I had to go back and look at my photos taken with the Olympus M.Zuiko ED 40-150 mm ƒ 2.8 PRO lens. I always considered it to be a very sharp lens. Now i realize that the sharpness is far more "relative" when looking critically at photos, with my monitors today. The lens is sharp - but certainly not razor sharp at ƒ2.8

It is a mild sharpness, without that extra crispiness you sometimes see only with the top notch (expensive) lenses. My Canon EF 200mm ƒ2 L IS actually is the same way. They ARE sharp - but not like super-duper razor sharp once you zoom into the finest details. For that you need to do do some digital tasks.

Now

I can better understand that the new OM System M.Zuiko ED 50-200 mm ƒ 2.8 IS PRO lens, is of the type that actually is razor sharp (in a similar league like the ED 300/4 L IS lens, which is razor sharp, perhaps the sharpest of all Olympus lenses together with the M System M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO - which by the way is a $7500 lens).

I am aware though...
that what I write here - is pretty SILLY. Real photographers who actually focus on skills, beauty and professional art - most likely don't deal with pouring their energy into sharpness comparison nonsense.

I get that.

But there is something els.e It is FUN to be a GEEK *LOL*

 

Various levels of good sharpness

simply isn't what makes a photo automatically good. It is a technical aspect of many... sure. But the CONTENT is still what really lifts a photo into a higher realm. The differences in sharpness I am trying to point out here, are pretty minor, so that 99.9% of the people, never ever notice any difference.

Or would spend energy on it.

I realize about the new OM lens

Anyway, this new white, shiny, whistle & bells lens, is really playing in a top-notch class from what I have seen. So, it trumps the older one. Yet, at the same time, the new zoom lens is insanely expensive. Even for fullframe standards it is very expensive (priced like or even more than a fullframe camera lens á lá Canon RF 70-200/2.8 L IS). So, clearly over the top.

The "older" Olympus ED 40-150/2.8 PRO lens on the other hand, is so much more affordable - and a very good zoom lens. I wouldn't want to miss it !!

Turning it "into a razor sharp lens" ?

Take images with the M.Zuiko ED 40-150/2.8 PRO lens, and give it a light AI sharpness procedure - and suddenly even the finest, tiniest details turn into razor sharp details. As if taken with a PRO 50-200mm lens.

You just saved 3600 €

I think it is only for die-hard landscape photographers who make money, who primarily benefit from the latest OM System 50-200mm ƒ 2.8 IS PRO lens. The rest, benefit from the old, affordable M.Zuiko 40-150mm ƒ 2.8 PRO lens. And when needed - you can give it a light sharpening procedure with a good AI based app (such as Topaz, etc).

It works very well in that regard, and looks fantastic. Totally splendid for a guy like me, who writes / keeps a 'PhotoDiary' / 'OnMyMind Diary' the way I've been doing for 25 years. A tiny island with personal photos, practically unknown and unvisited in the digital universe *LOL* For all that I do here, the older version of this zoom lens, it is simply perfect.

The Pigeon (2018)

The photo of the pigeon taken at 300mm focal length, shows that you with a bit of AI sharpening can chisel out even the tiniest details in her colorful feathers.

True; she was an unusual colorful bird... I normally don't see so many colors in the pigeons. Or was it the light that fell into the semi open metro station ? I don't know.

I was driving the train northwards, and as she stood relatively nearby the train driver cabin, i took the shot in the seconds between passengers going in and out - keeping the doors open a couple extra seconds.

It is a beautiful photo. Yet, it also shows how filthy the "cleanest subway in the world" actually looks like when you study the details on the ground (even if they are often cleaned - it is filled with gum spots and gunk).

Now compare that to Singapore. THEN we can talk about the world cleanest subway (for real/in truth). Where words actually are true. While here in the West we tend to call many things with sparkling words - but when you rub a little bit at the surface, you see that most things ain't true in reality.

Not that I am a fan of Singapore (i am NOT because i dislike the system there as such). Yet, cities who are clean, without tags and shit sprayed on walls ... makes things far more beautiful, and nice to look at, nice to be in. Here in the "so called West", things just go down the hill... Albeit slower here in Sweden compared to many other western (and larger) cities.