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

Recommend me a lens #3244353

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Daveaka, Jun 17, 2015.

  1. Daveaka

    Daveaka New to Mu-43

    2
    Jun 17, 2015
    I bought my first "proper" camera a couple of months ago, a Panasonic G6, coming from point and clicks there's a bit of a learning curve, but I'm enjoying the process.

    I'm using the supplied Kit lens,14-42mm f3.5-5.6 OIS, and while it's a massive step up for me I'd like to get something a bit faster, I'm mainly using the camera to take photos of the family, my son is 14 months old and he's on the move from morning till night, i live "up north" in the UK so something that performs well with a gray, overcast sky would be a bonus. I also use the camera when out on walks around the dales, woods etc so wildlife pictures and landscapes would be nice

    I'm in two minds whether I'd be better suited to either a smaller lens like the 12-32 f3.5-5.6 or a 20mm f1.7 and then add a telephoto in the future OR buy a smaller prime lens like the Sigma 19mm/30mm & also a telephoto.

    Currys currently have the GM1 with 12-32mm lens for £319, seems quite a good price for the body and lens? the lens usually retails for £250-300.

    I'm fine with buying second hand, but I'm out of my comfort zone with Cameras/lenses, I assume I just look for a deal on ebay?

    Cheers..
     
  2. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Hi Dave - Unless you're looking for something similar in range and speed but smaller, I can't see how the 12-32 would help you. I have a copy and it's a great pancake zoom, but it sounds like what you really need is something faster (wider aperture). Unless you want to spend a lot of money and are happy with a much bigger lens, the primes route is the way to go.

    For indoor shots of family etc, then a 25mm lens is probably the best option. You can pick up the Oly 25/1.8 for around the £200 mark used, or a little more new. It's a great lens - very fast focusing, small and extremely sharp, even wide open. If you prefer something wider, the 17/1.8 or Panasonic 15/1.7 are both very good. The Panasonic is probably the better, but more expensive.

    The Panasonic 20/1.7 is a nice lens too - smaller and just as sharp, but slower in focusing.

    I don't have personal experience of the Sigma lenses, but the 19 and 30 lenses both get good reviews; they're only f2.8 of course.

    Finally, the GM1 is a nice camera, but it's very small and lacks an EVF - quite a different experience to your G6. Personally, I don't like cameras without an EVF and wouldn't go down that route. Also, the 12-32 can be had for around £140 used (what I paid for mine), so whilst the £320 deal at Curry's sounds good, it's still a lot if you're happy with the G6.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. greenlight

    greenlight Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Nov 16, 2012
    UK
    Colin B
    I'd echo the advice Paul has given - one of the fast 25's (Olympus 25mm f1.8 or Panasonic 25mm f1.4) or the Olympus 17mm f1.8 would suit you well I think. I have a 9 month old and a 2 1/2 year old and the 25mm and 17mm lenses are my most used.

    To choose between them it might be worth looking at what focal length you tend to use the most with your zoom.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Daveaka

    Daveaka New to Mu-43

    2
    Jun 17, 2015
    Thanks, great advice and some food for thought..
     
  5. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 6, 2013
    Philly
    Steve
    Or the 45 F1.8. Cheap, amazingly good lens, small, and good for portrait and tighter landscapes. Or one of the 25s/30 as suggested. Kinda feel the 45 is a must have lens for M43.
     
  6. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I like the 45mm, but it is VERY tight indoors for kid pics. It's a good lens for posed waist up and headshot portraits, and outddor shots, but I'd recommend it more as a second prime lens.

    I think 25mm (or Sigma 30mm) is the most versatile because it can be used for general shots and it's long enough that you don't get too much distortion in closer portraits.

    15/17/19/20 are better if you want loosely framed environmental pictures indoors, but don't want close portraits. You'll get perspective distortion if you frame closely with lenses this wide.

    Sorry to the OP, there are so many good options in this category that you can't get a clear absolute recommendation. But the good news is that all of these lenses are great, so you win no matter what you pick.
     
