Olympus mFT 60mm f2.8 vs. FT 50mm f2.0 and 35mm macros?

Started Sep 29, 2012 | Discussions thread
Flat view
sderdiarian Veteran Member • Posts: 4,229
Olympus mFT 60mm f2.8 vs. FT 50mm f2.0 and 35mm macros?

Tale of the tape: the 60mm is almost an inch longer while more than 1/2" narrower (3.2 in. x 2.2 in. vs. 2.4 in. x 2.8 in.) and weighs about 4 oz. less (6.5 oz vs. 10.6 oz) than the 50mm.

The 50mm is a proven pro-quality build lens with great IQ (used by DPR for their Olympus camera tests) and comes with case and hood. But I've read the 50mm hunts in focusing, especially on mFT.

Both are currently priced at $500 on Amazon.

And then there's that pesky FT 35mm f3.5 macro at only $229 which, while slower, also receives rave reviews for IQ and is a compact 2.1 in. x 2.8 in. and 5.8 oz.

The FT's can be used both on my Olympus DSLR's and E-PM1 (have adapter), not so the 60mm, which does factor in a bit to my decision.

Which would you recommend and why? User reports appreciated.

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

 sderdiarian's gear list:sderdiarian's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II +1 more
Olympus PEN E-PM1
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Flat view
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow