What's a good first 4/3 lens to use with MMF-2?

SRHEdD

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
979
Location
Viera, Florida USA
Real Name
Steve
I don't want to go crazy on the first one, so what's a good first lens to experiment with? 14-54 2.8/4? I just grabbed an MMF-2 on here and want to experiment. Is there a reasonably good macro?
 

HarryS

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2012
Messages
986
Location
Midwest, USA
The 35mm macro is inexpensive and a nice lens, although it will focus like a turtle. Anything else costs more money.
 

kevinparis

Cantankerous Scotsman
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
3,912
Location
Gent, Belgium
there were 2 macros for the 4/3 system, a 35/3.5 and a 50/2.

No experience of the 35, though it was less expensive, but the 50 I believe was at the time was one of the sharpest lenses DPR had tested..

I have the 50 and have had some good use out of it. I am not a die hard macro freak , but it can be fun, and it make a nice portrait type lens as well. The auto focus can hunt a lot, but that seems to be a macro related issue.

here are a few recent shots with the 50

View attachment 358968P5010274 by kevinparis, on Flickr

View attachment 358969P5010360 by kevinparis, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
PC010020 by kevinparis, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
PC010044 by kevinparis, on Flickr

my other 4/3 lenses that is getting use on the E-M1 is the 50-200 - its a bit of a beast size wise but is a superb lens

cheers

K
 

fadingphoenix

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
27
there were 2 macros for the 4/3 system, a 35/3.5 and a 50/2.
Actually there were at least four. Harder to find are the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 and the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 that were made with the 4/3 mount.
Great photos btw!

The 50mm f/2.0 is definitely a fantastic lens. It's one I've planned on owning for myself for a while now. If I was recommending a macro I would say find a good price on either the 50mm or the native m43 60mm f/2.8

For zooms I would recommend any of the Olympus HG line, depending on your preference and shooting style. Some people have preferred the 11-22 f/2.8-3.5 for walking around as it gave them a wide to almost normal range. The 14-54 makes a very nice standard zoom with an affordable price, particularly the mk1; whereas the 12-60 f/2.8-4 is a little bigger and a more expensive but gives you the full package in one lens. kevinparis mentioned the 50-200 which is indeed a great lens if you're looking for telephoto.

Panasonic had their 14-50 f/2.8-3.5 but for the price I would probably say either of the Oly 14-54 versions would be preferable.

Sigma also made a zoom for four thirds. The 18-50 ex f/2.8 constant aperture, I don't know much about it myself and I assume that like the other Sigma's it's harder to find these days, but when I looked it up it actually appears there is one on ebay currently.
 

Ulfric M Douglas

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,709
Location
Northumberland
To hunt for a 4.3rds lens just for the adapter seems a bit backward,
however I have three bits of advice.
1. The 4/3rds 9-18 works great on my micro bodies and cost me £200 instead of £350 for the micro version.
2. The ridiculously cheap (£70used) Mark-I 40-150 has great optics, nice apertures and is a fun lens to play with, kind of a lesser 50-200 if that makes any sense.
3. A bright zoom with great range is the 14-54 with F2.8-3.5 and can be had very cheap used for a tast of F2.8-zoom goodness.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
The HG lenses, like the 14-54mm were all excellent and I don't think that you could go wrong with that lens; however, the focussing will only be good on the E-M1. I often used if for macro work like this shot:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,140
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
re Macros:

The 35mm ZD macro is 1:1 (1x) magnification; iirc the 50mm ZD is 1:2 (0.5x).

I have the 35mm; the focus hunting in moderate light is terrible on both the 4/3 cameras (my E-3), and the E-M1. However, manual focus for macro is fine, and it does do AF ok in daylight (still slow, but less hunting).

Barry
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
I had the 50mm and sold it. While an outstanding lens, it was only good for macro, as the focus speed for anything else was as slow as a wet week.
 

