Help me choose a lens for my new EPL-1

[mark_stephan2]

<p>Couldn't resist and ordered a black bodied body from Amazon and should have it next week. I plan to use it with my Panasonic 14-45 until I get a new lens, preferably a prime for under $200.00. I'm looking at a used Oly 17, Sigma 19 and 30 lenses. The Panny 20 is just to expensive although the reviews and pictures I've seen look outstanding it's still out of my price range. Given the budget which lens would you choose? I'm leaning towards the Sigma 19 which would give me a 35mm equivalent of 38 which is close to the 35mm lenses I used in my manual focus film days. Are there any other lenses in this price range I should consider? If I decide to get a zoom at a later date would you recommend the Oly 14-42 version I lens? It's pretty cheap but duplicates a lens I already have.</p>

[andreas_manessinger]

Get a used 17/2.8 from eBay. It's not the fastest lens, it's not the best lens, but you should be able to get

one for less than 150$, maybe substantially less, and they are available in black as well. If I were you, I'd

get a used Panasonic 14/2.5 next. They are cheap as well. It you need longer reach, I'd get the Olympus

40-150.

 

All three lenses are available in numbers for around 150$ each, sometimes cheaper, if you buy used. I got my 40-15 and the 14/2.5 that way and I don't regret it.

 

If you go that route, you'll acquire a very cheap but capable kit of three lenses that gives you a range from

28-300 mm eq. Weight is around 300 g for all three, size of the pancakes is negligible. Not bad if you ask

me :)

[eric friedemann]

<p>I've not used the Sigma or Panasonic lenses, but have owned and was impressed by the Olympus 17mm f/2.8. That the lens isn't particularly fast is compensated for somewhat by the Oly E/M43 cameras being very, very good in low light.</p>

<p>I would agree with DPReview that the 17mm has flaws that can be- and usually need to be-corrected with post-camera processing:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP1/22">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP1/22</a></p>

<p>I found the 17mm to have very, very good sharpness and contrast. I would allow though that I almost always shot the 17mm at f/5.6, as in this photo. While this photo was made from a JPEG, I would advise processing RAW files.</p>

<p>One other thing I find annoying about a number of manufacturers' M43 lenses, the Oly 17mm does not have an available lens hood. Given the relatively low price of the 17mm and its diminutive front element, I always shot the lens sans hood and filter.</p><div></div>

[eric friedemann]

<p>The photo I posted really looks like crap on this photo.net web page. It is sized and sharpened at 700 pixels wide, but views at larger than the original on this page. What's up with that?</p>

[ronhartman]

<p>It would be hard to beat, or even equal, the optical quality of the Panasonic 14-45 with any of the other lenses mentioned. Why not stay with that? I have the Pan 14mm on order. I bought it for the small size and faster aperture (and prices have dropped a lot) but will mostly continue to use the 14-45.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>My bad on the photo-viewing thing- I got a new computer and had the IE viewing setting somehow set to 125%. </p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>Besides a little bit of lens speed (aperture) and size, the 14mm and 17mm have nothing on your 14-45mm. Your lens is noticeably optically better in every way. I would not waste my money on a sub-$200 lens, as you aren't going to add much to your system. Micro 4/3 is different from most SLR systems in that respect, in that if you're going for image quality, zooms are a good idea. I guess you could go for the Sigma 19mm, but I don't think a gain from your current setup to an f/2.8 lens is worth $200. Wait until you have the money, and get a very high-end lens like the Panasonic 25mm, Panasonic 7-14mm, Olympus 45mm, etc. </p>

<p>About upgrading from your 14-45mm to the Olympus 14-42mm: again, I wouldn't do it. First off, jumping from kit lens to kit lens is a waste of money and effort. Second, the 14-45mm is actually the best midrange zoom made, again with respect to image quality, slightly beating out both the Panasonic and Olympus 14-42mm lenses. The 14-45mm was made without regard to economics. It has the added bonus of an IS switch on the lens, so you can toggle it on or off on Olympus cameras.</p>

[matthew_newton]

<p>I don't know about really really good in low light. The inbody image stabalization is nice, but I'd be reluctant to use anything over ISO800 from my wife's E-PL1 without some significant noise reduction or print sizes over about 5x7 for anything.<br>

As for a lens, what do you tend to shoot the most? If portraits or a bit more "normal" setting, then the sigma 30/2.8. I really, really like the one I have.<br>

The Olympus 17/2.8 isn't, generally, considered a very good performer. It isn't really sharper than the kit lens and it isn't all that much faster (basically a stop faster at the same focal length).<br>

Both sigma lenses are very sharp and focus extremely fast and quitely, even if they aren't small.</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>If it were me, I'd just wait and save my pennies until I could afford the Panasonic 20/1.7. The Sigma 19 and Olympus 17 don't impress me at all.</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>Allowing that I've sold my E-P1 and the 17mm in favor of a Fuji X100, which is sweeeet but much higher priced, if I were going to buy an E-PL1, I'd want to pair it with a pancake lens. By the time you put the kit zoom on an E-PL1, it weighs as much as a Nikon D3100 with a kit zoom, which has an optical viewfinder, a larger sensor and a sensor with greater native resolution.</p>

<p>Matthew, I'll disagree with you about the E-M43 12 MP sensor and higher ISOs. I had an 8x10 print of a test image shot in horrific light I used as a sample at my store. The image was shot at 1600 and was noiseless. I would again advise, though, that to get the most out of any M43-sensored camera you will want to metheodically process RAW files and not rely on JPEGs.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>This is typical of somebody buying an interchangeable lens camera, why bridge cameras appealed to me, they immediately think about what additional lens they can buy even if they do not really need it. I only bought my EPL1 becuase I had the kit lens from my G3 to use on it[ and some legacy lenses ]. The G3 now has the 014140 ... YES I succumbed to the virus :-) Though I had a reason ... used to the x12 of my bridge I was frustrated with just a 014042:-) Still am when I use the EPL1 rather than the G3, but that is me and my conditioning.<br>

SO ... why not use that 014045 in the time being to see how you go :-) <br>

Really I am going quite well with my oly/pan rig.</p>