An obituary for my 12-50mm

Started Mar 18, 2014 | Discussions thread
Contributing MemberPosts: 884Gear list
Sharpness throughought the range is worth it
In reply to Weegee, Mar 18, 2014

Weegee wrote:

You're starting to add weight that you went to micro 4/3 to avoid! And I'll bet that only 20%, if that many, of your pictures will be taken at f/2.8. Let's face it, you have GAS ( like I have, once in a while! ).

Enjoy the extra weight and girth.

That extra weight and girth is so worth having a long end that doesn't have to be stopped down like crazy to get decent results.  I think that's what I like the best, not necessarily the 2.8.  It's good everywhere in the range.  I'll admit, if you do most of your shooting around 12mm and F4 or above, the 12-50 is fine.  The 12-50 was good at 12, but much worse as you zoomed out.  I doubt the 10mm extra reach even matters much at that point, when I see how much I can crop on the tele end with the 12-40.

Sure, for my purposes a lighter, variable aperture 12-40 would've been nice to be a bit lighter.  But considering I lug the 12-40 just fine up mountains around my shoulder, the extra girth and weight is fine for me.

If I was really wanting to go light, I'd skip the 12-50 all together.  It's sure nice to have a continuum of options available. 

 Wallybipster's gear list:Wallybipster's gear list
Olympus E-620 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow