Please don't compare...

Started May 28, 2012 | Discussions
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Please don't compare...
May 28, 2012

There is such an overload of information and opinions here that it is soooooo difficult to sift through all the posts. Please forgive me in advance if this has been addressed before, but just really trying to figure this out...

I am locked into the FT system and just went micro about 30 days ago with purchase of e-m5, so I don't want to compare to FF in this post especially since I am surrounded by FF users that do enough of that.

I just want to make wise lens choices going forward. So, I have the e-m5 with 12-50mm kit lens and was over zealous and bought the 40-150mm lens too. I may perhaps regret that one. Also, I recently purchased the 45mm f/1.8 which I love using very much... get great results (I think)

My interest now is to only purchase fast lenses whether they be zoom or prime, and I really prefer to have autofocus option. There seem to be several options available or soon to be available. Although, they also seem very difficult to aquire.

Looking for lens advice, so that I make good choices. Thanks in advance for any insight that you can provide...

BTW - not interested in shooting sports or animal wildlife unless they are in the zoo. I shoot architecture, macro, still life, floral/gardens and trying to get into portraiture as well. Basically anything that won't talk back, but doesn't hide from me (like birds and such)

Promit
Contributing MemberPosts: 912Gear list
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

The 20/1.7 and 25/1.4 are immensely popular lenses, and with good reason. Those would be the ones to look at for fast AF lenses. There's also the 75/1.8 coming if you want to go longer.

 Promit's gear list:Promit's gear list
Sony SLT-A77 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Sony a77 II +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to Promit, May 28, 2012

The 20 and 25 that you mention are ones that I am looking at on-line... think I really want the 25 (badly), but it seems to be back ordered everywhere. Do you know if this will autofocus on the e-m5? It sounds like it would be a really sweet lens to have. Definitely could have used it this past Saturday during a garden shoot... used my 45mm f/1.8 and struggled with composition, but I didn't want to switch to the slower zoom lens. Tried to attach a photo of a rose I captured to my original post, but didn't seem to work.

Promit wrote:

The 20/1.7 and 25/1.4 are immensely popular lenses, and with good reason. Those would be the ones to look at for fast AF lenses. There's also the 75/1.8 coming if you want to go longer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Makinations
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,688Gear list
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to Promit, May 28, 2012

Those are nice. There is also a 60mm macro coming. You might want the 12mm f2. If you want a fast wide that is about your only real option.

There is also a 12-35 f2.8 coming in, I think, August.

Promit wrote:

The 20/1.7 and 25/1.4 are immensely popular lenses, and with good reason. Those would be the ones to look at for fast AF lenses. There's also the 75/1.8 coming if you want to go longer.

 Makinations's gear list:Makinations's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Olympus XZ-1 Canon EOS 40D Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

meant to attach this photo to my post... taken in the rain with 45mm f/1.8

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Makinations
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,688Gear list
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

It works fine on the e-m5.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/smrlabs/7179725920/in/photostream

I've had no issues with any of my Panny m43 lenses on my e-m5.

YTreePhotography wrote:

The 20 and 25 that you mention are ones that I am looking at on-line... think I really want the 25 (badly), but it seems to be back ordered everywhere. Do you know if this will autofocus on the e-m5? It sounds like it would be a really sweet lens to have. Definitely could have used it this past Saturday during a garden shoot... used my 45mm f/1.8 and struggled with composition, but I didn't want to switch to the slower zoom lens. Tried to attach a photo of a rose I captured to my original post, but didn't seem to work.

Promit wrote:

The 20/1.7 and 25/1.4 are immensely popular lenses, and with good reason. Those would be the ones to look at for fast AF lenses. There's also the 75/1.8 coming if you want to go longer.

 Makinations's gear list:Makinations's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Olympus XZ-1 Canon EOS 40D Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,252
Like?
A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

Architecture: three chioces: the very expensive 12 2.0, the expensive but very wide 7-14, the less expensive, smaller, and less wide 9-18.

Tele? Oly 75-300, Panasonic 100-300. Both are fairly small, neither particularly cheap. Only drawback there is that both are somewhat slow lenses, can start going soft in less than good light.

I use an older non SWD version of the Olympus 50-200, which is very fast at F2.8-3.5, and doesn't go soft in shaded forests. AF with this lens on the EM5 is slower at around 1.5 seconds, and it's a big lens, but it's also a bargain - the older 50-200's are going for around $500 on the used market. Factor in the 4/3 adapter, around $150 or so.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to TrapperJohn, May 28, 2012

See I thought I really, really, really wanted this lens... just needed some feedback from someone that wasn't a nay sayer or salesperson trying to take my $. Thank you so much TrapperJohn, I had so much difficulty sifting through all the rubble trying to figure this out.

Any suggestions on how I can make this happen sooner rather than later. i.e. where to buy... it is currently backordered at b&h and I doubt that I would have any better luck at the two local camera shops I go to.

TrapperJohn wrote:

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jogger
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,380Gear list
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to TrapperJohn, May 28, 2012

TrapperJohn wrote:

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

Thats an odd length for a portrait lens. If you get close for a head and should shot, the perspective gets wonky (doesnt give you much working distance either). The 45/1.8 is a far better portrait lens.

Architecture: three chioces: the very expensive 12 2.0, the expensive but very wide 7-14, the less expensive, smaller, and less wide 9-18.

Tele? Oly 75-300, Panasonic 100-300. Both are fairly small, neither particularly cheap. Only drawback there is that both are somewhat slow lenses, can start going soft in less than good light.

I use an older non SWD version of the Olympus 50-200, which is very fast at F2.8-3.5, and doesn't go soft in shaded forests. AF with this lens on the EM5 is slower at around 1.5 seconds, and it's a big lens, but it's also a bargain - the older 50-200's are going for around $500 on the used market. Factor in the 4/3 adapter, around $150 or so.

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to Jogger, May 28, 2012

Since I already have the 45mm f/1.8, I feel like I am at least headed in the right direction. My interest in the 25mm f/1.4 is more for floral/garden and the f/1.4 is very attractive too. I'm finding that I really like selective focus more and more.

Just trying to determine if it is a wise choice or should I wait to see what Olympus comes out with.

Jogger wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

Thats an odd length for a portrait lens. If you get close for a head and should shot, the perspective gets wonky (doesnt give you much working distance either). The 45/1.8 is a far better portrait lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Diane B
Forum ProPosts: 20,484
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

I've had the 20 for several years but bought the 25/1.4 from Adorama a couple of weeks ago when they had a shipment. I love it for many of the subjects you mention. I carry it and the 45/2.8 macro all the time as my small kit.

You might try Kenmore Camera in Seattle area as they seem to get Panny bodies and lenses when it seems no one else does. Also Samy's on the west coast,

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38647240@N00/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
phototransformations
Senior MemberPosts: 2,735Gear list
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

I'd think you'd get more out of the 75 1.8 for isolated flowers and such than wit the 25 1.4. Perhaps you should try shooting at 20, 25, and 75 with your existing lenses to see which focal lengths best suit what you'd like to shoot.

The Raynox 150 or 250 attached to the longer tele lenses is a decent quality macro setup. Any of the legacy macro lenses are also good choices.

YTreePhotography wrote:

Since I already have the 45mm f/1.8, I feel like I am at least headed in the right direction. My interest in the 25mm f/1.4 is more for floral/garden and the f/1.4 is very attractive too. I'm finding that I really like selective focus more and more.

Just trying to determine if it is a wise choice or should I wait to see what Olympus comes out with.

Jogger wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

Thats an odd length for a portrait lens. If you get close for a head and should shot, the perspective gets wonky (doesnt give you much working distance either). The 45/1.8 is a far better portrait lens.

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +22 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Makinations
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,688Gear list
Like?
Re: A couple of non-comparisons...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

Do try your local shops. I know the shop by me has one. In fact I think the last 4 items I've purchased there (E-M5, PL 25 f1.4, E-M5 grip and Oly 45 f1.8) were not available from Amazon or B+H (At least not where I was in the waiting list.) at the time I found them on the shelf of my local shop.

I think all the camera makers have been doing more to get their cameras in front of people at brick and mortar shops rather than only online.

YTreePhotography wrote:

See I thought I really, really, really wanted this lens... just needed some feedback from someone that wasn't a nay sayer or salesperson trying to take my $. Thank you so much TrapperJohn, I had so much difficulty sifting through all the rubble trying to figure this out.

Any suggestions on how I can make this happen sooner rather than later. i.e. where to buy... it is currently backordered at b&h and I doubt that I would have any better luck at the two local camera shops I go to.

TrapperJohn wrote:

Portraits: the PL25 1.4. Look no further, that is what you need.

 Makinations's gear list:Makinations's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Olympus XZ-1 Canon EOS 40D Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,252
Like?
I think otherwise, PL25 is a great portrait lens
In reply to Jogger, May 28, 2012

but maybe it's just me.

I've had the 4/3 version of the PL25 for about four years, and it works great on the EM5. Even a bit sharper than the M43 version.

And I tried the ZD 50M for portraits and the 45 1.8 that I now have, but both had me backing up a lot. I find the PL25's AOV to be a bit more intimate in use, easier to use because it doesn't have me walking back several feet, and its bokeh to be absolutely gorgeous.

Just my take... there's something to be said for the 'nifty fifty', which the PL25 emulates exactly.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,252
Like?
What I used for flowers
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

on 4/3 was the ZD 50 F2 plus twin head macro flash. If you're after individual blossoms, this was a terrific combination, because it blacked out the background by underexposing it away - the macro flash highlights a single bloom very nicely.

Having said that... if you've tried the 45 1.8 for flowers but find the AOV lacking, you might go longer, not shorter. Trouble there is, it gets pricey. I've shot a couple of lilly blossoms yesterday with an old Nikkor 105 1.8, and it did pretty good, so perhaps the 75 1.8 might do better in that regard.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Klarno
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,223Gear list
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

If you're to have one telephoto zoom lens (which I personally think is something even a prime-centric shooter should have), you picked the right one. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 40-150, it's one of the sharpest lenses (and arguably the single sharpest lens) in the entire lineup. And it's so lightweight that taking it with you as an extra lens when you need it simply isn't an issue.

As for what fast primes to get, you already have the one that gets the best cost-benefit ratings, and what others you get will simply depend on how you shoot.

Here's the thing about the 20mm and the 25mm: they're both great lenses. But people who have both end up never using the 20mm again. The 25mm Summilux just has that extra special something in its rendering, even if it's a significantly different focal length. Plus its autofocus is superior for video and C-AF (if you even care about that sort of thing).

But beware, they're not particularly close focus lenses. The closest focus for the 25mm is 15", providing 0.17x magnification; the closest focus for the 20mm is about 8", but with the difference in focal length it actually provides less magnification, at 0.13x. These might be ok for getting the context of the scene, and should be fine for still life photography. But they're not macros. Nor are the 45mm f/1.8 or 75mm f/1.8, which both offer even less magnification than the 20mm.

Your best options for closeups will be the 12-50 (which you already have), the Panasonic 45mm f/2.8 or upcoming Olympus 60mm f/2.8. You can also get the Olympus macro adapter which is designed to be used with the 40-150.
--
http://www.photoklarno.com

 Klarno's gear list:Klarno's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM2 A3000 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Some options with lots of image samples
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

40-150 is a great lens for wildlife, architecture (detail shots) and some close focus work, here are some samples:

I feel the 45mm is fantastic for portraits, some samples:

But dont dismiss the 17mm as an all rounder, you can get it dirt cheap and it is really a very nice lens:

Good luck with your choices.

-- hide signature --

alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Iskender
Senior MemberPosts: 1,313
Like?
40-150 Great
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

Here are all the official lenses in the system, minus a couple of constant aperture zooms from Panasonic which will appear in the near future:
http://four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html

You shouldn't underestimate the 40-150, especially since you seem to like selective focus. It's in no way even close to being a macro, but the 90 cm close focus means you get a ton of background blur...in fact the DOF should be a bit thinner at 150/5.6 than you get at closest focus with the 45/1.8! Certainly the 150mm angle of view is not always what you want, but it works great in many situations.

In addition to this the 40-150 covers a large range and is excellent for trying things out, with close or distant focus. It's also slightly lighter than the 25/1.4, even if it isn't as small. Basically a great allrounder as long as there is light, and in lower light it will do an excellent job too with image stabilization and a tripod. Don't be fooled by the cheap exterior.

Here's an example of what you can do with this slow lens (Four Thirds SLR version in use here):

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jalywol
jalywol MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,897Gear list
Like?
Re: Please don't compare...
In reply to YTreePhotography, May 28, 2012

First, don't disparage the 40-150mm. It is an inexpensive lens, but it has great color, excellent sharpness, and can produce very fine images. I have one and still use it on my Panasonic bodies, even though it is not stabilized. I think you will find it more useful than you are expecting, especially in outdoor situations.

Second, I think your other lens choices so far are just fine. The 45mm Oly is a stellar lens at a great price, and the kit lens for the OMD is water resistant and has macro in addition to it being a good all purpose lens.

Now, on to your future lens purposes:

If you do architectural work and you want primes, your two choices are the 12mm f2 or the 14mm f2.5. I have both, and like them both; but the 12mm has some microcontrast and color balance magic to it that makes it stand out. Is it worth 4x the cost of the 14mm? (you can get the 14mm for about 160 on Ebay). Well, maybe. That's one of those things you would have to decide for yourself after trying the lenses. I personally would hate to give mine up, but if I had never gotten it, I could have done ok with the 14mm in its stead.

I had the 20mm and the focal length was not one I used much, so I sold it. It is a very sharp and fast lens, however it is not super speedy to focus. The 25mm f 1.4 might be a much better choice for your purposes, as it is quite fast and has legendary optical output. If I were going to get a lens in that range again, I would definitely get the 25mm over the 20mm.....

As others have mentioned, there is one zoom coming that meets the need for speed; the Panny 12-35mm. It looks to be an excellent lens, but it does cost more. You may also want to look into the Oly 75mm that will be out soon if you want a longer lens that is very fast.....

Lots of choices, but I think the place to start would be the 12mm or the 14mm and the 25mm primes, and then go from there as you figure out what your shooting style is and what other focal lengths you would use with this system.

-J

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YTreePhotography
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: 40-150 Great
In reply to Iskender, May 28, 2012

Klarno and Iskender both - Your photos are great. Thanks for sharing.

Also, thanks for the pep talk about the 40-150mm lens. No one likes to think that they made a bad lens choice, and I thought it was a good decision at the time. I really need to peruse the M43 forums more instead of listening to FF fanatics that talk down about the system although there is a lot of that going in the MFT forum too. It gets me very depressed and second guessing my choices. Tired of hearing that I won't achieve as shallow DOF, or sharp focus, or limited in print size, the list goes on...

This was really helpful. I tried getting answers by tacking onto other threads that were discussing a specific lens, but got lost in the shuffle. I wish there was a forum just for MFT users that didn't allow FF comparisons... like it was against the rules. I think it just muddies the waters and keeps the real answers from being presented. All in all, I feel better about my current equipment and will do some more experimenting. Although, I do think I need that 25mm f/1.4... it does sound like a nice piece of glass to carry around. I think I would use it a lot even though I have the 12-50mm lens too. Each one has it's own purpose. Attached is a photo I captured with the macro setting on my 12-50mm lens. I was happy with the results... and that is all that matters

Iskender wrote:

You shouldn't underestimate the 40-150, especially since you seem to like selective focus. It's in no way even close to being a macro, but the 90 cm close focus means you get a ton of background blur...in fact the DOF should be a bit thinner at 150/5.6 than you get at closest focus with the 45/1.8! Certainly the 150mm angle of view is not always what you want, but it works great in many situations.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads