Based on your expertise what do you think I am missing lens wise? I like to shoot anything that suits me. I have a particular fondness for getting close to things and prefer animals to people for portraits. I prefer to travel light and shoot handheld and as I live in the NW low light is sometimes unavoidable. I loved shooting Tri-x if that makes a difference. After some trading and selling (and a bit of bartering) I have ended up with the following: hexanon 40/1.8 hexanon 50/1.7 hexanon 135/3.2 super takumar 55/1.8 OM 50/1.8 OM 28/2.8 OM 35-70/3.5-4.5 14-42 kit lens As I see it (given the 2x multiplier) I have the 100 - 300 pretty much covered. The OM 28/2.8 has my "normal" covered (although I'd prefer to have a 24/2.8 but I have what I can afford). I need to rely on the kit lens for WA because I'd rather make my car payment than pay the going rate for primes that would end up being WA on the PEN. The OM 50/1.8 and the OM 35-70/3.5-4.5 are probably doomed. I like the OM 28/2.8 but I'm not opposed to an upgrade. I'd like to find a long lens for birding (which I do on occasion). Finally, for no good reason I am enamored of the idea of getting something like a Jupiter 8 (which I clearly don't need but then again I don't NEED any of this stuff). Any suggestions? Kevin
Your assumption would be wrong. I have found that I like shooting with the PEN more than I have enjoyed shooting with anything in the last 20 or so years. Call it getting excited over a new toy if you like. Since I'm not made of money I ask to get some advice since that is one of the benefits of being on a forum such as this. Using legacy lenses on m43 isn't like using them on film. They react differently and the assumptions I would have from my using them on film bodies wouldn't be accurate. So, I ask advice from those of you who are using them. Right now I'm in the midst of finishing my Masters project and getting the computer labs at the university I work at ready for start of school next month so NO I won't be getting out much until after that, but I can take some time to do some research and yes geek out a bit concerning lenses. FWIW in the past 10 years I have probably shot around 400K images so I suppose I do find time to get out and shoot.
OK, Of the Normal lenses.... if the 40/1.8 hex is good shape...IE: firm focus movement, no oil on the blades, no wobbly parts... Keep that one.. it is compact, Sharp and faily well made for the Konica FS-1, for which is was the normal kit lens in the day. Plus is will be super 80mm f/1.8. IF... The 50/1.7 Hex is in good shape, this may be a keeper too. But, there where a few variations.. I think the 40 is a newer lens. Of the wides/& zooms.... I'd keep the Oly 28/2.8... another great lens that make a pretty good "standard" lens, Albiet a tad long becoming a 58mm FOV. But within a normal lens range. Keep the 14-42 native mount..... Keep the 135/3.2 makes a nice 170 fairly fast lens... almost f2.8! Sell the rest.... the Takumar is a good lens, but the focusing can get very loss as far turning...It losses its dampening over time... It is sharp though. I have one..the Non-SMC version... I pefer my Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 C-Sonnar over it...Which brings to your odd request. A J-8... Go for the J-3 (50mm f/1.5 Zeiss Sonnar copy)... You will love the "Sonnar Look" The Modern Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 C-Sonnar was designed after the 1932 Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 (What the J-3 is a copy of) Here are 2 Images, 1st one from a J-3 from another website, the 2nd one is from me, I took a week or ago of my son. Note Copyright on 1st one.. Taken with a J-3 at f/1.5 And one from my Modern Version Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 C-Sonnar T* @ f/1.5..
Ok, most people posting lists of gear without telling what they like to photograph are too concentrated on gear. It is fine, that you are not one of them. It is still difficult to answer your question, because you don't mention, what you want to photograph. So what do you want to photograph? It is much easier to help you, if one knows your favorite subjects. A wide angle lens is, what you are missing most obviously. I don't mean an equivalent to 28mm, but wider focal lengths. I own the Olympus 9-18mm, which I really love. I like its optical qualities very much and also its versatility. I often go taking photos with only this one lens. If I had the Panasonic 7-14mm, I would not do this, because I'd miss the range between 14mm and 18mm too much. But your mileage may vary, of course, and the Panasonic lens is said to be great. If you want to have more tele, then you might wait until Photokina, since Panasonic has announced an 100-300mm in their official roadmap. Olympus has published a roadmap, too, but although it is not as clear what to expect, they might introduce a tele-zoom, too, at least this is, which their roadmap suggests.
