Having only used this lens on a couple of occations and only for a short outing, I'm not quite sure about it. Either it's me not used to the focal length or the lens isn't quite as sharp as others I have seen on the Internet. I need to use the lens for a longer period and do some tests with it before deciding if I'll keep it or not. I'm thinking now of the Tamron 18-200 if this doesn't work out for me. Might take me some time to decide this but I'm not really in a rush to do this. I have my beloved Olympus 14-150 which I think is a wonderful lens.

I've photographed these froga before and every time I do it they seem to be in the same position doing the same thing; sleeping. However it does give you a chance to focus accurately and here it was the eyes on the first frog. They're quite large actually and I don't think that comes over very well in this image. However this lens is ideal for this type of photography and the OM-D did very well with the WB in differing ligh conditions. I didn't use auto-WB but changed it on the camera to what I think the WB was at the time.

I hear it all the time, shallow depth of field is not possible with the m4/3 format. I think this image disproves that once and for all. This image was taken at f2.8 so not quite wide open. Manually focued on the eyes again and I think f2.8 was ideal here. If I had used the lens wide open at f1.8 not even all of the eyes would have been in focus. The longer the focal length the less DOF you have. I wonder what the 75 f1.8 is like, it must be extremely small and careful focusing will be neccessary. I'm still thinking about that purchase but I'm holding off for now. You never know, the price may come down in a couple of months (I must be dreaming).

There was no other angle to take this photo, shame really but better to take what you can than nothing. I used the manual focus function to fine focus this one. I wanted to get the eyes sharp and AF didn't quite manage that. A very useful function I think and one that I will use often in the coming months. Excuisite creature isn't he. 

I just love the rendition of this image. There is certainly a lot of backbroud separation giving a quazi 3D look and feel to the image. Very nice indeed, and not shooting though glass is also a plus. I've been using this lens for some portrait images and it proved to be excellent. That 90mm equivalent angle of view is getting near my favoured focal lenth. A little short but not bad at all.

When I took this image I wasn't at all sure if these birds were real or not. They didn't move blink or make a sound. They were real though. Having used this lens for a coiuple of outings I wish I had something a little longer. Olympus have just released the 75 f1.8 and from what I've seem so far it must be a marvelous lens but at a €1000 it's not cheap. I'm going to have to think about this very carefully. I'd love to have it though.

All these images were shot through either glass or something similar. It didn't do too badly but I did get some misfocused shots. I was always attempting to focus on the eyes but it's not possible to be exact because the focus box on these cameras are larger that what I would wish for. I was in S-AF + M mode so that I could manually fine focus if I thought the AF was off. Works quite well but nothing for sport shooters.