Is the 12-40mm good enough to forego 12mm, 17mm, 25mm and 45mm primes?

Started Mar 13, 2014 | Questions thread
WW Webster Regular Member • Posts: 369
Re: "Monster lens"?

Guy Parsons wrote:

The 40-150/2.8 Pro will be a monster lens, not the thing that you would carry every day unless you had a definite known deliberate purpose for it ...

A lens slated to be less than 7 inches long is a "monster lens"?  Are you serious?

While the weight of the 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro less has not yet been disclosed (to the best of my knowledge), I expect to positively enjoy carrying a lens of that quality around all day on my OM-D E-M1 in preference to my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS on my EOS 5D MkII.  Bring it on!

-- hide signature --
 WW Webster's gear list:WW Webster's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow