Torn between 17/f1.8 or 45/F1.8 on E-PM1

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Darthpnoy88, Mar 18, 2013.

  1. Darthpnoy88

    Darthpnoy88 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2012
    Going on vacation to either Asia or Europe this year and I'm debating whether to save up either on the 17mm or the 45mm I'd like to keep things light as much as possible but still have something that's fast and covers the general stuff.

    Recommendations and thoughts will be appreciated. :smile:
  2. silversx80

    silversx80 Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 27, 2012
    North Carolina
    I've got the 45mm, and the original 17mm (f/2.8). I have to say that the 17mm focal length is much more versatile. On the other hand, you've already got the P14, so why not the PL25?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Darthpnoy88

    Darthpnoy88 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2012
    Thought about the 25mm as well but for some reason I like the classic 35mm FOV. The 45mm on the other hands seems so seducing.
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman Subscribing Member

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    if your budget could stretch, then adding the 20 and the 45 would give you a very small very versatile kit, especially on that body.

    • Like Like x 1
  5. Boneyard

    Boneyard Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 5, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Well if you are mainly pursuing lightness then either fits the bill, which really brings it down to focal length. You already have the approximate focal length of the 45 covered with your legacy lenses (unless you are craving AF in addition to a lighter bag). With that being said, I would recommend the 17.

    You said you like a classic 35, so I would assume you are aware of the versatility of the focal length, where some (myself not included among them) find the 45 somewhat restrictive for certain applications.

    The above posts advocating the 25 are correct in that they would give you a better spread and overall kit versatility, but only you can judge what works for you. Maybe the gap between 14 & 17 is significant enough to make it worth it.
  6. cprevost

    cprevost Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 31, 2012
    The 45 is a great portrait lens. If you think you need to do lots of portrait work get it. Could be great for some street candids. It'll be hard to get full body shots but for head and shoulder shots it's wonderful. It may be too long for general shooting though. I find that I carry it with me but it's rarely on the camera. It comes out when I find a perfect use for it. Something wider like the Panny 20 would be a very useful lens. I find the Panny 20 lives on my camera most of the time. I pull out the 14 when I need to go wide or the 45 when I need more reach. The 20 though takes about 70% of my photos.
  7. GFFPhoto

    GFFPhoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2013
    I'd say 45. You already have the 14, and a fast short telephoto would be great for capturing detail when taking indoor shots in cathedrals (or zen temples). You would also be better able to isolate subjects you are unable to get close to. The 17 would give you a faster lens in a focal length you already have (and the 14 is quite good optically). The only limitation you might run into with the 45 is in small indoor areas, where it might back you into walls trying to capture a subject.

    Avoid the 20 if the 17 is in your future, they are too similar, but the 25 wouldn't be a bad choice. Unless you really shoot 90% of the time at one focal length, I would fill out your kit before upgrading an already good lens with a faster one at a similar focal length.
  8. wilerty

    wilerty Mu-43 Rookie

    Mar 10, 2013
    Syracuse, New York
    Walking street scenes, landcapes, and inside buildings the 17 will be great. For street people pictures, the 45 will win. I carry both, plus the 12-50 and 40-100.
  9. BLT

    BLT Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 13, 2013
    As Kevin said - for a price similar to the oly17, you could possibly get the 20 and 45. That would be a great kit. (actually the 3 primes I have)

    Otherwise I think the 17mm is a more versatile FOV than the 45mm and you have already said you like it.

    So another option would be to buy the 17mm and one day sell the 14mm to help fund the 45mm? If I were to only have 2 lenses, I think it would be the 17 and 45.
  10. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    See that 45mm? Buy it.
    (Also look for a second-hand Olympus 17mmF2.8 or Lumix 20mm.)
  11. Darthpnoy88

    Darthpnoy88 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2012
    Thanks for all your thoughts gentlemen I decided to pull the trigger on the 45mm refurbished one on Olympus website :)
  12. htc

    htc Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 11, 2011
    Good choice! now you have 14 mm and 45, one of the lightest pair of lenses. Optically very good also.
  13. cprevost

    cprevost Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 31, 2012
    Get the 20 or the 25 and you have a very versatile 3 lens kit. I have the 14, 20, and 45. What I love is that if I put one on the camera the other 2 will fit in my pockets easy. The 45 is a stunning portrait lens and a great short telephoto. You will love it.
  14. pdbphoto

    pdbphoto Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 19, 2013
    I guess it depends on how one sees things. Some people are wide-angle folks and others tele-folks. Myself? I tend to want to isolate a subject/composition, so I would lean towards the 45mm. OTOH, if I was walking about some old city with narrow streets, a wide angle would be much more useful.
  15. chasm

    chasm Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 2, 2010
    45mm + Sigma 19mm.
  16. arson519

    arson519 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 10, 2013
    id also go for 45 because u already have a wide 14, wouldnt be wise to have a 14 and 17

    edit: just read you got 45MM ;) tell us how it is
  17. Darthpnoy88

    Darthpnoy88 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2012
    The 45 finally arrived through FedEx here are some 2 shots of my pet I took

    <a href="" title="First time on Olympus 45mm Zuiko F/1.8 by rhansantiago, on Flickr"> 8580765506_467e04be29.jpg "500" height="375" alt="First time on Olympus 45mm Zuiko F/1.8"></a>
    <a href="" title="2nd shot of my dog on the 45mm by rhansantiago, on Flickr"> 8579666747_deca7ac96e.jpg "500" height="375" alt="2nd shot of my dog on the 45mm"></a>

    I'm totally in love with this lens. Thanks for all the tips guys :)
  18. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011
    If I already had the 14, I would not be too excited about the 17mm and would go for something longer. The 45 is typically too long for me on my vacation/travel photography except for a few select shots. My favorite traveling lens is the 20mm.

    My 2 cents would be to go for something other than the 17 (given that you have the 14mm already) to expand your range a little. If the 45 is your only other option, I would go for that but if you are open to other lenses, something like the 20 or 25 or even the sigma 30 might be worth considering.
  19. Darthpnoy88

    Darthpnoy88 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 27, 2012
    Actually considered the PL25 I just couldn't pass up on the price of the refurbished unit of the 45. :2thumbs:
  20. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I think you made a good choice. With the 14mm and the 45mm you have a versatile pair. If you didn't have the 14mm already and wanted to bring only one lens then a 17mm, 20mm or 25mm would have been more appropriate but paired up with the 14mm the 45mm is a much better combo! You said you wanted to keep it as light as possible so that will avoid the need to bring any of your legacy 50mm lenses. Have an enjoyable trip, and bring back lots of great photos!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.