Thank you, that's what I was looking for. The J3 pictures are lovely. I had pretty much decided to sell the OM 50 and OM 35-70. I was on the fence about the Super Tak. The Hexanon 50/1.7 and 40/1.8 are in nice shape so I'll keep them. What is it about the "Sonnar look" that is so appealing? I find it really lovely but I am at a loss to articulate why that is. It reminds me a lot of some stuff I've seen with the Super Takumar 50/1.4. Nice stuff. Kevin
The Creamy Bokeh has very soft fall off, it, in part has to do with the design groups. The C-Sonnar has a tad of front focus from 1m-3m from f/1.5 to f/2.8. (the 1932 Zeiss may have had that design also for f/1.5-f/2, from which the C-Sonnar was designed after by design btw). From f/2.8 on, it just gets even better from 1m-3m at f/1.5 on a RF, and many like that look.. see the 1st image., but on a Live View focus... it is not an issue,.
Fair enough, I said in the original post... That's about as specific as I can get. I am not trying to be flippant, I just tend to like to shoot a lot of different things. I suppose if I was to narrow it down I would say as of late I have been really interested in flowers, bugs and animal portraits (we have a lot of wildlife where I live). I have a 7 year old and with my schedule it's a bit easier to shoot those subjects right now. I also like landscapes but the rains start here in a month or so and what limited backcountry trips I make until then I'll just use the kit lens or my point and shoot. I really like shooting with MF lenses. I realize there are some nice native lens options but I am having such a blast with the MF stuff that I am trying to stick with it and see what I can do. I don't mind going out with just a WA or just a normal lens and see what happens. You get some wonderful stuff that way. I agree that WA is my biggest need. getting a prime that would translate into a fast WA on a PEN would be expensive (for me at least) and that's not going to happen. I may have my share of gear but I limit my gear acquisition to trades and deals (meaning cheap). I'm a technology professional so I have no problem paying a premium for computers and software as I make my living that way but photography is what I do for my own enjoyment so it gets a strict budget (especially these days). The 14-42 kit lens will have to do. One advantage the kit has is that it is small and reasonably good for what it is.
The effect is breathtaking. Sorry to ask such a dumb question but is this what the Summicron (50/2) is famous for? I've never been within sniffing distance of a Summicron. I know a few friends that see it as the holy grail of lenses. I know that Leica makes wonderful lenses (but then again so do a lot of folks). I once had a friend that was a Mercedes engineer and he used to tell me the difference between a Mercedes and a Honda was that the Mercedes was manufactured to much greater tolerances but that under normal operating conditions you would likely not notice it and for most people the differences would not be worth the additional cost. Is it something like that? Kevin
I believe so... It is a little different from the Zeiss.... but it too has a smooth fall off...one of the versions (I think before ASPH elements were used) is lovingly called "The Bokeh King" . Of course, I think the New 50mm C-Sonnar is "The Bokeh King" All with a G1 and Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 C-Sonnar at f/1.5 Both are great.
FWIW I happen to agree with you about gear. I am always hounding my father in law about this very same thing. He always says he "needs" the latest and greatest gear because of this reason or that. Its usually I need more megapixels to print larger (despite the fact I have never in 25 years seen him print larger than 8x10. Its easy however to get fixated because the very industry that supplies us this gear depends on us to constantly be buying more in order to survive. I find it ironic given that photography at its core is such a simple idea. Kevin
I have been LOVING shooting with the Konica 50/1.7 and now when I put my old OM lenses on I find I really don't care for them at all. The OM 50/1.8 MIJ is headed for the big sale table in the sky. There is something about the quality of the Hexanons that I really like.
