Which Olympus all around lens for an old M1?

[Mountain_Man_79]

@John King There had to have been something wrong with mine then. Both my 14-42 (regular or pancake) kicked the snot out of that 12-50. It also felt like I was crushing pepper in a shaker when manually focusing that lens.
And I misspoke...I also sold off my 40-150Rii. Not because it was bad...it was actually an outstanding lens, especially for $99. I just no longer had a need for it when I got the 12-100 (still the best all around lens I think you can buy, to answer the OP).

 

[John King]

@John King There had to have been something wrong with mine then. Both my 14-42 (regular or pancake) kicked the snot out of that 12-50. It also felt like I was crushing pepper in a shaker when manually focusing that lens.

That does sound pretty bad to me, Chris ...

And I misspoke...I also sold off my 40-150Rii. Not because it was bad...it was actually an outstanding lens, especially for $99. I just no longer had a need for it when I got the 12-100 (still the best all around lens I think you can buy, to answer the OP).

I've still got my 40-150R.

I have light kits and heavier kits. Heavy would be E-M1 MkII + 12-100 + FTs 50-200 MkI. Really light is E-M1 MkI + 14-42 EZ with self-opening JJC lens cap.

 

[PakkyT]

I've still got my 40-150R.

Me too and I also have the 12-100 Pro. The "R" is so tiny and light and at only $99 brand new there is not a lot of money tied up in a very good image quality lens (when the lighting is good). Back when I was shooting the 12-60 SWD and then the Panny 12-35/2.8, I bought the "R" to go on vacations with me (instead of my normal 4/3rds 50-200mm). I took enough shots with it I feel as if I got my $99 out of it, so worth keeping.

I probably wouldn't take it with me when traveling with the 12-100 Pro just for the extra 50mm, but I might take it along on shorter trips where I was opting for my 17/25/45 f1.8 prime trio as the focal length of the "R" dovetails very nicely in with those lenses and has a similar size/weight to any of those so easy to bring along even if it doesn't get pulled out.

 

[John King]

@PakkyT For a light kit, the E-M1 MkI + 12-50 + 40-150R + 75-300 MkII is pretty good.

I like plenty of FL overlap with my zooms. Saves a lot of faffing about.

 

[mfturner]

+1 on either the 14-150ii or the p12-60 for hiking, depending on if you would like a wide angle or telephoto centric setup. It's hard to beat those with less weight and stay weather sealed. With the longer lenses you can chase butterflies and bees like i see in your Flickr with more standoff.

 

[Glawsder]

Another vote for the Panasonic 12-60- either of them, I have the Leica 2.8-4.0.

I had the 14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses and felt I needed wider, so I got a 12-32 just to see.
That convinced me that a 14---- lens was no good for me, had to be 12----
With the 12-32 and 40-150R I spent too much time changing lenses and not taking photos.

I bought the Leica after trying out both it and the Lumix version. I felt the extra speed and quality of the Leica were worth it.
The Lumix 12-60 is very good, better than both the 12-32 and 14-42 kit lenses I had.

12-60 means I don't change lenses unless I really want longer (40-150 or 75-300).
People question the weather sealing but I have never had a problem between the em1ii and 12-60, and have shot in very wet conditions.

 

[shreebles]

+1 on either the 14-150ii or the p12-60 for hiking, depending on if you would like a wide angle or telephoto centric setup. It's hard to beat those with less weight and stay weather sealed. With the longer lenses you can chase butterflies and bees like i see in your Flickr with more standoff.

Truth here, the Panny 12-60 is a really good lens for hiking. The extra reach is useful over the other zooms, I once used it to capture a signpost we missed while hiking, magnify on the screen and voila, we could see we went the right way

I don't have one anymore since I use mostly Olympus lenses now*, but it's the combination of useful, cheap, and sealed that makes it really easy to recommend. It's a hair sharper than the Oly 12-50mm (though it doesn't have its macro function) and not that much worse than either the 12-40 or 12-35mm pro zooms.

And it pairs really well with the E-M1 Mark 1, it's lightweight and a good length/weight. A 12-40 Pro is still on the large/heavy side for the first E-M1 with its short grip.

*therefore, going on a similar hike today I would bring a 12-45mm F4 Pro and the 40-150R, or the 12-200mm zoom.

 

[Lawrence A.]

Although I like my 12-40 f2.8 better (one of the best lenses I own), I never understood the hostility to the 12-50. I don't think it is a great lens, but it is a perfectly good lens. I know the original poster said the 12-40 focal length is something he wouldn't use much, but if he saw what an excellent lens it is, he might change his mind. Except when I use the 75-300 for birds, or feel like shooting with a prime, the Olympus 12-40 f2.8 lives on my Pen-F.

 

[Holoholo55]

Me too and I also have the 12-100 Pro. The "R" is so tiny and light and at only $99 brand new there is not a lot of money tied up in a very good image quality lens (when the lighting is good). Back when I was shooting the 12-60 SWD and then the Panny 12-35/2.8, I bought the "R" to go on vacations with me (instead of my normal 4/3rds 50-200mm). I took enough shots with it I feel as if I got my $99 out of it, so worth keeping.

I probably wouldn't take it with me when traveling with the 12-100 Pro just for the extra 50mm, but I might take it along on shorter trips where I was opting for my 17/25/45 f1.8 prime trio as the focal length of the "R" dovetails very nicely in with those lenses and has a similar size/weight to any of those so easy to bring along even if it doesn't get pulled out.

Agreed that the 40-150R is still a keeper for me despite having the 40-150 Pro. It was part of my kit when I bought my first M43, an EM5 w/12-50. It is great in a light kit with the P12-32 or O12-40. For a travel kit in combo with a 12-40, it is light and compact. However, now that I have a 12-100 like you, I'd leave the 40-150R behind, figuring that the all-purpose Pro lens will be enough for travel. I gave it to my son as a kit with an EM10 II and a 14-42 kit lens, then acquired another one when my friend gave me his PM2 kit with the same lenses. Still a keeper.

 

[CD77]

My walk around kit for use during the day is currently a pair of lenses... P12-32mm and P45-175. Both are decently sharp (especially the 12-32), both are extremely light and they work great as pair to cover wide through to telephoto. I tend to have the 45-175 on most of the time whilst out and about as it covers a good FL range for landscapes wildlife and even street (although I prefer primes for street), and the 12-32 comes out when I need a little wider.

 

[Macroramphosis]

My walk around kit for use during the day is currently a pair of lenses... P12-32mm and P45-175. Both are decently sharp (especially the 12-32), both are extremely light and they work great as pair to cover wide through to telephoto. I tend to have the 45-175 on most of the time whilst out and about as it covers a good FL range for landscapes wildlife and even street (although I prefer primes for street), and the 12-32 comes out when I need a little wider.

This is exactly what I have in my daily bag too. And just like Chris I have the P45-175 on the camera, and the P12-32 alongside it. That's in the tiny bag. The medium bag puts the 12-32 on the G6 (so there are two bodies sharing the same batteries to hand), and the P30mm macro alongside it - this means less lens swapping, obviously.

Unlike Chris, though, I think my 45-175 is outstandingly sharp for the money.

Unfortunately, there is so much choice you will be forever confused. Sigh.

 

[CD77]

This is exactly what I have in my daily bag too. And just like Chris I have the P45-175 on the camera, and the P12-32 alongside it. That's in the tiny bag. The medium bag puts the 12-32 on the G6 (so there are two bodies sharing the same batteries to hand), and the P30mm macro alongside it - this means less lens swapping, obviously.

Unlike Chris, though, I think my 45-175 is outstandingly sharp for the money.

Unfortunately, there is so much choice you will be forever confused. Sigh.

Don't get me wrong... the P45-175 is sharp, it's just not as sharp as the P12-32, and probably not as sharp as a couple of the other lenses that have been discussed (12-40 PRO and 12-100 PRO). I also tend to carry a macro with me, in my case the O60 macro... you never know when you'll need to get up close and personal!