The Orthodox do reject that our Lord is in, with and under the species of bread and wine. Indeed I would say this is regarded as a more serious error than transubstantiation, which actually is not so much an error as not doctrine, an unpopular theolougoumemnon (theological opinion) which once held sway in some Orthodox churches due to Jesuit and pre-Jesuit contact with the Roman Catholics.
Where the Orthodox tend to agree with Lutherans rather is in the idea that the Eucharist is a sacred mystery that cannot be fully comprehended. “in with and under” falls into the same category as transubstantiation, as being inadequete, but also seems to clash with, for example, the reservation of the presanctified Eucharist.
@MarkRohfrietsch is correct that Martin Luther actually improved Eucharistic piety in tne communities he converted, as opposed to the Calvinists and early Anglicans, who were opposed to it (recall the destruction of altars and the iconoclasm under Archbishop Thomas Cranmer). Happily this has changed; we can say that Dom Gregory Dix, who controversially regards as Zwinglian the Eucharistic theology of the 1552 BCP (and by extension, the 1662, but not the Scottish books like the 1929 BCP, or the American books of 1786, 1892, 1928 and 1979 which were by them, and also to a lesser extent the 1962 Canadian BCP).
The Eucharistic piety of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox has never been questioned, nor has any serious question been posed of Assyrian Eucharistic piety, except by polemicists, although one could argue that since Assyrians will communicate anyone who believes in the Real Presence, this marks a reduction in piety vs. the Russians and Ukrainians, who will not communicate anyone who has not confessed recently or in some cases, immediately before the liturgy, let alone the non-Orthodox, but I would dismiss such an argument as nonsensical, since the Eastern Orthodox have occasionally communicated Oriental Orthodox; and indeed the Antiochian Orthodox in Syria and the Greek Orthodox of Alexandria give the Eucharist to Suroye and Coptic Orthodox as a matter of course (in the latter case, primarily if the Copt is married to an Alexandrian Greek) and I have seen reports of the monks of St. Catharine’s Monastery, the seat of the autonomous Eastern Orthodox Church of Sinai, under the omophorion (great stole, but basically, think of it as equivalent to an umbrella) of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, giving communion to Coptic pilgrims, which would be unthinkable in the mother church in Jerusalem due to the sectarian rivalries at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre between the Greeks, Catholics and Armenians (and by extension, the other Oriental Orthodox, who tend to worship in chapels subdivided from the Armenian precincts of the basillica).
There is no doubt however that Lutherans have always as Mark has said believed in the Real Presence and to quote Luther “celebrated the Mass with the greatest reverence.” Much of the work of Bach is liturgical music for the Lutheran mass, with his famous Mass in B Minor being an exquisite, if impractical, setting for the mass.
