Hi, Currently I own Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Sigma 60mm f2.8 DN Lens Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 75mm 1.8 Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 R But am thinking my next lenses will probably be: Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm f2.8 Pro Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 60mm f2.8 Macro (for macro :smile And maybe the Oly 40-150 2.8 but thats a hell off a lot of cash and a very big lens - if I'm going that big as may as well get a 70-200 2.8 for my Canon. I did have the Oly 75-300 before I got the grip and felt it was too front heavy. So what do you guys think - can the 12-40 2.8 effectively replace all the primes it covers in real world usage. Oh, I'd best define real world usage to me - thats my family growing up - a four and seven year old - all rushing around, low light parties, taking pics when out with them of birds, animals an so on - to complicate matters I like the shallow DoF pop from narrow primes but done have the time to swap lenses all the time or have the free hands (or the will to carry) for extra bodies. Also what flash would you guys suggest, I don't usually use flash (despite having a few for my Canon setup that I can use on the EM10 on manual but they seem so big). Another way to put it I guess is what would be your ideal line up without breaking the bank?
Rather than an advise, I'll share my thoughts on my lenses for the E-M10, and prospective gear. I consider myself an amateur photographer. I mainly shoot nature, street and portraits, but ocassionally I do video, mainly electronic devices teardowns. I don't look for excellent video quality, but appreciate good detail in close ups. This results in a very broad range of needs, as you may guess. Currently I own: Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Sigma 30mm f2.8 DN Lens Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 R I've found these lenses to be excellent low-budget options, very well suited for novices as they are lightweight, sharp and responsive. But, of course, they have their limitations. For example, would not recommend any of them for night or low light photography. You won't get that creamy bokeh of the faster, longer primes. You can get pretty decent macro shots with the 40-150mm and the 30mm, considering they are not macro lenses, but if you want real macro capabilities, they are not for you. These lenses are not designed for full-manual operation, specially in terms of MF. Based on my needs and the limitations of these lenses, I plan to purchase the following: Zhongyi Mitakon 42.5mm f1.2: This combination of focal length and aperture are great for narrow DoF and low light. I want to develop my full-manual skills, so this lens seems to be a good starting point. Some people simply don't want to mess up with manual, and that's ok, and depends only on personal preferences. Other excellent option, is the Oly 45mm, which is, in my opinion, the best AF lens for portrait, or the Nocticron 42.5mm, but that is totally out of my budget. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 60mm f2.8 Macro: MFT system is lacking native macro lenses, so this lens has little to no competition (I can only remember a japanese macro lens branded Yasuhara or something close to that). I would get this lens purely for technical photography of electronic devices. My final word is that everyone has an ideal lineup depending on personal preferences and needs.
Thats a nice write up - cheers I've had a crack at manual and even with focus peaking I found it a little beyond my skills and sadly with the one manual I have (a 50mm 1.4) theres no electronic link to automatically startup the magnification option on focus ring (very handy for what little close up stuff I've done with this kit). You're absolutely right about everyone having their own lineup and I'd love to hear as many as possible - there may be another "me" out there who's been with mirrorless and is a multi-millionaire and has tried everything ~That unlikely scenario aside it would be great to hear how others use their too - I often find ideas and inspiration pop up from the most abstract of sources and everyones take is more than welcome.
Anti-GAS advice: do not but anything unless you know that you need it (and why). Done. I think you already have the best lens for shallow DoF: no other prime is going to give you much more. The 45 could be a little more "usable" indoor but you already have two long lenses. Oly 25/1.8? If you are not into lens changing I would avoid more primes. The 12-40 can give you the 12mm and is also a "casual macro" lens and is one of the best lenses around. The weight is not that different from the 75-300 but it is shorter: it's going to be quite front heavy. Another option could be the smaller and lighter Pana 12-35/2.8 (and it's brother 35-100). http://camerasize.com/compact/#521.412,521.346,521.336,ha,t I think you wont see much difference from the zoom you have now unless you print big or pixel peep or have a good eye for barrelling, CA, corner softness, things hard to spot on a monitor. It's going to give you one or two extra stops for low light shots. For macro the 60 is another thing but I mean "real macro": tripod, lights, ultra shallow DoF, etc. I do not know if you are willing to do it (I'm not). My advice: if you are suffering, and I mean it, in low light go for the 12-40/12-35 otherwise wait for the next GAS attack. If you like to shoot with the 75 but you find it is too long consider a shorter prime, 45 or 25.
lol, GAS abound I hadn't considered the 12-35 - although as its more expensive I would have to look at it in great depth before changing my mind on that one. Macro wise I have the Canon MP-E 65mm (for sale at the mo) and have made some very nice images if I do say so myslef, so I'm pretty ofay with macro, although do still shoot handheld. For the indoor low light I may just have to look into how to use fill flash correctly, although as I move around a lot I'd probably have to be a little creative with on camera or off hand wireless flash.
The grip makes a huge difference. One of the best accessories I've ever bought for a camera. I use the 12-40 almost exclusively; it's bright, focusses quickly, focusses very close and is razor sharp. My next lens will probably be the 40-150 f2.8. It's a lot smaller than the Canon 70-200 and covers a narrower field of view (9.25 deg.) at the long end than the Canon (12.3 deg.). The Canon lens is almost exactly twice as heavy and I believe it's a lot more money.
I have to say despite my reservations about making the body bigger I'm quite the fan of the grip too and certainly it helps with the 75mm. Regarding the 40-150 \ 70-200, its not that much more - a couple of hundred (but much cheaper second hand) and thats for the mark II, if you look for the mark 1 or Simga or equally good Tamron offerings they're much cheaper. I think the 12-40 should be a great lens, a real step up from the 14-42 (although thats the best kit lens I've owned)
I have 6 lenses (plus 3 adapted manual focus) and the 12-40 is the one I use most, followed by the 40-150. The 75 is the only one I'd consider to buy right now but I'm quite sure I won't use it enough. For manual focus you can configure the Fn buttons or the rec buttons to activate the magnify or peaking. The magnify is also available in the "multi option" function. And if you are into camera configuration you can save this config to a specific MySet to use for manual focus. The 40-150 is as new as it gets: the price is going to drop.
Having owned a number of primes and zooms (still have 7 native zooms/primes and about 10 adapted primes), I can say that for me the 12-40 f2.8 is by far the most versatile and most used lens. It is awesome for sharpness, rendition, low light, and is weather sealed and focuses almost like a macro lens.... I recommend the 12-40 f2.8 without reservations. (and yes, I had the 12-35 f2.8 as well)
Thanks guys looks like the 12-40 seem to be the right choice for my next lens, that should abate the GAS for all of... oh, I don;t know... a week :tongue:
