1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

For $200-$400 what would you buy if?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by davidzvi, May 10, 2015.

  1. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I'm looking for something to compliment my GM1/E-M10 & 12-32 kit lens. I also have the 45-175, Olympus 17mm f/1.8, Sigma 60mm, and 9mm BCL. OIS is not a requirement but would not be a bad thing given the GM1. I'm not looking for something longer than the 60mm and I'm not sure I need something wider though I have considered the 7.5 mm fish.

    I think I have narrowed it down to 5 though I'm not sure the last 2 should really be on my list.
    • Olympus 45 f/1.8 - first option probably the best given the price and what I already have.
    • Panasonic 42.4 f/1.7 - might be a better option given OIS is is that worth almost 2x the price?
    • Panasonic 35-100 f/3.5-5.6 - well it is the mate to the 12-32 and the other telephoto options aren't really that much smaller than my 45-175. Where as this is about the same size as the 25 or 4# options.
    • Panasonic 20mm - size benefit over my 17mm but might be just too close in mm.
    • Olympus 25mm - no size benefit over either my 17 or the 12-32. This is probably last on my list, might even be after the 7.5 other than I'm sure it's a wonderful lens, not sure.
    I can see either used on the E-M10 or GM1. But on the GM1 it will probably be more for reach in a small light package than anything.

    Am I missing anything?
     
  2. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I would think the 60mm you already have would already be ideal for what you are looking for.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2015
  3. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Already have the Sigma 60mm but it's bigger and heavier (almost 3x the weight) than I want. The reach beyond 32mm of the 12-32 is the main goal. But if there were something that I'm missing that would make sense I'd consider it.
     
  4. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    well 45mm just isn't really much longer than 32. It's not like you are going to have a long list of subjects where 32mm was too short and 45 is perfect.

    60mm is twice as long focal length as 12-32, so that's getting somewhere. It's 190g, which is only about 80g more than the 42.5/45mm primes, plus you own it.

    35-100 is lighter and with more reach, but 50g isn't going to make any difference and you said you didn't need the reach.

    You aren't going to find anything that is 1/3 the weight of the 190g sigma. That's near BCL spec.

    I'd just save the money and use the sigma.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  5. shermanshen

    shermanshen Mu-43 Regular

    109
    Jul 28, 2014
    Of the options you listed, I actually like the 25mm the best. I think there's enough difference between the 17 and the 25 in terms of what you can do creatively with it, and it's optically a very nice lens. I also just like the 50mm fov as an all purpose focal length. My Panny 25mm is my go to family portrait lens as it's wide enough to get a group in, while maintaining a comfy working distance.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  6. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    My mistake I was looking at the package weight, not the lens weight. Prime reach is more what I meant, not interested in the Oly 75 or Rokinon 85.
     
  7. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    842
    Feb 20, 2013
    I love questions like this because I find myself often in the same boat. There are so many choices that sometimes it's fun; sometimes it's a pain!

    I think you're on to something. Regardless of what lenses you have, I can still see a place for one of these two lenses in any small kit. The FL is right for you. Wide open they are both good and both have more background blur than your 60 at f2.8 (I'd keep the 60 too, however). As for which one, the new Panasonic has a very close focus and if you crop to 4mp it's more macro than I'd ever need. I've seen pics of critters taken with it! Stabilization is also a biggie. I'm going to pay $400 for the Panny instead of $200 for the Oly. If I had the Oly, however, I might just keep it.
    I think you're on to something again. Sell the 45-175 however, if you do this. And then you won't have a super long lens but you could always but a 135/2.8 lens for $50. That said, I use a slow telezoom so infrequently that I'm just sticking with my 40-150. It's good enough.
    This is tough because you have the 15, 17, 20, and 25s to choose from. You could get the 15 as well as a 25. Or, you could do like me and get the 20. You have the 17 so you could do with a 25 as well. For $150 you could buy a 50mm f1.8 and a focal reducer for it which would give you a 35mm f1.2. Pretty fun. Or you could probably get both the O25 and O45 twins for under $500. As far as the real fisheye, seeing you have the 9mm, I don't know how often you use it, but if I had the 9mm I probably wouldn't have gotten the 7.5. Want to trade? Kidding, of course! :p

    But, from what you said, I think the 42.5/1.7 would be the best bet for you.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Okay, well I could see the 35-100 making a lot of sense. Then you could head out with the 17/60 as a faster prime kit or the 12-32/35-100 as a tiny zoom kit.

    I have both the 45mm f1.8 and 60mm f2.8 Macro, and for non-macro usage, there's just not much between them in terms of the kind of shots I can get. So I can't see the 45mm f1.8 being a lot of use unless it is a swap for the 60mm. The 45mm is shorter, lighter and would probably be a nicer 2 lens kit when paired with the 17mm. So I could also see swapping the 60 + your $300 for a 45 and 35-100.

    http://camerasize.com/compact/#491.397,491.93,491.371,491.92,ha,t (they didn't have 35-100, but it is the exact size of the 14-42 R at 55x50mm so I used it as a stand in)
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  9. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    If it was me, I'd add the P42.5/1.7 and the O25/1.8 to round out your primes. Getting the 20/1.7 wouldn't make much sense IMO since you already own the 17/1.8.

    The addition of OIS on the P42.5/1.7, since you are using a Panny body, would be all the reason needed to spend the extra $50. Not sure where you got the idea that it costs 2x unless you're comparing a great used price vs new.

     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  10. budeny

    budeny Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 4, 2014
    Boulder, CO
    Dunno, from your criteria, I don't see any reason for you to add any lenses. 35-100 is smaller, but $400 is too much (imo) and it's quite shorter than 45-175.
    Save money for f1.0 primes or spend them on dedicated photo trip.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  11. PMCC

    PMCC Mu-43 Regular

    132
    Feb 18, 2013
    I just don't understand this kind of threads... The OP does not even state what capacity he thinks his system is missing.
     
  12. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Sorry I thought I did. I'm looking for something snake and lighter than my 60mm Sigma or Pan 45-175 to compliment my 12-32. Mainly this would be for my GM1 for a nice little 2 lens kit.

    I know there have been many threads like this where the OP goes missing, but this is not one of them.
     
  13. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Size of the 35-100 f/3.5-5.6 is the only reason I put it in the list. That and either everyone that buys it loves it or no one is buying it because used copies are few and far between. But $400 seems high to me as well.
     
  14. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Yes new vs used. Clean Oly 45s seem to be in the $200-250 range. No idea what sale might be on the Pan 42.5 once it's released.
     
  15. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    The 20 is down to $299. That's a bargain.
     
  16. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Not selling either the Sigma 60 or the Pan 45-175. The 60 is my poor man's 75 and while it's not really a 75 I don't use it enough to justify the 75 (had one, sold it). The 45-175 is for baseball and the like. I tried the longer options but I'm typically not at shutter speeds or have the support 600mm AOV really requires. And I got a good deal on it so...

    Right now the 42.5 might be leading the way, I forgot about the close focusing difference between it and the Oly 45.
     
  17. hazwing

    hazwing Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 25, 2012
    Australia
    Based on this, either to 42.5mm or 45mm makes the most sense. If you are not worried about costs, I'd get the 42.5 for the OS. However because the 42.5 is new it's gonna take a bigger drop in resale price, with time.

    Unless, you find you often shoot longer than 45. Then the slow 35-100 would be better
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Just checked Amazon, they do have them for $320. But I think that is still a bit on the high side.
     
  19. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I just can't see what role a 42.5/45mm would play in a 2 lens kit paired with the 12-32 unless a large portion of your shots are candid portraits. It's not long enough to be of any telephoto use vs the 12-32. And while it is fast aperture, it is too long for "general" photography, so you'd have a hard time making use of that benefit. The 17mm f1.8 would actually make more sense as it gives a fast option in a more universal range. I said it earlier, but a 17/42.5mm kit sounds pretty nice if you just forget about the 12-32.

    35-100 makes sense on paper, but it's still too expensive and new for me to actually buy one. Like the other slow medium telephoto zooms, I expect it to be under $200 before too long.
     
  20. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Or the 12-32 on the GM1 and 17 / 45 / 60 on the E-M10. But mainly I'm looking for 9mm BCL + 12-32 + ? in a small package.