Drop $350 on a 45mm prime when you've already got the 14-42mm kit lens?

Started May 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
sean000 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,356
Re: The other thing is, you can get by with a MF nifty fifty

dougjgreen1 wrote:

To me, the 20mm f1.7 made more sense because there's no way to get a fast compact legacy lens on the cheap to serve the purpose of something in the 17-20mm range. But if you can deal with manual focus, you can get a cheap old ~f1.8 ish nifty fifty for well under $50 including the adapter. If you find that you need that focal length in a high speed AF lens, you can always get one down the road.

This is true. I used a Nikon 50mm f/1.8D for about a year before I bought the 45mm f/1.8. The reason I bought the Oly 45mm is because our daughter started walking and moving around a lot faster. Even though I had gotten pretty quick on the draw with MF by then, I started missing shots that autofocus would have captured.

I would love the Oly 75mm f/1.8, but currently I am getting by using a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 (Nikon F Mount) on my E-M5. It's great for outdoor portraits, and it's reasonably small and easy to carry. It's also a macro lens.


 sean000's gear list:sean000's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow