Two-lens System: 17+45 or 12+45?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by curiouspeter, Apr 10, 2013.

  1. curiouspeter

    curiouspeter New to Mu-43

    Apr 10, 2013
    I have decided to buy an OM-D. I will for sure get the 45mm f/1.8. I rented it for a weekend and loved it! That lens alone is enough reason to buy into micro four-thirds.

    To complete a two-lens system, should I get the 17mm f/1.8 or the 12mm f/2.0?

    I know they are quite different (in terms of FOV) but they may not be different enough for me to get both. I fear one of them will permanently live in the box.

    I heard the 12mm is "better" but the super-wide FOV requires a lot of work to produce non-boring compositions.

    I do mostly architecture and landscape, but I also want a general purpose lens for trips and friends.

    If I end up getting the 17mm I may be tempted to buy a Coolpix A for the 28mm FOV. :) 


  2. GFFPhoto

    GFFPhoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2013
    Personally, I would miss normal focal length with just a wide, and I would miss a wide angle if I only had a normal. Forced to choose I would go for the 17, only because I like the focal length better.

    You can also get the 14mm on ebay for around $180 new but stripped from a kit. Its not as good as the 12, but its not far behind (just as sharp, 2/3 stop slower, and the 12 renders with a bit more contrast). Its also a tiny tiny pancake, so it can live in a jacket pocket instead of the box. 45, 17 and the 14 for occasional use would be a nice kit.
  3. Gillymaru

    Gillymaru Mu-43 Veteran

    My choice would be OMD body 45mm and 12-35 Panasonic, covers all the focal lengths and has great image quality.
    Or if primes were essential get the 25mm Panasonic and 45mm. I think this is makes a great 2 lens kit, if you want a wider prime add the 14mm Panasonic. Cost wise similar to getting 45mm and 12mm but much more versatile.
  4. curiouspeter

    curiouspeter New to Mu-43

    Apr 10, 2013
    My fear of having a good zoom is that it will never come off. :) 

    OTOH, the DoF scale on the Olympus primes may become handy because I do shoot hyper-focal from time to time.

    I will take a closer look at the 12-35. It is definitely cheaper than 12mm + 17mm. Thanks.
  5. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    I'd go 12-50mm + 17 + 45. You get 12mm, an okay zoom and a pseudo macro. The 17mm will give you a a good general walk-around/fast wide prime.
  6. pictor

    pictor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 17, 2010
    For me that would be a tough decision, since I like both focal lengths and I am happy to have both of them, since I love to use my 9-18mm. If you don't need faster apertures, you will probably like that zoom, too.
  7. janneman

    janneman Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 6, 2012
    Jan (John) Kusters
    My 2 lens kit is 12 and 45 mm, I carry a small bag with OM-D and these two as every day set. This, however is not sufficcient for everything, and in the end, I bought a sigma 19 mm for those occasions where something in the middle was needed. I do not carry the 19mm normaly, but if I can forsee I need it, it replaces the 12 mm in my small bag.
  8. fin azvandi

    fin azvandi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 12, 2011
    South Bend, IN
    Do you know what kind of focal lengths you like to shoot already? I think you might find the gap between 12 and 45 to be too much for general, walkaround shots. Jonathan's idea of 12-50 + 17 + 45 sounds like a solid plan if you like the 17mm focal length.
  9. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 25, 2012
    Off the wall suggestion, take the money you save with the 17mm (over the 12mm) and get a third 7.5mm fisheye for super-wide landscape/cityscapes.

    Have a look into defishing this lens with Hugin (free) using the panini projection and you get a very wide FoV and your walkaround 17mm.

    I'm currently toting the 14/20/45 set but about to buy the 7.5 samyang/rokinon for something properly different that I can bend back to looking normal if I want to.
  10. mrjr

    mrjr Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 25, 2012

    If I were buying an OMD kit all at once, I have to think this is what I would do. I love my 25 mm, as well as my 14 mm, but I'm utterly infatuated with the idea of having a two prime kit. For me, it's worlds easier to manage two lenses than three for some reason. And if I could only have two primes, for most of my shooting.... seems like it would be hard to beat the 17 + 45. Then having the 12-50 covers my needs for wide and macro. Not a bad idea.
  11. curiouspeter

    curiouspeter New to Mu-43

    Apr 10, 2013
    That is a good suggestion. Probably better than the 14-42mm + 12 + 45 combo.

    The de-fished-eye idea is good too, although I would love to get a 8mm rectilinear prime. I briefly considered the 9-18mm M. Zuiko, but it is rather pricey for a special purpose zoom that will be used only at the widest end.

  12. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 6, 2012
    If there is ever a 10mm f/4 prime for m4/3 and is cheaper than the 9-18, I would probably get that and sell the 9-18. I really only use my UWA at the widest end.

    Back on topic. I think 17/45 is a better combination than 12/45. 12mm requires better discipline and technique in many situations, at least in my shooting.
  13. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    The FOV of a 17mm (35mm FF equivalent) never did much for me - quite a few years ago, I did a two week trip in Europe with a 35mm film SLR and 24mm, 50mm and 135mm lenses, which was a combination that worked extremely well - for me. YMMV, obviously.
  14. elim

    elim Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 25, 2013
    I use the 12-50, 17 and 45 combo and recently went to Yosemite with it. I find it to cover most bases. Though at times I wish I had the 25mm mainly just because I wanted it.

    Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
  15. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2012
    David Dornblaser
    I use the 17 & 45 plus a short telephoto combo and like it a lot. The 12 is a nice lens but it gets used less.
  16. sabesh

    sabesh Mu-43 Veteran

    17 + 45. Good combination for friends, travel, walkabout and landscapes (landscapes need not be ultra wide angle, hence you can get by without the 12).
  17. Halaking

    Halaking Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 17, 2012
    Los Angeles
    I end up use them all 9-18, 12, 17, and 45.
  18. angusr

    angusr Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 21, 2011
    I have 14, 20 and 45. I have used them in all combinations at various times and the most satisfactory for me are the 20mm alone, or the 14 and 45 as a 2 lens kit.

    I have a suspicion that the 17 and 45 would work really well for me, but I couldn't bring myself to part with the 20, and having the pancakes is something I really appreciate.
  19. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    14+45 is a great compact combo. I've been using it for over a year and would't change it. I also have 45-175mm but for special purposes only. 17mm & 20mm would be more limiting indoors than 14mm.

    Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 App
  20. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    This is what I was thinking when I read the title, except I would do the 20/1.7 instead of the 25/1.4
  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.