Epm2 travel replacement with pen f advice

[Hcbruijn]

Pan14-140 or oly14-150 mark twos of course? I've ordered the 12-32.

 

[wimg]

Pan14-140 or oly14-150 mark twos of course? I've ordered the 12-32.

What about neither?

Considering the size, unless you really want an all-in-one lens next to the 12-32, I would go for something in the range of 40-175 or thereabouts - lighter and better IQ.

If you do want overlap, I'd still seriously suggest the 12-100 Pro. Yes, shorter long range, but it is so good, you wouldn't mind IMO. Yes, it is twice th eprice, but it is way better, and will really serve as a proper replacement for the 12-32 if you don;t want to travel extremely light.

Also, what a lot of people do not realize, going from 100 to 140 or 150 is only a factor of 1.4x or 1.5x from a zoom POV. You'll only just notice the difference. There is a reason that in the past when we didn't have zooms yet that most prime ranges jumped a factor 1.4 in FLs. That was a jump in FoV that humans can distinguish, but it is only a single of those jumps. The important part in the zoom range, wide to fairly long tele, is covered, and that is what it is about, IMO.

Kind regards, Wim

 

[DynaSport]

I've only used the P14-140. I've been very happy with it.

 

[BlueDevil]

I always use Centrepoint focus lock, hold button halfway down to lock. Is that an issue on pen f?

It can be. For some reason on the PEN F the focus point 'drifts' off to other places on the grid. I think what probably happens is that inadvertently your cheek, nose etc make contact with the screen and that moves the focus point to where ever you made contact with the screen. There is some way of fixing this that I came across a while ago but for some reason mine has started doing it again. I never have this problem with my EM1 or Em1 M2.

I find this really frustrating, especially for street photography when it is really important to be able to nail the focus very quickly. I'll probably trade it in for an EM5 M3 when it comes out.

 

[Hcbruijn]

What about neither?

Considering the size, unless you really want an all-in-one lens next to the 12-32, I would go for something in the range of 40-175 or thereabouts - lighter and better IQ.

If you do want overlap, I'd still seriously suggest the 12-100 Pro. Yes, shorter long range, but it is so good, you wouldn't mind IMO. Yes, it is twice th eprice, but it is way better, and will really serve as a proper replacement for the 12-32 if you don;t want to travel extremely light.

Also, what a lot of people do not realize, going from 100 to 140 or 150 is only a factor of 1.4x or 1.5x from a zoom POV. You'll only just notice the difference. There is a reason that in the past when we didn't have zooms yet that most prime ranges jumped a factor 1.4 in FLs. That was a jump in FoV that humans can distinguish, but it is only a single of those jumps. The important part in the zoom range, wide to fairly long tele, is covered, and that is what it is about, IMO.

Kind regards, Wim

I'm thinking now instead of 14-140 i could get a 35-100 2.8. the 12-100 isn't practical for traveling because of the weight and cost. Wouldn't want that stolen.

 

[wimg]

I'm thinking now instead of 14-140 i could get a 35-100 2.8. the 12-100 isn't practical for traveling because of the weight and cost. Wouldn't want that stolen.

That is a good option too, goes well with the 12-32 - however, it isn't all that cheap either .

Kind regards, Wim

 

[Holoholo55]

Do you or others think 40 is enough extra reach for travel shots?

When I have traveled, I found the 12-50 or 12-40 to be the most useful walk around lens. However, I also found that the 40 was a little short sometimes. The majority of shots were at the wider end of the range than the telephoto end. The 12-100 Pro is probably too big and heavy with the PEN-F unless you're using an accessory grip, which then makes the whole kit a little big and heavy. You said using the 40-150 R on your PEN-F made you self-conscious. The 12-100 Pro would be even more so. I think the Pana 12-60 f3.5-5.6 would be worth considering as it's relatively still compact. I dunno if I would be satisfied with a 14-150 or 14-140, but others seem to be very happy with it. I tend to value having the extra 2mm on wider end.

If size and weight were not deal breakers for you, I'd recommend a 12-100 Pro and an accessory grip for a PEN-F or EM5-II. I'd also take along a fast prime and/or your 9-18 if you need more.

 

[Hcbruijn]

For me it used to be until I purchased the Panasonic 14-140. The 12-40 pro is far better but I find myself using the 14-140 most of the time now. But when I go on holidays next if I do not get a faster lens for low light the 12-40 2.8 pro will be taken in preference to the 14-140 as it is no good in low light.

So you don't have a prime for indoors or night?

 

[drd1135]

The Panasonic 20 is an excellent lens to pair with the F. Sharp and small. A little slow to focus but ok. Btw, I have to comment on the idea of upgrading from an epm2 to the pen f. That's quite a jump. You may still miss your epm2 but if nothing else the image stabilization is light years ahead on the F.

 

[Hcbruijn]

The Panasonic 20 is an excellent lens to pair with the F. Sharp and small. A little slow to focus but ok. Btw, I have to comment on the idea of upgrading from an epm2 to the pen f. That's quite a jump. You may still miss your epm2 but if nothing else the image stabilization is light years ahead on the F.

I love the 20. You know I'm starting toove away from the idea of a zoom and stick with my roots. Pan 14 for a slight change.

 

[MarylandUSA]

I love the 20. You know I'm starting toove away from the idea of a zoom and stick with my roots. Pan 14 for a slight change.

Same here. For everyday, everywhere carry in my belt pouch, I go with an E-P5, a VF-4 viewfinder, and three primes: Panasonic 20, Panasonic 11 (14 + Lumix adapter), and Sigma 60. My 40-150 R zoom now lives in my car, attached to my older body. I don't lose sleep over the large gap between 20 and 60.