The dreaded "what lens would YOU buy" thing.

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I am divesting myself of all my Nikon stuff... it's slowly but surely being sold, and I'm using some (all?) of that money to bolster my new little µ43 rig.</p>

<p>I'm not a pro, never will be. but I've been a serious amateur for a long time. I shoot a lot of people (family, kids, church) photos, and when I can, I love nature, landscape, stuff like that. Love macro, but am keeping the Nikkor 55mm f3.5 I've had for years and love (planning to get a simple adaptor for it).</p>

<p>Right now, I have an EM-5, a backup body (E-PM1), 14-42 Olympus zoom, 40-150 Olympus zoom. I'm happy with those, but I'm thinking a couple little primes will really round it out and be fun. I crop in pretty often and resize, don't print very large very often (but want to!) and... size is of the essence. The reason I chose the 40-150 was because it was so darn small and light.</p>

<p>So... I'm thinking... first... of getting the Panasonic 20mm f1.7, then the second lens would be the Olympus 45mm f1.8. And eventually probably get an Olympus flash (the little flashes that come with these won't bounce).</p>

<p>What would YOU do? Just wanted to start some discussion, have a little fun with it.</p>

<p>Price is ALWAYS an issue with me, and I'll be buying these used most likely.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>I would consider manual focus - Voigtlander 17.5/0.95 and 42.5/0.95.<br>

Or I would consider the Olympus 12/2 and 17/1.8, Leica 42.5/1.2, and Olympus 75/1.8.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>too much money for a decided amateur like myself, though for some of those... Thanks, though!</p>

[Mike Howard]

<p>The Oly 45/1.8 is more or less a must have lens, as far as I'm concerned. I also REALLY like the Sigma 19/2.8. It is a fantastic lens, for very little money. I have it and the 30/2.8, and one of them is on my camera most of the time. I also have the Olympus FL-300R flash. It is tiny and works a charm. Oh, and for wider angle, consider the Oly 9-18, more range and a fine lens.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>OK, cheaper then: 14/2.5 and 45/1.8</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Do those weird looking Sigma lenses have manual focusing available? I don't see any "grip" for it. The 19 f2.8 looks intriguing.<br /><br />The Oly 45/1.8 might be my first next acquisition actually. But I feel like I"d use something at the 12 - 15mm range more.</p>

 

[elliot1]

<p>Yet to find a bad m43 lens.</p>

<p>A couple of other lenses you might enjoy in addition to the two you are already considering, the 14mm Lumix (excellent for low light & wide angle) and 75mm Olympus (excellent for sports). </p>

[anthea50]

<p>I recently bought the 25/1.8 and it is a brilliant, sharp lens. With its 25cm focusing distance it can also work as a decent close up lens in a pinch.</p>

[Greg M]

<p>The 20mm f1.7 can retain good sales value second-hand as it is a popular lens and may not be as inexpensive used as you think. The 25mm f1.8 M. Zuiko is probably still too new to be finding any used units or good deals and it's $400 new, which sounds expensive based on your comments.</p>

<p>KEH, one of the better used equipment dealers, has a second-hand 45mm f1.8 in what they call Excellent condition, for $286. In my experience buying from KEH, that would be a very clean piece, and it comes with a warranty. Probably about as good as it gets, second-hand. They also have a used 14mm f2.5 Panasonic for $192 and that's one of the smallest lenses I have ever owned. Sharp too, It can exhibit some hefty purple fringing in the highlights on Olympus bodies, but is relatively easy to remove.</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

At the moment I have an E-PM1 with the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 DG-Summicron and Olympus 45mm f/1.8

M.Zuiko, and they are both superb lenses. I'm considering either the 12mm f/2 or 14mm f/2.5, and that

would be my needs pretty much covered.

 

The Panaleica isn't cheap, even used, but it's a lens that'll put a smile on your face every time you take it

out.

[Greg M]

<p>Couple of years ago I carried my E-P3 to Paris with those three primes, the 12mm f2, 25mm f1.4 and 45mm f1.8. Worked great. I would not have wanted to have less coverage than 12mm.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Greg,</p>

<p>Any idea what the percentage use of those lenses was?</p>

[Ken Katz]

While I have 6 Oly M43 lenses, if forced to use just primes, I could live with just the 12mm f2 and 45mm f1.8. I recently added the Oly 12-40 F2.8, which is excellent both optically and mechanically, and probably sharper than every thing else I currently own except for the 45mm. While it is large, heavy (for m43) and not cheap it has become my go to lens except when I need an extra 1+ F stop of the primes. Also find that I crop less with the zoom due to the ability to frame more precisely. Note that except for a few Oly and Pany primes (and all the Sigma primes), many of the lenses discussed above are not bargain priced.

[Greg M]

<p>This evening I will open up the processed images folder in Photoshop and tell you exactly how many of each lens I used in the final images I loaded to this page...</p>

<p>http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Travel/Paris-2012/</p>

<p>I'm venturing a guess the 12mm f2 probably was the most used, with the 25/1.4 second.</p>

<p>Today I fall in the same boat with Kenneth. I've moved on to the E-M1 and while I still own all the primes, more times than not I'm now using the 12-40mm f2.8.</p>

[johnfarrar]

<p>Whatever you get, I'd advise testing it quickly and carefully - three of the M43 lenses I've bought have had to go back for replacement. An Olympus 12/2 was soft; and the 12-50 and 40-150 were decentered.<br>

For a small prime kit I've been very happy with the 12/2 and 45/1.8 (Olympus) and 20/1.7 but starting again I'd explore the other lenses in the 17-25mm range, and indeed the 12-40 as suggested above. The 45/1.8 really is very good and very well priced. </p>

[GerrySiegel]

From the first year I owned the Panasonic GH2 I got by pretty well with the 20mm 1.7. A year later I gave up Starbucks ate rahmen noodles....and bought a Lumix 12-35mm F 2.8. It does just about everything right. But getting the 20mm 1.7 has not been a regret. With the 12-35 I don't even feel the need for a macro with its close focusing.

[john_narsuitus]

<blockquote>

<p>"I am divesting myself of all my Nikon stuff... it's slowly but surely being sold, and I'm using some (all?) of that money to bolster my new little µ43 rig."<br>

<br />"What would YOU do?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I already did it!<br>

<br />For my micro 4/3 system, I have the following zoom lenses:<br />Olympus 14-43mm f/3.5 to f/5.6 (came with a body)<br />Panasonic 45-200mm f/4 to f/5.6<br>

<br />...and the following prime lenses:<br />Panasonic 20mm f/1.7<br />Panasonic 14mm f/2.5<br />Olympus 17mm f/2.8 (came with a body)<br />Olympus 45mm f/1.8<br>

<br />... and two bodies:<br />Olympus E-p1<br />Olympus E-p3<br>

<br />However, I am keeping my Nikon system.</p>

<p> </div>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>John writes:<br /><br /></p>

<blockquote>

<p>...and the following prime lenses:<br />Panasonic 20mm f/1.7<br />Panasonic 14mm f/2.5<br />Olympus 17mm f/2.8 (came with a body)<br />Olympus 45mm f/1.8</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />Which of those do you use the most? the least? Which do you like the most? the least? I'm thinking a 14mm prime (which would make sense sorta) would be superfluous, as my 14-42 is just fine at 14 and only a little smaller in aperture.</p>

[john_narsuitus]

<p>Listed in descending order:</p>

<p>Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 -- this is my favorite of the four listed lenses and is the one I use the most; love its image quality</p>

<p>Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 -- second favorite; use it when 20mm is not wide enough; would have bought the 12mm f/2 if it had been available when I bought this lens</p>

<p>Olympus 45mm f/1.8 -- like the focal length for portraits but rarely use it because I prefer to use my SLR for portraits</p>

<p>Olympus 17mm f/2.8 -- love this focal length but compared to the 20mm f/1.7 this lens is too slow for me; I keep it as a backup lens</p>

<p> </div>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>THANKS. That REALLY helps.</p>

<p>REALLY thinking of getting the 12/2 as my only prime for now and add the 45 later maybe. I'm really okay with using the 14-42 as my main walk-around lens, so I'm thinking any pancake prime in that range wouldn't really benefit me much anyway.</p>

<p>More important for me will probably be a nice flash, since I will probably mostly just use the zooms a lot, and the 12/2 when I want to have some real fun.</p>

<p>I also ordered an adaptor to use my 35 year old 55mm f3.5 Nikkor as my macro lens.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i personally got a fuji system with 14/2.8, 27/2.8, 35/1.4, and 60/2.4 primes. but if i was getting into m4/3, i'd want something wide(ish), something smallish, and something longish. so 12/2, 17/1.8, and 45/1.8 would probably cover it. if i could only afford one, i'd probably lust for the 12/2 but could learn to live with the 17/1.8.</p>

<p>on the fuji, i use the 14mm prime a lot, but 24mm equivalent focal length is probably easier than 21mm. IMO it makes sense to have a prime that's wider than your zoom, if you use zooms often. my second-most used focal length is probably the 60, which is a tweener as it does 1:2 macro and also portrait duty. the 35 is mainly used for low-light, but 50mm EFL also works as a one-lens compromise. i wish i used the 27 more, but i also have an x100 which hogs a lot of my candid/street shots. the 27 is super-sharp though.</p>

[unclebuddha]

Instead of starting a new thread I thought I'd just piggyback on here. I have the 14-42 kit lens but don't use it much. I got

the Panny 14/2.5 and 20/1.7 and use them exclusively. Especially the 14, it is so tiny it makes the camera a joy to travel

with and takes great pictures.

A question: Oly sells two 40-150 4-5.6 lenses, on is marked "Zuiko" one is "M Zuiko". Can someone tell me the

difference? The M Zuiko is $120 refurbished, the Zuiko is $280 so there must be a difference!

Thanks!

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Mark,</p>

<p>Did you get the Olympus email today with the AMAZING refurb deals? (most of which are gone now, alas, I just can't afford them this month).</p>

<p>The more expensive 40-150 is, I think a 43, not a µ43 lens, if I recall correctly.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>If anyone cares, I went with the Panny 20/1.7. <br>

Small size, excellent quality... pancakes are the thing for me right now.</p>

<p>SHould make my EPM-1 OR my EM-5 pocketable. I can't wait to mess with it later this week.</p>

[harold_gough]

I use almost entirely legacy manual focus lenses, my main lens being a Vivitar Series 1 (Kiron) 105mm macro. Other Kiron lenses have excellent performance, as do their TCs, and are available cheaply. I use OM and FD mounts.