Poll. Which lens setup would you pick?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by dino1891, Jan 8, 2013.

  1. dino1891

    dino1891 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 8, 2013
    1) Pansonic 14mm, Panasonic 25mm, Olympus 75mm
    2) Olympus 17mm , Olympus 45mm , Olympus 75mm
    3) Olympus 12-50mm, Panasonic 25mm, Olympus 75mm
  2. GRID

    GRID Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 22, 2011
    None of them, I have 7.5 12 20 45 75 and that´s the ones i like and give a good even range to pick from :)
  3. yekimrd

    yekimrd Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 14, 2012
    Cincinnati, OH
    Real Name:
    Hey, I think the options are too limiting. Most people have their own shooting style. I myself have a 12/2, 17/1.8 (gave up my 25/1.4), and 75/1.8 (plus 60/2.8)
  4. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I vote for none of those. I personally can't get by without some sort of tele and 75mm just isn't long enough for me. I also noticed you did not have the 20mm on the list. Any reason why?

    I will say that I love my 14mm. It focuses quickly and accurately. It renders colors very nicely and is quite sharp. It is small and light too. I just got my 45mm so I have not had a chance to fully play with it but so far I like it. It is very sharp and works well in low light situations. It is also very small and light for the focal length. Both of these are great lenses and fairly affordable ones. I would like to try out the 75mm but the price tag prevents me from doing so, at least for now.
  5. WasOM3user

    WasOM3user Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 20, 2012
    Lancashire, UK
    Real Name:
    Assuming the 3 options are limited by a specific budget (which is what I assume given the mix).

    For a similar budget I would go for
    Pana 14mm
    Pana 25mm
    Oly 45mm
    Oly 40-150mm

    And then save like mad for either (dependant on shooting style) the 12mm or 75mm to be added later.
  6. harry_s

    harry_s Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 19, 2011
    Wiltshire, UK
    I'm 2/3rds of the way there to option 1. 14mm 2.5, 25mm 1.4 and hopefully a soon to be purchased 75mm 1.8.

    That will be my travel kit complete, but to be honest it's hard not to add the 45mm 1.8 in as well considering the price/performance ratio.
  7. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror!

    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Real Name:
    Kit lens (or 14), 20, 45, 75...that's what I'm saving for...just missing the 14 and 75
  8. m43dex

    m43dex Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 5, 2011
    I don't have any of these sets/kit options... But I will play along. If I have to pick, I would prefer number 2. I really love the 45mm, I really like the 75mm shots that I have seen so far and I like the 17mm FOV.
  9. snkenai

    snkenai Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 5, 2010
    I voted on the choices, as if I HAD to chose only between those offered. But, if i could afford to make my own choice of 3, (assuming I had none to start with), would be the OLY 14-42 II, 25, 60 macro. None of which I currently have.
  10. Bravin Neff

    Bravin Neff Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 25, 2011
    Real Name:
    Bravin Neff
    In my opinion, 17mm takes the place of everything near it -- 14mm, 20mm, 25mm. This is why I love this (35mm equivalent) focal length.

    On the other hand, if you get rid of 17mm and replace it with something wider, I feel 28mm (equivalent) is frequently too long and would rather have a 12mm and a 25mm.

    Just my take.
  11. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    Wow, why is it so tough to play along with the question? It is a bit more thought provoking to consider it as proposed. It's easy to say what you would prefer -- force yourself to consider the compromises and what is most important to you.

    I chose #2 over #1, mostly because of the 45/1.8 providing best option for portraits.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Real Name:
    14, 45, 75 would be my pick, but I selected 17, 45, 75
    • Like Like x 1
  13. fin azvandi

    fin azvandi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 12, 2011
    South Bend, IN
    Limited to those sets of options, I went with #3. The camera is never pocketable, but by trading the 14 for the 12-50 you gain a wider wide, an option for macro, and decent zoom for when you're out and about with no time to swap lenses. The 25 and 75 have you covered for low light, portraits, and shallow DoF.
  14. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 2, 2012
    #3 w/ one caveat. 14-45 instead of 12-50. In fact, I now have the 14-45 and 25 as only natives. Some legacy's are on the horizon for playing.
  15. Geoff3DMN

    Geoff3DMN Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 29, 2012
    Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Real Name:
    I picked #1 rather than #2 because the 17mm isn't wide enough for me (although I love the 45mm in option #2 I don't use it as much as the 14mm).
  16. dino1891

    dino1891 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 8, 2013
    Thank you for voting. I know it was hard because all three systems have compromises. THe only way to not have compromises would be to own more than 3 lenses.

    I wanted an initial 3 lens kit that would allow me to get most of the shots. I know with the compromises, I'll miss a shot here and there. But even though I have more than 3 lenses, I think I would miss just as many shots during the time it takes me to decide on a lens to use then change it (Unless I were using a zoom that covers a wide focal range. However, I like to have depth of field control, and thus I favor primes over zooms).

    The reason I listed those particular sets is that they are all the same price. Option 1 is $100 cheaper than Options 2 and 3 (which are the same price). I do NOT intend to spend any more money into this camera system, until I will want to upgrade my OMD in two or three years. Maybe I'll pick up a newly released lens if it is affordable.

    I am leaning towards Option 1 because of the Panasonic 25mm. I like to have a normal lens which I could use to play around with the depth of field.

    I really like Option 2 because I get three top notch Olympus lenses for the same price as the other options---it makes more sense to get three top notch lenses vs two top notch plus an average lens. HOWEVER, it is a little less attractive to me because I think the 17mm does not allow much play with the Depth of field. While the 45mm would allow me a shallower depth of field, I would also have to step back three or four steps to get the same framing as the 25mm which could be a little awkward/annoying at times.

    Option 3 is least desirable to me, but it also makes just as much sense since it is versatile.

    So basically,
    Option 1= most suitable for my shooting style and need of depth of field control
    Option 2= more bang for the same amount of bucks. I like the 35mm equivalent just as much as the 50mm equivalent. The only problem is that I can't get narrow depth of field with the 17mm.
    Option 3= most versatile
  17. dino1891

    dino1891 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 8, 2013
    BTW, I like street photography. That is why the 35mm equivalent Olympus 17mm is also attractive. Only if it were able to produce sufficiently narrow depth of field...I would have picked Option 2 in a heartbeat.
  18. Vivalo

    Vivalo Olympus Loser

    Nov 16, 2010
    I voted for #1 because there's the 25 for speed, 14 for small size and 75 for tele and DOF control. Second option would be #3 BUT 25 changed to 20mm for the small size and the kit would then be at about the same price than #1 option.
  19. dino1891

    dino1891 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 8, 2013
    I would love to go panasonic 20mm. It actually fits better into my potential kit and I would then go 14mm, 20mm, 45mm, 75mm for the same price (with the rebates). Its just that I keep reading about this banding issue with the OMD.
  20. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    None of the above. Oly 12, Oly 17, and Oly 75. The whole area between 20-40 is just dead-space for me. I had a Panasonic 25 that I basically never used and now have a Fuji 35 that I almost never use. Both are simply amazing lenses but I just don't see well with them. So I'd have a real wide, a semi-wide, and a portrait length. I might have said the Oly 45 instead of 75 but having used both, it would be rare that the 75's reach would be too much but there are definite times when the 45 isn't enough. I'd usually either bring fewer than three lenses or more than three though - its either a "be ready for anything" shoot or a "walk around with one or two primes" shoot and rarely anything in between...