1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Too many overlapping focal length

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by sin77, Dec 5, 2014.

  1. sin77

    sin77 Mu-43 Veteran

    243
    Dec 9, 2011
    Singapore
    I have Oly 14-42 EZ, Oly 45 f1.8, PL45 f2.8 macro and 35-100 f2.8.

    As you can see there are too many overlapping around 42 and 45 mm.

    Which should I be selling?

    Factors to consider:

    1. I like EZ because of video, but I seldom shoot video. I hate the f5.6 at the longest end and neither is it impressive at f3.5 widest.

    2. I am thinking whether to exchange EZ lens with Panasonic 14 f2.5. I used to own the 14 f2.5 with E-PM2, but sold away because of the unbearable CA and flare. I heard E-M10 might be able to correct CA.

    3. Oly 45, PL45 and 35-100 makes a lot of redundancy. 35-100 will still be the main lens to use because it is a versatile zoom. PL can get real close though I don't shoot macro that shows eyes of housefly type. Oly is a gem for low-light, lightweight, smallish and bokeh, but cannot get close to subject.

    4. I ever thought of selling EZ, Oly 45 and PL45 so that I could buy either Oly 12-40 f2.8 or P 12-35 f2.8. But selling PL at half the price when I bought it new is really painful to the heart and if I really want to enjoy macro, I may regret. I like 12-35 for the weight and OIS (in case I use back Panasonic body), but I like Oly 12-40 for the close magnification.
     
  2. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    Do you find yourself needing the extra stop of light that the 42/45 give you over the 35-100mm?

    Do you prefer zooms over primes?

    If it were me, I would sell the 14-42 and get something wider in a prime like the 14/2.5 or 17/1.8, sell one of the 40 primes.

    If you like zooms better, you can always sell both the 40 primes, the 14-42 and get a 12-40/2.8 or the 12-35/2.8 and keep the 35-100/2.8
     
  3. spdavies

    spdavies Mu-43 Top Veteran

    963
    Apr 9, 2013
    Hawaii
    Stephen
    I obsessed over this same issue for a while.
    Especially the Oly vs the Panasonic short fast zooms.
    The way Oly and Panasonic split the features on their lenses is probably good marketing for them but maddening for the consumer.
    I too wanted to keep my options open to use Panny bodies and therefore felt I needed the OIS in lenses.
    They make such a big deal about all the lenses fit all the manufacturer's bodies -
    it's true but with a big asterisk - not with all the features.

    I finally decided I had to make a commitment -
    I came down to staying with Oly bodies because of the incredible IBIS and how it works with legacy glass.
    My Panny bodies are going up for sale.
    This made it possible to decide on the Oly 12-40 2.8 -
    I don't regret it - beautiful lens, near macro, convenient manual focus ring, extra function button, sharp.

    I want to keep a couple of small lenses for a compact kit with my E-M10 -
    I have the Oly 14-42, the P14-42EZ and P14-45 and the P20 1.7.
    The P14-45 is going to go, even though I have a strong sentimental attachment (my "first")
    and even though it's the sharpest short kit zoom - it's too large.

    I need to decide between the O14-42 and the P14-42.
    The Panny is smaller, which is its main attraction - don't care for the power zoom much.
    The Oly is larger, but nicer controls and I have the macro and WA attachments for it.

    Do any of you lens gurus out there know if there is a significant IQ difference between the Oly14-42 and the P14-42?
    Or alternatively, if there is another compact kit short zoom lens with better IQ than either of these?

    And finally, the P20 1.7 -
    very small, good IQ, also sentimental (my "second").
    But - not crazy about the focal length - prefer longer or wider -
    (every time i start shooting with it, I have to re-remember that it's a "40" not a "20").
    But I should have a small fast short prime for low light to go with my "compact kit" -
    the Oly's are bloody costly, the Panny's have iffy reviews on their IQ.
    Is the Panny 14 really as poor as people say?

    It's always something with these first-world problems!

    Not trying to hijack the thread -
    I think the issues I am deciding are similar to the OP's -
    and I wanted to share that making a firm decision about Oly vs Panny bodies helps with deciding about lenses -
    I no longer have to favor Panny lenses because of the OIS issue - one less "feature" to worry about.

    Cheers.
     
  4. sdb123

    sdb123 Mu-43 Veteran

    249
    Jul 25, 2014
    Northants, UK
    Steve
    sin77 - You could always get some extension rings and use with the 45mm f/1.8; whilst not true macro, the results are very usable. I used to own the Olympus 60mm macro and loved it...however I didn't use it enough to justify keeping, YMMV. If you did want a dedicated macro lens I would certainly recommend the 60mm in place of the PL 45mm, that would free up one of your issues!

    I also owned the 14mm f/2.5 and really liked using it on the E-M10. I didn't notice any significant issues with flare. I now have the PL 15mm f/1.8 (purely as I got it at such a good price) and am very happy with its performance.
     
  5. Fmrvette

    Fmrvette This Space For Rent

    May 26, 2012
    Detroit, Michigan
    Jim
    IMHO - None of the above.

    Until, that is, you find a shot that you really, really, really want to get and find that you can't get it with your current gear.

    The two 45's don't really overlap - the PL has macro, the Oly is lighter and smaller. If you know ahead of time which you're likely to need on a given day then you need only carry one in your bag. (Not likely to shoot macro today? Take the Oly and save weight. Going to shoot at a zoo or garden where you may see flowers or butterflies? the PL is the lens of the day).

    The 35-100mm you're keeping anyway, so no decision there.

    The EZ is (possibly) the least capable of the lenses for still photography. However is the resale value enough to warrant selling the lens? A used 14mm prime, if you want to re-add it to your kit, isn't all that dear - especially since you have the F/L covered already and so can afford to wait for a great price on one.

    Just my 2 cents, fully worth half of that amount :biggrin:.

    Regards,

    Jim
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    If I were buying a compact kit zoom today, there's no question at all that it would be the Panasonic 12-32mm. Shorter telephoto, but the 2mm wider makes more difference in my mind. Honestly, 42mm is much too short for even a short telephoto, and you can always crop. The 12-32mm is also tiny and has gotten universally impressive reviews for its optics. Plus, as a kit take-off from the GM1 (or with a discounted GM1 kit) it's not that expensive, either.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Pecos

    Pecos Mu-43 Top Veteran

    775
    Jan 20, 2013
    The Natural State
    The PL 14/2.5 is such a great, small lens at a good price that I think just about everyone should own one. I don't think you'd regret it. 14 and 45 are a good walk-around combo if you like primes.
     
  8. sin77

    sin77 Mu-43 Veteran

    243
    Dec 9, 2011
    Singapore
    I used to own P14 and P14-42X. E-pm2 had issues with them as the CA was unbearable. I don't really wish to buy 14 again and then regret. Anyone own 14 and E-M10? Is there any CA problem with this combo? Likewise how about P12-35 pancake?
     
  9. sdb123

    sdb123 Mu-43 Veteran

    249
    Jul 25, 2014
    Northants, UK
    Steve
    sin77 - I replied to that previously. I used the 14mm f/2.5 with E-M10 and didn't experience notable CA or flare, it was a solid combo. I now have the PL 15mm f/1.7 and can also recommend that very highly.
     
  10. sin77

    sin77 Mu-43 Veteran

    243
    Dec 9, 2011
    Singapore
    Any noticeable barrel distortion or pincushion from 14mm when used with E-M10?