GBarrington

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Apr 4, 2014
Messages
634
Location
Springfield, Illinois
I'm not so sure that the 14-54 Mk1 is all that bad at auto-focus. Inside the shop, the lens did hunt a bit on the E-M10. But outside, in good light, the lens was what I would call, acceptably slow (good enough for still life, architectural shots and landsapes, not so much for sports!). However, the manual focus on this camera body is so good, (FAR better than on my E-30), that I don't think there is any significant penalty for using manual focus. I agree with the VERY high speed of focus with the DSLR 9-18. Yeah, it's big, but neither me or the sales clerk at the shop could discern any difference in focus speed INSIDE the shop!

At this point in my m43s experience, I am quite content with using my DSLR Zuiko lenses on the E-M10

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Ulfric M Douglas

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,709
Location
Northumberland
Interesting.
I agree with the VERY high speed of focus with the DSLR 9-18. Yeah, it's big, but neither me or the sales clerk at the shop could discern any difference in focus speed INSIDE the shop!
I got a similar comment about my old 9-18 with adapter on my old e-P2 ... he said something like "Oh, I read it was slow to focus, this is fast."
So maybe the lens just suits the new focus systems.
 

pmon

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
37
Location
Milan
Real Name
Paolo
When I switched to m43 I kept four-thirds 14-54 mkII, 40-150 and 9-18. Currently I have the 40-150 and the 9-18, I sold my beloved 14-54 mkII because it was really too big for my e-p5.
 

JimUSNY

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Nov 5, 2013
Messages
122
Location
Mid Hudson Valley NY
Real Name
Jim
The lens I like best is the 11-22 on my EM1, the 70-300MM was also macro, it did better at that than it did for long wildlife in my opinion, almost kept it just for long range closeups, I personally like the 35MM over the 50MM, not because of quality but mainly because of internal focusing...
what ever one you get at least you wont be paying what I did even for used ones, all the 4,3rds stuff is going so cheap these days
 

GBarrington

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Apr 4, 2014
Messages
634
Location
Springfield, Illinois
When I switched to m43 I kept four-thirds 14-54 mkII, 40-150 and 9-18. Currently I have the 40-150 and the 9-18, I sold my beloved 14-54 mkII because it was really too big for my e-p5.
What did you replace it with? I have refrained from replacing the 14-54 simply because I worry that I won't find anything as good optically!
 

pmon

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
37
Location
Milan
Real Name
Paolo
What did you replace it with? I have refrained from replacing the 14-54 simply because I worry that I won't find anything as good optically!
After many sleepless nights ;-) I convinced myself to go to the expensive route and managed to buy a used panasonic 12-35mm f2.8. So far I am very happy, it is not very light but it is confortable anyway on the pen, it adds 12mm on the wide end that I really appreaciate, but looses a few mm on the tele. As far as image quality ... look for yourself in the forum in the sample image threads and smile ;-)
 

SRHEdD

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
979
Location
Viera, Florida USA
Real Name
Steve
To hunt for a 4.3rds lens just for the adapter seems a bit backward...
Agreed, it is just one of the capabilities of the camera I'd like to explore. More a curiosity than a need, which is why I'm after the experiences of the group. It WOULD be hard for me to buy the 50 Macro, when I don't have the 60 m4/3. I also hunt pawn shops, and KNOW I'll stumble across a 4/3 kit at some point, so having the adapter (for cheap) was an easy decision.
 

DoofClenas

Who needs a Mirror!
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
1,278
Location
Traverse City, MI
Real Name
Clint
I've owned the 7-14, 8, 12-60, 14-54 mk1, 25, 50, 50-200SWD, 135-400, and an ec14 recently...and I sold them all. If you want something razor sharp, and you don't mind the painfully slow AF, the 50mm f2 is a keeper. However, I'd rather own the m4/3 version 60mm macro if I need one again for a project. The 50-200 is a beast of a lens, and if you don't mind the bulk, it's another stellar performer...and you can add the ec14 to it without sacrificing much. The 12-60 was very versatile, but I much prefer the 12-40 constant 2.8 (that and the AF is more accurate and faster). The same can be said about the 14-54...it's a great lens, but if you can afford the 12-40, just get that one. The one lens I've been think about reacquiring is the 135-400, but only if I can buy it at what I sold it at. Currently there is nothing in the m4/3 system with that reach especially if you add an ec14. Performance and weight wise, it's not the best, but it was a fun lens to own, but got pushed to the side once I bought a 50-200swd and ec-14.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom