Thinking of trading my Oly 12mm f2 for a 12-40mm f2.8...

Discussion in 'This or That?' started by Johnny The Greek, Feb 27, 2016.

  1. Johnny The Greek

    Johnny The Greek Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 19, 2015
    As much as I love my primes, and will keep most of them anyway, I'm thinking of offsetting the cost of buying the latter with the funds I get selling the former. Sometime in the coming year I will either bite the bullet and buy the new E-M1 or else settle on the original model, and wanted a weather sealed lens to go along with it (the 12-50 is fine but clearly has inferior optics)

    I'm just wondering if anybody was or is in the same boat, and what you ended up doing.
  2. svenkarma

    svenkarma Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 5, 2013
    Real Name:
    mark evans
    Been there, done that, worked out fine for me!
  3. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Whatever you decide, consider that if you're getting it new, getting the 12-40 as a kit along with the body is significantly cheaper than standalone.
    You might want to hold off for a bit as the new weather sealed Panasonic 12-60, though still a bit slow, looks to be a good quality lens.
  4. khollister

    khollister Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 16, 2010
    Orlando, FL
    Real Name:
    I had the 12/2, now use the 12-40/2.8 - the zoom is far flexible and I think the IQ @ 12mm is actually a bit better than the 12 I had (primarily edge/corner sharpness). The prime makes a better astro lens but that's about it other than size.
  5. jcm5

    jcm5 Mu-43 Veteran

    May 12, 2014
    Also owned both, gave up the prime bc I needed the funds; the 12-40 is obviously much bigger/heavier, but it was a tradeoff I was willing to make for versatility in FL (+ weather-sealing). I suppose if money didn't matter, I would keep both...
  6. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    I kept the 12 after getting the 12-40 and still use it on occasion. There are times when I don't want the size and weight of the 12-40 but I do want the focal length. A 1 stop gain in speed is rarely a factor for me.

    I will say that I think there's something about the way that the 12-40 renders things that I prefer to the 12. It's something to do with colour or contrast but I seem to have a slight preference for the 12-40 over the 12, 17 and 25 primes but I have kept all of my primes in that range.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. JBoot

    JBoot Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 4, 2012
    Scotch Plains, NJ
    Real Name:
    I agree with David A on the 12 and 12-40. Kept them both, use the 12-40 more, but find that at times I still need the smaller prime.
  8. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    Keep them both and wait a year. If after a year you find you haven't picked up the 12/2 prime more than once or twice, then go ahead and sell it.
  9. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    There are a few lenses that IMO are not really worth getting due to alternatives. When I first saw the 12/2 I really, really wanted it. But, after thinking about it, isn't the 12-32 just fine for my purposes? The answer has been, yes. As far as the 12-40/2.8, I never really liked that lens either. I would prefer to have a couple small primes or, 12-32 + 20/1.7 or 25/1.8 + 45. That's just me though. If you're looking for a one-lens setup obviously the 12-40 is the go-to.
  10. cptobvious

    cptobvious Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 8, 2013
    I went both ways, 12/2 to 12-35 and back to 12/2. The 12-35 has better cross-frame sharpness than the 12/2 due to the 12/2's field curvature (the 12-40 is even better at 12). However, I felt like 2.8 was marginal in a lot of situations for MFT, both in terms of limited ISO performance and DOF, and the size/weight of the lens almost demands an external grip, which puts the body/lens package out of small camera territory. If I'm not carrying a small camera, my thought is I might as well go back to full-frame for the better IQ. So I stick with a trio of primes on MFT (12, 17, 45).
  11. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Real Name:
    Embarrassingly I will take you one step farther 12 - > 12-35 - > 12 - > 12-35. Basically I really like and seem to have more fun at times with the 12mm (and other small primes) but find with multiple young kids I always go back to zooms. Young kids don't stay still and I end up getting frustrated at not having the right focal length to get the shot I want, or missing it while changing lenses. This combined with being too cheap to keep both for just a hobby means I'm back to the 12-35....for now:rolleyes-38:
  12. laser8

    laser8 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 29, 2013
    Mare nostrum, Istria
    It depends on your style of shooting I guess. I have the 25pl and the 45pl that cover most of what I do, I bought the 12-35 to cover the wide angles which I like to shoot, since the 12 is almost as expensive. I found myself missing wider angles, and using the other FLs at 25 and tele end, so went for a 7-14.
    Try and see what is best for you, today is really easy to swap lenses without much loss.

    I also suggest you check the most used FLs (there's a nice little program for that) , it may make life easier for you.
    • Funny Funny x 1