  7. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    +1 on all the comments posted above.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. EdH

    EdH Mu-43 Top Veteran

    629
    Jul 14, 2014
    Devon, UK
    Ed
    I'd go for the Oly 25mm f1.8 (or PL25 but this is a bulkier option and more expensive) as a first prime. It's sharper than the 17mm, offers more subject separation, and the 50mm field of view it gives is more flexible. The 45mm is a must-have lens but is too long as a first prime. The Sigma 30mm is good (and very cheap) but f2.8 isn't really fast enough.
     
  9. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    I want to know why this thread title ends in a load of numbers ...
     
  10. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Because 3244352 other people have asked the question before.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 6, 2013
    Philly
    Steve
    While I agree with most of what you said, the reason I suggested the 45 is that the OP has the wide range covered with a zoom already and generally speaking tighter portraits are better than full body shots. As the pros always say. GET CLOSER!;) And with a child you can still go head to toes indoors, unless you live in a really tiny place. I use the 75mm indoors (for waist up or pets) and our house is not that big. A matter of taste I guess, but the 45 & 25 were my first primes (bought the pair used from same person), I found I use the 45 more often all around. I also feel the 45 is a lens that can take your photos to another level, from a kit zoom. A 25 is faster and sharper absolutely w/better bokeh than a kit zoom, but will give a pretty similar look most of the time.

    There is no wrong answer though. All the lenses are good. And with used prices maybe he'll end up with both! :laugh1:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    The Panny 20,1.7 may be too slow focusing for chasing a child around. You'll miss a few shots.

    The Oly 17,1.8; 25,1.7; Panny 25,1.4; 15,1.7 would be good choices. All are excellent. All are sharp and fast focusing. The o25 would likely be the best buy, the p25, the fastest.

    You'll find plenty of all at good pre-owned prices here and on eBay.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    Can't go wrong with a 25mm, and the Olympus version which I have can be gotten for around $280 these days.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    My vote goes to the 45 too: more isolation, tighter FoV, something different. I used the 60 in my house and I did not found it to be too long, for portraits at least. The 45 could be a perfect focal length also considering that a child is small, you have to get closer than usual and perspective distortions are bigger.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    In the house my 45mm gets little use unless I'm after just a face.
    The Sigma 30mmF2.8 focuses really well in low-light and has a useful focal length.
    The Lumix 20mmF1.7 is good but as folk keep saying : not ideal for moving targets.
    I never had the Sigma 19mm or the 25mm choices.
     
  16. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    The P/L 15mm f1.7 is super sharp and it's AF is lightning fast. I don't have any youngsters around so I can't say for certain it would be the one to go with but I would guess that following a fast child would be difficult to do and maybe a semi-wide angle would allow you to capture more in focus images without too much distortion (keeping at a reasonable distance from the child's face) which might allow you to crop a bit of the busy background (unless you want the background). I was pleasantly surprised when I got this lens that wide open you get a very nice bokeh (out of focus background)!
    I would look at the photos you have made with the kit zoom and determine which focal length you prefer.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2015
  17. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    My 2 cents (maybe not worth 2 cents so you can have it for free).

    For a starter kit, I would get the 20/1.7 and the Oly 40-150mm.

    The 20mm is a great sharp lens and the f1.7 will get you the low light you need. IMO, the 20mm field of view is just right and the 25mm can be a little tight, especially indoors in normal sized homes.

    The 40-150mm can be sharp (apparently some copies can be a little soft) and it will give you something that will give you some reach and take portraits even in the 40-60mm range. It is light and cheap two which are bonuses.

    These two lenses won't set you back much ($$) and will fill in some important gaps (more light and more reach) of the kit lens.
     
  18. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I agree the 20mm is nice, but AFC is not available with that lens, so it is a bit more difficult to shoot active children with it. If you had older children or adults as your primary subjects, its great.

    I ended up resorting to manually focusing most of the time with my 1 year old, which I why it didn't last very long in my bag.
     
  19. svenkarma

    svenkarma Mu-43 Top Veteran

    566
    Feb 5, 2013
    mark evans
    I actually think that at that price the Currys GM1/12-32 option makes good sense.

    The sensor will be better than that of the G6. I have the GX7, and even at 6400 iso the noise is liveable with.

    For landscapes, there's a meaningful difference between 12 and 14.

    And for going about with a sprog you're getting a very portable size factor.

    Then get the Sigma 60 :2thumbs: