1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

which lenses

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by BAKatz, Mar 17, 2011.

  1. BAKatz

    BAKatz Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Sep 9, 2010
    Riverdale, NY
    ok...i know this is a real open ended question, and you all have your opinions, which is exactly what i'm looking for......i still have only the kit lens for my EPL-1......however...we are planning a cruise to Alaska in 2012, and my question is which 2 (maybe 3 ) lenses should i try to buy in the next year....i also do not have the vf-2.....so......how should i try to complete my camera bag? the only one way out of my price range is the 800 $ tele/zoom olympus....the others i'll have to save for...thanks to all for your help...it is greatly appreciated.......oh....panasonic lenses are fine too.....i just don't want to have to deal with adaptors......
     
  2. shoturtle

    shoturtle  

    823
    Oct 15, 2010
    for a long zoom not over price, the panny 45-200 works great with the epl-1. It does not focus as fast as the 40-150 form olympus. But it has more reach. The oly 40-150 does better macro by itself. But a simple canon 500d conversion lens on either lens will make them very good macro lens, very close to 1:1. I would add the panasonic 20 1.7 great for night time shooting and indoor stuff. And if you want a walk around zoom the oly 14-150 is a very good option. And yes the VF-2 is worth the price. Now if you want a true macro, you can get the olympus 4/3 to 4/3 adapter and get the olympus 35 3.5. The other option is a 800 dollar lens as well so I will skip that base on your lens budget.

    These would be my suggestion, I am not into legacy lenses personally. But other are and may have some good options if that is a route you wish to go.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. mauve

    mauve Mu-43 Top Veteran

    892
    Mar 9, 2010
    Paris, France
    From personal experience as well as from crowd's wisdom, the Panasonic 20/f:1.7 is an absolute must have.

    Then, depending on your shooting preference, you might wish to expand your options to the wide end or the tele range. There are neither intrinsically good nor bad lenses, just the problem of fitting together needs and budget.

    But that 20 stands apart in a class of its own.

    Cheers,
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. I wouldn't leave home without an Ultra Wide-Angle - so a Zuiko 9-18 would be on my list. The Panny 7-14 may be a bit expensive.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. LisaO

    LisaO Mu-43 Top Veteran

    798
    Mar 18, 2010
    New York Metro Area
    Lisa
    I was in Alaska in 2009. A long lens is great as much of the wildlife is far away. I would look at the 40-150mm and the 20mm, you could get both for less than $600. In Alaska there is no such thing a a too long lens. There is even a 100-300mm if you really want to go long.

    I went to Alaska before I had an M4/3 but I used 2 Nikons 1 full frame with 24-70 and 1 crop body with 70-300.

    3691881453_7cfc51fbb6.
    Me on Mt. Denali Alaska

    3648945929_2c2ace635e.
    Young Brown Bear -White Pass from Skagway, Alaska
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. BAKatz

    BAKatz Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Sep 9, 2010
    Riverdale, NY
    thanks everyone.............this has been a great help......let the savings begin........if i'm lucky i will be able to go a little overbudget by next august........
     
  7. Warren T.

    Warren T. Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    Mar 10, 2010
    San Francisco
    We went to Alaska last September. I brought the equipment listed under my sig. The 45-200mm came in real handy for wildlife shots. I could have used something even longer, like the 100-300mm, but i was satisfied with the shots from my 45-200mm.

    Here, a momma brown bear caught whiff of our scent, and stared straight at us for a few moments. She had two cubs nearby, and they were all busy salmon fishing. After she was satisfied that we weren't a threat, she continued with her fishing. We saw them in Haines at the Chilkoot River.

    http://fototime.com/5C8E4B83126B3D1/standard.jpg" border=0 alt="Hosting provided by FotoTime">

    --Warren
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. ronbot

    ronbot Mu-43 Regular

    98
    Apr 27, 2010
    I second the Olympus 9-18mm and 40-150mm. In fact, you can get both in native m4/3 for a bit over $800.

    Or... 9-18mm 4/3 version, 40-150mm 4/3 version bundled with 4/3 to m4/3 adapter, and the Pany 20mm for a bit over $1000, but the AF will be slow for both zooms and they will be obviously bigger than the native m4/3 versions.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. BAKatz

    BAKatz Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Sep 9, 2010
    Riverdale, NY
    thanks to everyone for the suggestions...i think i'm going to go with the Pany 45-200, and buy the VF2.....if the budget permits i'll get the pany 20......i figure for Alaska i'll need the tele more than the 20, but i'm hopeful i can get both.........i have a cruise to canada in sept. so if i do well in the casino........thanks again for all of your help
     
  10. Spuff

    Spuff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    652
    Dec 5, 2010
    Berkshire, UK.
    I would certainly appreciate the weight saving of the 40-150 if seriously walking. If the IQ of the 200 is definitely better when image size is matched compared to the 150 than maybe I would go with the 200.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. mach330

    mach330 Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Mar 19, 2011
    The OC
    For macro with 40-150 we need a 4/3 to 4/3 adapter? Where can I find this?
     
  12. shoturtle

    shoturtle  

    823
    Oct 15, 2010
    no if you are getting the m.zukios lens, by it self it gets close to 1:4 but not quite there. Just get a good conversion lens like a canon 500D or a 2 diopter form B&W or Hoya. The canon is very very good. And if you need more mag, a canon 250d close lens or a hoya or B&W 4 diopter. But they get hard to work with for hand held close up. You will really want to shoot them with a tripod.
     
  13. bigfoot

    bigfoot Mu-43 Rookie

    12
    Feb 19, 2011
    My $0.02, FWIW...

    We went last year and only brought a Canon G11. The zoom range on that seemed to be pretty useful for general work and we got some great pictures. The shutter lag, however, caused us to miss a few good whale shots on a tour.

    I think it depends on what you plan on doing. If you figure on taking a lot of wildlife tours, you will definitely want a good zoom. If you will be spending more time just walking around the ship or ports of call, I think the Olympus 17mm or the Panansonic 20mm would be more handy with its better light gathering abilities.

    Also, be careful not to load up with too much weight. After a while just carrying the G11 and a few accessories around started to get a little old. Next time we are bringing a small backpack to keep everything in (gear + souvenirs).

    The cruise ship, while well-lit, can still be a little dark for taking photos inside depending on where you are. Dunno what you have for flash usage... but I just picked up a Vivitar DF-183 bounce flash and it runs on two "AA" batteries and is small enough to throw in a jacket pocket. Works fine on the E-P1 and supports the various flash functions (red eye, slow sync, etc.). For $50 through Amazon the price can't be beat.

    Don't forget the spare batteries for everything, too! Hope you have a great trip -- it is a blast!


    If we do go again, here's my plan for gear, if it helps:

    Camera
    Camera Pouch
    Wide or Normal Prime Lens
    Zoom Lens
    Spare Batteries
    Bounce Flash
    Small Backpack
    Lens Pen
    Pocket Tripod
    Extra Memory Cards
    Kayakers Dry Bag (at least big enough for camera)
    Bug Spray
    Small Swiss Army Knife (check w/cruise line first)