Lens suggestions?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by Grizzle, Jan 8, 2013.

  1. Grizzle

    Grizzle New to Mu-43

    Jan 8, 2013
    This is a very broad set of questions, but I don't exactly know how to narrow it down at this point.

    Background; I've been shooting most of my life, probably 19 years being really into it. I never nerded out much and got into specs/equipment, just shot with what I had. I was looking to upgrade my set up after graduating college, and my enthusiest uncle suggested the Olympus OM-D E-M5, which I purchased along with the Zuiko 12-50mm lens.

    My main questions:
    So I am going on a trip out of the country in March for about 3.5 months. I want to extend my lens choices for the trip, but not sure what I want, and not looking to break the bank. I have a few old lenses from my old Minolta which I think could be used with an adapter, but I don't know really anything about that. I have a Minolta MD W.ROKKOR-X 28mm, a Vivitar 75-205mm, and a Vivitar 135mm Auto Telephoto. I think the best options for those are the 75-205mm or the 28mm, but not sure what adapter would work and if it would be worth it since all settings become manual.

    Second option is to rent a lens, my uncle suggested the Panasonic 35-100mm G Vario, and to rent it from borrowlens.com. At 3.5 months, however, I'm looking at spending around $1000 anyways, so maybe I should just buy a lens?

    Please, any suggestions and ideas would be great! Thank you

  2. Jen726

    Jen726 Mu-43 Rookie

    Sep 18, 2012
    Greg- going to let the pro's take on the adapted lens question since I've never used adapted lenses.

    As for native lenses, if you're up for spending the money, I would say the 35-100mm is going to be amazing for the range/quality/size. I don't have one yet so I can't speak from personal experience, but it seems like a perfect lens. The cheaper option is the Olympus 14-150mm or the Panasonic 14-140mm which would get you more range, especially on the wider side and I think landscape would be important. I guess if I could take only one lens, I would take one of those... However, I think it's f/4-5.6 or something so definitely not versatile at night but for daytime shooting would be really good. And it's a pretty light lens. If you have the money and are willing to dish it out, I would say the 35-100 and a wider lens (like the 14mm or 12mm if you really have extra cash) would be the best duo... but this combo can get pricey.

    I'm looking to sell my 14-150mm if you're looking for one (PM me). Haven't listed it yet, but was planning on it. But in all honesty as an unbiased response, that was the reason I originally bought the 14-150mm but have since then decided to bite the bullet on the 35-100mm. I already have a wide angle to finish off the range. I feel like you'll eventually end up wanting the 35-100 for it's better low-light ability, but it takes awhile to convince yourself (or at least it did for me) to spend that kind of money on a single lens.
  3. Salc64

    Salc64 Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 24, 2012
    New York. USA
    I've said it before and ill say it again . If I only had 1 lense it would be the PL 25. It's fast, great all focal length if I can only have one. The o45 is also great but a bit long if your not outside or in a wide open area. I guess if you told us what you planned on shooting more people will chime in. Also if u plan on putting this camera in your pocket the P14 would be my pick, only because I still haven't had the pleasure of seeing or using the new oly 17mm
  4. dwig

    dwig Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 26, 2010
    Key West FL
    1. Forget the 28mm, at least for the trip. It offers nothing that isn't coverted by the 12-50 you have.

    2. The 135 and 75-205 are maybes, but are massive compared to something like the Pany 45-200 (a sub-$300 lens) and will be slow and cumbersome to use. If the 135 is an f/2.8 there is some advantage to its shallow DOF. Otherwise the 45-200 will do the job better.

    3. Compared to $1000 to rent for the period, purchasing a lens instead is a bit of a no-brainer.
  5. SkiHound

    SkiHound Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 28, 2012
    I always think it's tough to recommend lenses because so much depends on personal style, what you like to shoot and how you see. Personally, I wouldn't spend close to $1k renting a lens. I've rented lenses for a week or so to try them. But I think you could buy the lens, use it for the trip, and sell when you return for a lot less money. A couple of thoughts: The first lenses I'd think about adding are 1) a large aperture normalish focal length lens, and 2) a longer telephoto. I have the PL25 and it really opens a lot of low light opportunities. Lots of folks like the f1.7 20mm and it's smaller, lighter, and less expensive. And I think you could consider the new 17mm f1.8 in that category. I have the Oly 40-150 and think it's huge value lens. It's small, light, not built that well, relatively inexpensive, and, IMO, offers IQ way better than a lens this light, small, and inexpensive should. You can cover a lot of ground with a 12-50, 40-150, and fast normalish lens.
  6. Ropes4u

    Ropes4u Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 24, 2012
    Where are you going? Naples would require and wide angle for the narrow streets, where as Africa a long reach lens might be better.

    Given you can swing the fast glass, buy it.