting to bore me. As cameras get better and better it seems they capture even BETTER than what was actually there. A certain punch to the color or a certain sharpness that makes it pop that's neat-o but gets tiresome too. Like too many pretty sunset photos seen one after another. Someone needs to figure out how to take the creativity up a notch and stick out from the crowd as colorful perfect photos are simply becoming a dime a dozen it seems. We need more creative "imperfection" somehow.
Posted by: Richard | Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 10:45 PM
The Pana 12-35 and the Oly 12-40 1:2,8 are MFTs secret weapons in so far as I don't think twice about carrying one of them around for a longer period of time. With 35mm sensor systems, weight is always an issue. Since the introduction of the E-M1 the system has struck the right balance in terms of attainable image quality and portability.
Posted by: Maurice Jones | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 02:39 AM
My five cents about the post before mine: NatGeo photos are there to "document", they HAVE to be perfect. Then, you have fine arts magazines, and their photos wants to " tell a story", so they can be creatively "imperfect". To everyone his medium.
Posted by: A. Costa | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 03:47 AM
What Richard said.
Posted by: Earl Dunbar | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 08:34 AM
Just for the record. As a looooong time TOP reader I have no problem at all with TOP remaining the "same old blog" for as long as you like. When you do change, I am sure it will be grand but there is no rush.
Posted by: James Weekes | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 08:45 AM
"(I have a tough time researching cameras and lenses because I always get sidetracked by photographers and their photographs.)"
Perhaps that's because good photographers can outperform their gear? Or is it that gear is a personal preference, and it is what a photographer sees and manages to represent that is important regardless of all objective measurement of how the image is captured?
Posted by: Rob Graves | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 08:52 AM
>> We need more creative "imperfection" somehow.<<
Sounds like you are describing Instagram and all of the other "art" filters/settings found in most cameras and editing software these days!
Posted by: Doug | Friday, 26 September 2014 at 09:58 AM
Another way to go (if you're still looking for Oly 12-40mm photos) is to do a search in Flickr. This will get you what you want if people tagged their photos correctly:
https://www.flickr.com/search?text=OLYMPUS%20M.12-40mm
Meanwhile, there are Flickr groups folks can land their photos in if they used this lens:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/olympus12-40mmf28/
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2420389@N22/
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2338014@N25/
There's no shortage of reviews comparing it to Panasonic's 12-35mm lens either:
http://suggestionofmotion.com/blog/panasonic-12-35mm-vs-olympus-12-40mm/
http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/lumix-12-35mm-vs-olympus-12-40mm/
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Olympus-M.ZUIKO-DIGITAL-ED-12-40mm-F2.8-PRO-lens-review-Pro-worthy-performer/Olympus-M.ZUIKO-DIGITAL-ED-12-40mm-F2.8-vs-Panasonic-LUMIX-G-X-VARIO-12-35mm-F2.8-ASPH
http://www.seldomscenephotography.com/2014/01/23/wide-zooms-for-micro-43-cameras-compared/
Hope this helps,
Eric
Posted by: Eric (Seldom Scene Photography) | Saturday, 27 September 2014 at 12:29 AM
Another way to avoid that boring perfect look is to use film, something quite common in National Geographic BITD. Also, it looks like a few of the linked photos use HDR (amping up digital perfection to a grotesque degree).
Posted by: Peter | Saturday, 27 September 2014 at 07:07 AM
Those pictures really made me miss the olympus 50-200mm from the E-system that he appears to be using adapted on his e-m1. What a spectacular lens.
Posted by: Vadim | Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 10:36 PM