WHich lenses should I buy for my new G3 for trip to Florida?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by thelawnet, Nov 13, 2011.

  1. thelawnet

    thelawnet New to Mu-43

    6
    Nov 13, 2011
    We have 2 kids, I take mostly candid travel shots, us in front of monument, us in the swimming pool, etc.

    I just have the 14-42 kit lens and a G3 now.

    Wondering where to spend my $$$???
     
  2. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Is there something wrong with the kit lens? It's a good lens for travel, that 28-84 focal range is pretty convenient and it's not a bad lens at all. If you want better Panasonic the 14-45 is sharper and IMHO better built. If you want a lens to go with the kit lens I'd say the 20/1.7 is definitely a great lens to have around. It's a whole different class of lens than the 14-42 and the speed helps with pictures in less than ideal light.
     
  3. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    What's your budget?
     
  4. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    For night use, you'll want a fast lens -- the 20, 45 or maybe the 14. I like telephoto a lot, so I would probably get the 45-200.
     
  5. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I spent a month in Europe last year and I took my Olympus E520 and several lenses and I ended up using my Olympus 14-54 moat of the time. On m43 the closest equivalent is the kit lens and quite honestly with the exception of the 14-42 that came with the E-PL1 mot of them are pretty darned good. It has WA for those shots in front of a monument or at an attraction, it can close focus reasonably well and best of all you already have it.

    It is a bit on the slow side but the G3 has pretty nice high ISO so you for the most part get away shooting at higher ISO to mitigate the fact that the lens is not that fast. It has relatively quick AF (unlike the Panasonic 20).
     
  6. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    The Pana 20mm

    I would get the Panasonic 20mm. It is a good workhorse lens. You may have to zoom with your feet on some shots but they will be sharp. This also lets you get some pretty good shots when the sun is going down or you are inside (without a flash).
     
  7. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    492
    Aug 5, 2011
    Probably the 45-200 to go along with your kit lens. The 20mm would be the other option.
     
  8. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    It depends on what you want to shoot. What most people get as a second lens is a telephoto zoom, which means your next solid purchase should be the 45-175mm lens. If you want more low-light capability and better image quality, then you should should pick up the duo of the Panasonic 20mm and Olympus 45mm f/1.8. There is no "correct" answer, or there wouldn't be a choice. Decide what you feel is missing. Do you wish that you had a lens that zoomed in more? Do you wish you had a lens that zoomed out more? Do you wish you had a lens that blurred backgrounds more?
     
  9. thelawnet

    thelawnet New to Mu-43

    6
    Nov 13, 2011
    I had a 10x zoom camera, and I never used the long zoom.

    I've not seen the point of taking a photo of a lion from half-a-mile away, when someone's already taken 1 million better pictures of lions than the one I will take.

    OTOH, nobody is taking pictures of my family except me.

    In other words I'm not interested in a long zoom.

    I am interested in the prime lenses, the 12mm is too expensive (although I would actually like a wider lens), the 17mm is poorly reviewed and so there are the 14mm, 20mm, 25mm, 45mm Olympus lenses for me to consider. The 14 and 20 are very small. I guess the Olympus 9-18mm is not a bad idea either, I generally like wide more than telephoto.

    I haven't seen anything wrong with my kit lens but I got the impression that if you're not going to get a set of better lenses you might as well just have an advanced point+shoot camera.

    Anyway, the prime lenses are well-rated only thing I guess I don't know how it is to be walking around with a fixed focal length, although I guess people seem to do ok with cell phones, which are I think roughly equivalent to the 14mm.

    Will a new lens (or lenses) give me better pictures? Maybe. Will I regret not having one for our trip? I have no idea.

    One other thing for me to consider is the 14-42mm x zoom (I have no interest in the marginally better 14-45mm old Panasonic kit lens), I wonder if the small size of this makes the only slightly cheaper small, but not that fast, 14mm prime a poor value. But then I have not seen a real review of it yet. Also power zoom seems a bit hmm, in comparison to a proper zoom ring.
     
  10. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    The 14-42X is a lateral step, at best. Considering that you have a G3, the modest increase in portability isn't worth it, and if you don't do video, neither is the power zoom. There is no reason to get that lens if you already have a 14-42mm lens; you won't see a real-world difference in image quality. There are much better places to put your money, especially if you don't have any other lenses.

    People have been using prime lenses since the dawn of photography. We often say that if you put the lens on your camera, then you'll make the opportunities happen. If you want to see how it is, zoom your current lens to 20mm, and walk around during the daytime for 10-30 minutes and take photos. That is what a fixed lens will feel like. The 45mm will feel pretty much like your lens zoomed all the way in, like for portraits of your kids, but with the ability to blur the background.

    I mentioned the Panasonic 20mm and 45mm because they are lenses that new photographers are loving, and experienced photographers are making part of their permanent kits. Many people that buy the 25mm lens end up keeping their 20mm, even though they initially planned to sell it. Just as importantly, they are relatively cheap, so you're getting a great price/performance ration, and you will be more comfortable using a lens that you don't have to baby it, due to exorbitant price. Last, if you end up not liking them, or getting your use out of them and want to move on to greener pastures (like that $600 25mm lens), then these lenses hold their value well enough that you get most of your money back; that which you don't get is more than worth the time and experience you had with the lens.

    The 14mm opens up a little wider than your 14-42mm does, but it's not the optical marvel that you expect a prime lens to be, so if you can live with "only" f/3.5 at that end, then you have pretty much the same performance.

    The 9-18mm would be a very solid addition to your kit; if you like wide, go ahead and grab it!
     
  11. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    492
    Aug 5, 2011
    I've thought that before (that the new X lens makes the 14mm prime a poor value).

    20mm is a pretty easy recommendation. On the other hand, the 45mm is relatively faster than the 20mm and it focuses better. It will probably work great for individual shots, but not so much for group shots in front of land marks.

    Of course, if you are taking a picture in front of Cinderella's Castle, you need to use a really high aperture anyway to get the background to show up. The reality is that at f5.6, the 20mm prime and the kit lens will look almost identical.
     
  12. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Well...will better lenses give you pictures? Not really. You can make great photos with whatever you have. Better lenses may give you some options that you wouldn't otherwise have (faster, more range etc.) but thats about it. What you do with it is up to you.

    One of the advantage of a system like m43 is the ability to use different lenses but the title of your thread is which lens should I buy for my new G3 for a trip to Florida. Based on what you said you wanted to shoot (candid family stuff and travel stuff) the kit lens is a great option. That said...

    I have a 14, 20, 14-45 and 45-200 as well as a bunch of OM prime legacy glass. My most used native lenses are the 20 and 14-45 (by a long shot). The 20 is a superb lens. Its in a class by itself. If I could have only one lens it would be the 20 without a doubt. The 14 is also a very good lens but not up to the level of the 20 optically. It is however faster to AF and quieter (a lot quieter). I don't do a lot of WA stuff and I don't think the 14 is much of an improvement over my 14-45 for WA. The Olympus 17 is not a bad lens at all. It gets ignored because the 20 is so good but the 17 is a good lens (a nice focal length) and very good bargain. Take a look at the lens sample image archives and decide for yourself.

    As far as prime vs. zoom...well that depends. I love shooting primes and prefer it for a lot of stuff but for travel I would not go without a zoom. The new 14-42 x zoom is VERY small and while I like the power zoom idea the switch for manually focusing would drive me crazy. With m43 were talking some pretty small gear anyway. My G2+20+14-45 takes up less space than my old DSLR body alone took.
     
  13. thelawnet

    thelawnet New to Mu-43

    6
    Nov 13, 2011
    Well is the 25mm more useful than the 20mm? The price difference is not that huge, although the lens is relatively huge...

    I can get the 20mm for £242 ($385) now or wait till I'm in the US and buy it for like $350. Not a big difference, is the warranty a big deal on lenses?
     
  14. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Pete
    You may be interested can get the PL25 for £439 from SRS but with a £25 cash back from Panasonic until the end of the month.