[Fight!] 25mm Pancake + 510/520 or 410/420/450 - what to do?

If you can fit the E-520 body in your jacket pocket, the pancake would probably fit along w it, as the lens doesn't add that much past the bulge of the grip.

On the 420, it seems to stick out further because the body is a tad slimmer... but if your pocket can't fit the 520 body, it probably won't fit the 420 + pancake. (Of course, that's useless info if you don't plan on ever putting the camera in your pocket)

Something else to consider: the two stiles use different batteries, and if you plan on upgrading to a newer body at some point, that might be a factor- the 4x0 shares the BLS battery w the 620, while the 5x0 shares the larger, higher capacity BLM battery w the E-3/30.

If possible, try both in your hand to see if one wins out over the other for you. but if it were me, I'd go w IS over smaller form factor (but then, I'm more apt to be shooting at 300mm than 25mm), and I prefer the 520's bigger grip anyway for my style of shooting
--
Art P
Select images may be seen here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sigvarius/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cecropia_grove/

It's such a backasswards argument that it is hard to answer.
Why would you get a 25mm pancake lens and then seek out a body for it?

Figure out which camera suits you best regardless of lens, and then if you have or if you want to buy the 25mm, do so.

I had the 520 without the 25mm for over a year before I got the pancake. I like the combo, but that is not why I would buy the E520.
--

Do you know anyone who loves old movies and Hollywood history? Tell me what I should do with this!
jeanharlowmural.com

I'll post some new POTD's if you guys will submit some images! potdgroup.com

Get a Canon G11: works for me !

Vjim
But I already have the Magical 620...

I also got the E520 with the 14-42, 40-150, 14-54 for about 7 months before purchasing the pancake - specially for those casual outings with friends and for an outfit that was so light I could forget I brought my camera!

The grip suits my hands perfectly, so the lighter weight of the E420 is irrelevant to me. IS really helps me so that's a plus to me too

--
Never stop learning.

trooplewis said:

It's such a backasswards argument that it is hard to answer.
Why would you get a 25mm pancake lens and then seek out a body for it?

Click to expand...

Eh? I can't count the number of times I've read - and also written myself - that first-time DSLR buyers should look closely at the lenses they want want and then choose a body to suit. As we all know, camera bodies come and go but the lenses, if chosen carefully, can be a life-long investment.

I don't find it hard at all to understand why someone would want the Olympus 25mm f/2.8 pancake and then try to decide which makes the most sense - the smaller E-420 or the IS-equipped E-520. The E-620/25mm would be brilliant but, as noted, that's a lot more money for a secondary camera.

Similarly, I wouldn't be surprised to find a fair number of people who wanted the supremely thin Pentax DA40mm f/2.8 pancake and then sought out a small Pentax body to go with it. I'd have bought one myself but that lens is now US$450 while I found the E-420/25mm kit new for just US$350. I already have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 in Pentax K-mount and so couldn't in my mind justify the DA40's limited scope and purpose for the money. (It doesn't help that the US$450 DA40 was only US$220 just two years ago when I probably should have bought it.)

--

Group Captain Mandrake: 'I was tortured by the Japanese, Jack, if you must know; not a pretty story....Strange thing is they make such bloody good cameras.' ( Dr. Strangelove , 1964)

Robert Schroeder said:

007peter said:

Which camera body would you personally Choose to go with 25mm pancake lens?

Click to expand...

None; I wouldn't buy the lens in the first place ;-)

For a prime, it is slow (all the more when taking sensor size into account), and its image quality isn't superior either—not bad, but not better than the kit zoom, which of course is already quite good.

Click to expand...

Slow? It is a mere 1.5 stops faster than the 14~42 ... And the IQ is marginally superior except for slightly more CA in zone 3 - about the same as one gets with the Nikon f1.4/50G ...

Robert Schroeder said:

For me, the 14-42 kit lens would be the more versatile option, while still being small and light. I've just bought one, with the original intention of selling it alongside my old E-510, which already gets even more ridiculously low prices without a lens these days, but I think I might keep it to go with my E-620, for those cases when I might want to really minimize size and weight of the gear I have to carry, but don't want to do without a DSLR.

Click to expand...

I have the 14~42 and f2.8/25 and use both, particularly with my E-510 ...

With pancake:

Robert Schroeder said:

And, personally, I wouldn't ever want to lose IS again. Gaining something like two to three EV steps of handholdability simply is too useful.

So my decision for a least-weight, smallest-size DSLR kit would probably be the E-600/620 (probably second-hand) with the kit zoom.

Click to expand...

I do not disagree. However, while the f2.8/25 is not in the same league as my f2/50 macro, it isn't all that bad, either! AND it is tiny. FAR smaller than the 14~42.

Robert Schroeder said:

If someone would give me the pancake lens as a present and forbid me to ever give it away, and the only options were the E-4x0 or E-5x0, I'd probably opt for the E-420 or E-450, because that would really minimize size and weight.

Click to expand...

The E-510 and pancake is only slightly larger than the E-4xx and pancake ...

Robert Schroeder said:

E-410 (and E-510) would be out of question if I needed out-of-cam JPEGs, which are clearly sub-par with these two cameras.

Click to expand...

That is just nonsense, Robert. The 14~42 is much larger and has ED lens elements making it more resistant to CA. However, the pancake is sharper centre to corner than the 14~42 and has only slightly more CA in zone 3.

Here is just one that I do not consider "sup-par" from an OoC HQ JPEG ( not SHQ) with just my standard automated PP for upload (nothing special ... How many hundreds of these would you like to see? Straight OoC, one can easily read the printing on the crane arm without any PP at all, E-510 + 14~42:



--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
-- -- --

The Camera doth not make the Man (or Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...

Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php



Bird Control Officers on active service.

Member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group

Agreed. Bodies come and go faster than lenses.

Sterling
--
Lens Grit

Bootstrap said:

amalric said:

I have explained my reasons in a further post.

And wouldn't take lessons is arrogance and brevity by such a master as you

Click to expand...

Brevity is my middle name. I detest logorrhea.

Bootstrap said:

BTW your Ferrari logo is a clear counterfeit: shame on you

Click to expand...

The avatar that you refer to is the chevron for the US Army 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment with whom I proudly served in Viet Nam in 1968. Please don't belittle the chevron or my service to my country.

Click to expand...

Didn't mean to. Fact is that this is a multinational evironment, and in mine that rampant horse (on a red field) is clearly the Ferrari's one. It was inherited from Francesco Baracca, a hero aviator of WWI.

No harm meant. Just an amazing coincidence.

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

I would agree if you were purchasing a middle-grade or higher lens, but we are talking about a $200 lens here, not a 50-200 SWD

The question is just not realistic.

Besides that, the lens applies no matter which body he chooses...it's not like a Nikon vs Canon lens/body question.
--

Do you know anyone who loves old movies and Hollywood history? Tell me what I should do with this!
jeanharlowmural.com

I'll post some new POTD's if you guys will submit some images! potdgroup.com

amalric said:

Didn't mean to. Fact is that this is a multinational evironment, and in mine that rampant horse (on a red field) is clearly the Ferrari's one. It was inherited from Francesco Baracca, a hero aviator of WWI.

No harm meant. Just an amazing coincidence.

Am.

Click to expand...

I think the Ferrari logo is almost always against a solid yellow background.

--

Do you know anyone who loves old movies and Hollywood history? Tell me what I should do with this!
jeanharlowmural.com

I'll post some new POTD's if you guys will submit some images! potdgroup.com

Gidday Troop

trooplewis said:

amalric said:

Didn't mean to. Fact is that this is a multinational evironment, and in mine that rampant horse (on a red field) is clearly the Ferrari's one. It was inherited from Francesco Baracca, a hero aviator of WWI.

No harm meant. Just an amazing coincidence.

Am.

Click to expand...

I think the Ferrari logo is almost always against a solid yellow background.

Click to expand...

You mean like this ...



[EDIT]
BTW, taken with E-510 and f2.8/25 ...
[end edit]
--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
-- -- --

The Camera doth not make the Man (or Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...

Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php



Bird Control Officers on active service.

Member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group

I would go with the L1. You don't need IS with this lens really, I do 1/16 sec no problems. The heft of the L1 helps with stability. The body is built better than the choices you mentioned. It has bounce flash a big plus. I don't use a filter on the lens, waste of time IMO. This lens has very good flare resistance so i don't even use a hood, which I do with most other lenses I use. The flat body and the pancake make a pretty nice combination.
--
Oll an gwella,
Jim

This combination has to look seriously ridicoulous
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zeegee/

zigi_S said:

This combination has to look seriously ridicoulous

Click to expand...

It might be true, from the point of view of the streetshooter or of the candids victims.

Size of the camera is not as obtrusive as the feeling that a big eye is observing all your pores, that is a big long zoom.

A pancake inspires an oldfashioned notion of respect and trust

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

007peter said:

Which camera body would you personally Choose to go with 25mm pancake lens?

To Olympus E510/520 owners. Do you find the size of 25mm pancake fits oddly on your bigger E510/520? Do you ever wish you could have traded in for a smaller E410/420/450 body? Or are you so happy that you have Image Stabilization that there really is no need for you to upgrade to E620 right now?

My argument for Bigger e510/e520:

• You're be sorry for not buying an Image Stabilized body sooner than later
• Most owners of e410/420 dump their body for a E620 eventually.
• I bought a lovely Sigma 18-50 Macro for Canon DSLR, but sold it due to lack of Image Stabilization. If I buy e410/e420 now, I'll just repeat my mistake once again.....

Arghh.......what is your opinion If you were me?

Click to expand...

Hi 007, I have the pancake(recent acquisition) with the 520 and the 620. The pancake is small and fits very nicely with either camera. Personally, I love the IS that the 520 offers and many people really like the added grip. The grip adds a bit of bulk to a very small package, but the IS is something that will pay off more if you intend on using longer lenses handheld . The grip is moot when using the pancake though, since the lens is so light. Of course, you get some benefit of IS with the pancake, but the payoff isn't as great as with the longer focal lengths - I still think that every little bit helps though. My answer: the 520 over the 4xx. The pancake always looks up and says...don't forget about me
Hope this helps, cheers!

zigi_S said:

This combination has to look seriously ridicoulous

Click to expand...

I take it that you want to see it? Happy to oblige.







--
Jyrki Leskelä

I have both the e410 and e510. I got the 410 first because of its size. It came with the two kit lenses and I was pleased with it. Then I got the 25mm as a birthday gift and that combo was wonderfully compact. I later found the e510 on close-out and got it.

I keep both to have a backup. I planned to use the 510 for longer lenses and manual focus Pentax lenses since the live view permits a magnified view for critical focus and use the 410 when space and weight is at premium but mostly I find the added bulk and mass of the 510 are more than compensated by the the very effective IS.
Just my zwei pfennig

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/colette_noir/

Jyrki Leskelä said:

zigi_S said:

This combination has to look seriously ridicoulous

Click to expand...

I take it that you want to see it? Happy to oblige.

Click to expand...

Funny, I find them rather beautiful

Lilianna said:

I have both the e410 and e510. I got the 410 first because of its size. It came with the two kit lenses and I was pleased with it. Then I got the 25mm as a birthday gift and that combo was wonderfully compact. I later found the e510 on close-out and got it.

I keep both to have a backup. I planned to use the 510 for longer lenses and manual focus Pentax lenses since the live view permits a magnified view for critical focus and use the 410 when space and weight is at premium but mostly I find the added bulk and mass of the 510 are more than compensated by the the very effective IS.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that is the kind of user input that I find very valuable. Am I correct to assume that if GOD forced you to sacrifice one camera: you would sacrifice the 410 and kept the e510 for the IS right?

Vandamage said:

My answer: the 520 over the 4xx. The pancake always looks up and says...don't forget about me

Click to expand...

I thank you for that Straight Forward Answer.