As I search for my next camera I am renting various mirrorless models. My current favorite is the Olympus OM-D E-M10. However, there is no suitable kit lens. Either you get a $100 piece of junk with an absurdly slow long end, or you have to buy a pro lens for $1000 which is too big for the M10 body and too slanted towards wide focal lengths. What is really needed is a 14-45mm or 14-50mm f/2.8-4 zoom of serious quality. Only Fuji with its 18-55mm for APS-C gets this right (at $700.) I would happily pay this much for an equally good M43 kit lens for the M10, but no such lens is available.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What M43 lacks is a good kit lens
- Thread starter clemcam
- Start date
-
- Tags
- olympus om-d e-m1
Michael M Fliegel
Veteran Member
Look at the MMF2 or MMF3 Adapter and a used 14-54 FT lens if you are not happy with the current kit lenses. I disagree with your statement that mFT has poor kit lenses. I would use the 14-42EZ if I did not already own the 14-54.
Glen Barrington
Veteran Member
I've been using my DSLR 14-54 MkI Zuiko lens on the M10. From what I've seen, none of the native lenses available for m4/3s in this range come even close to this lens. So far, I haven't seen any lens I like better that this delightful lens, but I DO wish it were a tad smaller physically.
d3xmeister
Veteran Member
I was actually very impressed with the new Olympus 14-42mm lenses. The collapsible and the new pancake zooms are probably the best kit lenses I ever tested.
Actually I do not see the point if a f2.8-f4 zoom, but I see the point of f/4 zooms, much cheaper and smaller than f/2.8.
So you see ? You cannot please everybody.
JohnLock
Veteran Member
Both the 12-35 and 12-40 are, IMO, suitable size and price for EM5 , EM10 and EM1 bodies. They're bigger than YOU want, but are optically excellent (I have both). I don't find it a big deal to carry either around. And the 12-35 can be found pretty reasonably now.
Would what you describe be nice? Yes.
JL
Would what you describe be nice? Yes.
JL
Fredrik Glckner
Veteran Member
I think "piece of junk" is far from correct.
You could add a bit more and get the Lumix X 12-35mm f/2.8, which is brilliant.
http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2013/01/lumix-x-12-35mm-f28-review.html
Michael M Fliegel
Veteran Member
Both my 14-54 and my 11-22 are 2.8-3.5. They are awesome. My 40-150 is 3.5-4.5 and just looks right on the EM1. Works way better than it has a right to. All of these lenses were made in Japan, in case you are a lens snob (which I am not!).
Ehh and would you consider those "kit" lenses.. Most would argue that that would be a rather expensive kit, or to me more direct, they are ceartainly NOT kit lenses.
Jakob
Michael M Fliegel
Veteran Member
I keep forgetting that lens (I don't own it). The bottom line is that there are lots of "kit" lenses available for mFT. Even the bargain ones are fine, but you get what you pay for. The kit lenses for ASPC Nikon and Cannon cameras are routinely trashed as pieces of junk ( I don't own Cannon or Nikon and I am only repeating what I have read).
Anders W
Veteran Member
If something is sold as a kit with the body, it's a kit lens, no? I bought my 12-40/2.8 that way.
Now if what you want is a less expensive standard zoom, there is the very good 14-45/3.5-5.6, regrettably no longer sold as a kit lens (sic) but easily available nevertheless.
Would something like a 12-50/2.8-4 be nice? Sure. I'd probably no longer buy it now that I have the 12-40/2.8 but it would certainly fill a niche in the MFT lens line.
The m43 lenses are not bad (only the 12-50 is lacklustre if I remember correctly). They are your average kitlenses. I contrast, Fuji does something really nice and good. I remember my 14-45 mm f3.5 f 5.6 being a more than average kitlens with my G1 and still have it. Since the 12-35 last year it is not used a lot anymore of course.
Also bear in mind that the 12-50 is weathersealed, has a macro function and offers a 24-100 mm range. IQ could be a lot better I guess
Now for bodies like the GM1, EPL and EPM series such a 14-42 mm F2,8 - F4 lens would be too big. The 12-50 is not offered with the EPL5 etc for that reason.
But for camera's like the GX7, OMD-series and G(H) series a non weatherseald 14-42 mm f2.8 to F4 with the same IQ like the 14-45 would be a nice option. May be too nice (interfering with 12-35 mm sales?)...
Also bear in mind that the 12-50 is weathersealed, has a macro function and offers a 24-100 mm range. IQ could be a lot better I guess
Now for bodies like the GM1, EPL and EPM series such a 14-42 mm F2,8 - F4 lens would be too big. The 12-50 is not offered with the EPL5 etc for that reason.
But for camera's like the GX7, OMD-series and G(H) series a non weatherseald 14-42 mm f2.8 to F4 with the same IQ like the 14-45 would be a nice option. May be too nice (interfering with 12-35 mm sales?)...
Paulmorgan
Veteran Member
Either you get a $100 piece of junk with an absurdly slow long end
What would you consider as being absurdly slow.
Many people here consider F5.6 as being ok yet think the Olympus 12-50mm is a lot slower at F6.3.
In the real world the difference is a tiny 1/3 of a stop
Paulmorgan
Veteran Member
The 14-54 was a good kit lens as was the 12-60 and new 12-40
Last edited:
Glen Barrington
Veteran Member
Well, technically, the 14-54 MkI WAS a kit lens. It was the kit lens for the very first 4/3s camera, the E1
Bhima78
Veteran Member
I actually agree. I think both Oly and Panasonic missed the boat by not offering a cheap, at least somewhat fast prime option as a kit lens to their cameras. I mean, Canon has a solid, small 22mm f2 for $120 which is easily kit lens prices, why is there not something like this for m43? I have an EM-10 with the standard kit zoom but I never use it anymore and all I have is a sigma 60mm.
At least Panny has sold a few of their cameras with the 14mm option (I believe some with the 20 1.7 as well but its just way overpriced imo). Oly tried with their pancake but its pretty shabby compared to the Canon 22mm f2. Too bad that Canon lens is only on the not so great EOS M system.
At least Panny has sold a few of their cameras with the 14mm option (I believe some with the 20 1.7 as well but its just way overpriced imo). Oly tried with their pancake but its pretty shabby compared to the Canon 22mm f2. Too bad that Canon lens is only on the not so great EOS M system.
Last edited:
Anders W
Veteran Member
Standard zoom would have been better. But a generous reader would get the idea anyway.
Olymore
Veteran Member
Everyone has their own price/quality points so perhaps they should introduce a $500 kit lens, a $700 kit lens and a $800 kit lens as well as the 4 Panasonic and 4 Olympus kit lenses.
And I'm sure somebody would complain that there wasn't a $600 kit lens that suited them.
I'm also puzzled you seem to think that the Olympus lens is too big but the Fuji isn't when their sizes are very similar?
If you don't mind slightly smaller apertures the old Panasonic 14-45mm F3.5- F5.6 kit lens is pretty good and has more reach than the Olympus (or the Fuji)
--
There are 10 types of people.
Those that understand binary and those that don't.
And I'm sure somebody would complain that there wasn't a $600 kit lens that suited them.
I'm also puzzled you seem to think that the Olympus lens is too big but the Fuji isn't when their sizes are very similar?
If you don't mind slightly smaller apertures the old Panasonic 14-45mm F3.5- F5.6 kit lens is pretty good and has more reach than the Olympus (or the Fuji)
--
There are 10 types of people.
Those that understand binary and those that don't.
Last edited:
jalywol
Veteran Member
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum