1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Help... Lens switch????

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by BillyChocobo, Jun 20, 2011.

  1. BillyChocobo

    BillyChocobo New to Mu-43

    May 12, 2011
    Dallas, TX
    Right now i have the OLY 17mm. IS it worth it to go to the 14mm or the 20 mm Pany? I haven't used either other one... I'm super happy with my 17mm... Just thought "Hmm... is it worth to even buy them" considering that i bought this EPL-2 for the reason for my fun camera that i was planning on using like an old school disposable camera. But yeah....worth it?


    P.S. I am having WWAAAYYYY fun with my EPL-2...
  2. phigmov

    phigmov Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 4, 2010
    If you want to shoot low-light without a flash (parties and pubs) the 20mm is a must have. Its sharp and has plenty of other great characteristics but for me its my 'social' lens.

    It might pay to wait a few weeks and/or save your money - the Pana-Leica f1.4 and the rumoured Oly f2 and (maybe) f1.8 may be just as good.
  3. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    What is it that you think you're missing?

  4. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    From your post, I would say not--you are happy and having fun. The reason for the other lenses would primarily be a different angle of view.
  5. Luke

    Luke Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 30, 2010
    Milwaukee, WI
    The 17mm is a great lens. The 20mm is slightly better in measurable ways. Whether you will actually SEE a difference in most shots is debatable. And from the sound of it, it's not that important a difference to you.
  6. Hyubie

    Hyubie Unique like everyone else

    Oct 15, 2010
    I loved my 17mm. I replaced it with the 20mm only because I am indoors more often than not, so I needed that extra speed for indoors/low light. Had there been more difference in focal length, I would keep the 17mm in a heart beat.

    Had I known there would be a fast 25mm at its current price, I would have kept the 17mm and saved for the Leica 25mm. Now, that gives me an idea.... :wink:
  7. peaceridge

    peaceridge Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 2, 2011
    NEVER MIND: I just was notified that Adorama has shipped my 20! I ordered it just in case and they actually got some in!!!

    When you say the 20mm is slightly better in measurable ways to the 17, what measurable ways?

    New Pl2 person here (or will be as soon as UPS delivers it today). My main lens is going to be the Oly 14-150 - someday I'll add the Panny 100-300.

    In addition, I need one just for people, museums, grandkids. I'm attempting to decide among the 14, 17, 20, and new 25. I would get the 20, but they aren't available right now. Same with the 25. Should I wait, or just go with thte 14 or 17?
  8. Hyubie

    Hyubie Unique like everyone else

    Oct 15, 2010
    Just my 2 cents': I would say get the fast lens (20 or 25). They are great for people shots (the 20 based on experience, the 25 based on the few sample shots available), but more importantly, you'll need the extra stops for indoor shots w/o flash.
  9. BillyChocobo

    BillyChocobo New to Mu-43

    May 12, 2011
    Dallas, TX
    Well... Here after reading...I think i'll keep it... But should i end up getting the 25 then?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.