Oly EP5 with 12-40 F2.8 vs Sony a6000 with 24-70Z

JPTHEOG · Oct 6, 2014

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 6, 2014

Probably the best one-lens solution for walk-around: 24-105mm equiv coverage, and the lens is fairly light and small to be useful in that regard for a6000 body.

FE 24-70 will give you same reach but will limit you at the wider end (it will be 35-105mm equiv on a6000).

JPTHEOG · Oct 6, 2014

made a mistake, meant the 16-70 lens

quezra · Oct 6, 2014

The 16-70/4 will certainly be a very good single lens to have, if you only have one lens, but it won't replace what you currently have.

The Sony 16/2.8 is no match for the Oly 12/2 (of course they are in different leagues). On the other hand, the SEL 50/1.8 significantly beats the Oly 45/1.8 while being effectively faster:

The 55-210 will probably also comfortably beat the Oly 40-150. (You should play with the "field map" measurements on DxOMark to see comparisons like the above for yourself e.g. 55-210 vs 40-150: click "Measurements" > "Sharpness" > "Field Map" then select a variety of focal lengths and apertures)

You might get away with getting the SEL 35/1.8 for your lowlight purposes, and 16-70/4 for everything else, including portrait (70/4 is sufficiently thin DoF for most portrait purposes). And then the 55-210 for tele, or else one of the 18-200s.

Camley · Oct 6, 2014

superstar905 said:
I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

JPTHEOG · Oct 6, 2014

Camley said:
superstar905 said:

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Click to expand...

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

definitly NOT an advertisement. reasons for liking one over the mjght resonate with me

captura · Oct 6, 2014

"The 55-210 will probably also comfortably beat the Oly 40-150"

In fact that is very true, I have both. There is, however, an brand new 40-150 model which is not a replacement and is quite expensive. Confusing, eh?

captura · Oct 6, 2014

Camley said:
superstar905 said:

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Click to expand...

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

Obviously NOT an advertisement. The OP is unusually well-informed to know this already, which is NOT a pro-Pana. statement:

"I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather."

I believe the poster's question is genuine and he deserves the respect & courtesy which he expected, when he posted on this forum.

Camley · Oct 6, 2014

superstar905 said:
JPTHEOG said:

superstar905 said:

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Click to expand...

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

Click to expand...

definitly NOT an advertisement. reasons for liking one over the mjght resonate with me

Well tell me the odds of you moving from Olympus to Sony - please be honest.

captura · Oct 6, 2014

Camley said:
superstar905 said:

Camley said:

superstar905 said:

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Click to expand...

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

Click to expand...

definitly NOT an advertisement. reasons for liking one over the mjght resonate with me

Click to expand...

Well tell me the odds of you moving from Olympus to Sony - please be honest.

Tell him something helpful or leave him alone, please.

captura · Oct 6, 2014

superstar905 said:
JPTHEOG said:

Camley said:

superstar905 said:

JPTHEOG said:

superstar905 said:

I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Click to expand...

Your post seems more of an advertisement for Olympus than a genuine question.

My unbalanced view is that the m43 forum will tell you to buy an m43 product and this forum will tell you to buy a Sony product, so you gain nothing.

To make an informed decision, try them out in a camera store and read all the reviews.

Click to expand...

definitly NOT an advertisement. reasons for liking one over the mjght resonate with me

Click to expand...

Well tell me the odds of you moving from Olympus to Sony - please be honest.

Click to expand...

Tell him something helpful or leave him alone, please.

Click to expand...

thank you, lol. i'll respond in the morning with some more context, but a quick look at my posting history might yield some clues as to my desire for a one lens setup.

Similar to mine, actually. Did you read the DPR posts where a lot of LX100 owners don't think it resolves very well? Not as well as the RX100 III?

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 6, 2014

superstar905 said:
made a mistake, meant the 16-70 lens

Now...

superstar905 said:
I am truly searching for a one lens solution... I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I can't see how a 12-40mm lens can meet your one-lens solution expectation with "sports" included (much less your previous consideration of LX100 which had even less reach). Even with Sony 16-70, you'd have to get closer but it is a lens I'd put my money on, for its versatility.

JPTHEOG said:
I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

In-camera options are a matter of making adjustments to settings in your camera, and using those features (E-mount cameras have had selective color options since the first bodies). Yes, 1/8000s shutter speed is nice, but not when your base ISO is 200 (which is the case with many m43 cameras)... then it becomes a necessity. IBIS is a moot point, when you have optically stabilized lens when you're looking at that one-lens. Am I missing something?

JPTHEOG said:
I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

Then skip zooms, or compliment zoom with a fast prime (larger sensor, faster prime, better low-light combination). I compliment my 16-50/2.8 (Sony A-mount) with 35/1.8 and 50/1.4 (or 50/1.7) lenses. Sony 16-70/4 would go well with either 35/1.8 or 50/1.8, or both, depending on your budget. Sony 35/1.8 OSS is my "kit lens" on NEX-6.

JPTHEOG said:
I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

JPTHEOG · Oct 7, 2014

ok, let me better clarify my needs. Mostly, its a walkabout lens. Good for travel, good for family photos mostly indoors with relatively low light, and when I say sports I mean my kids soccer games when I am on the sidelines. architechture would fall into the travel category as often you are snapping building exteriors and interiors.

So this is why I like the 12mm f2 m43 lens, it does the job at night and anytime the light is not the best. The 12-32mm lumix is great for most daylight operations, and when I need the reach, I have a 40-150 oly which is cheap bit performs well above its paygrade. lastly, I have a 45 f1.8 oly which gives me nice portraits, and just great subject isolation in a crowd which I like. my kids are 2 active boys who are 4 and 5!

what I am hoping in a quality zoom is something that will cover the above uses except for the telephoto which I would keep on a second body. I like the rangefinder style body and absolutely love the EP5, but I am open to suggestions.

My fear, is that no matter how good the 12-40 Oly lens is and large aperture, the 16-70 on the a6000 might be better at giving me more comparable low light shots to my 12 f2 based on the better sensor. it is also a slightly smaller package and has a bpunce flash which is actually quite important since the size of either lens would probably cast shadows. I suppose the flipside is I can get 12-40 factory reconditioned from Oly for under $500 when they have their promo but that is not really the deciding factor. I believe from looking at full res photos the Oly is sharper and generally a better lens while I'll probably achieve thinner DOF on the Sony.

anyways, hope that helps.

ultimately, I hate changing lenses.

quezra · Oct 7, 2014

How important is small size to you? It strikes me that you could simply get the FZ1000 and sell off the 12-32 and 40-150, keeping the 12/2 and 45/1.8 for your above-mentioned specialist use. I don't think the 16-70 will quite replace those two primes. It would however replace the 12-40 (since it is basically similar to a MFT 12-52/2.8)

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 7, 2014

superstar905 said:
My fear, is that no matter how good the 12-40 Oly lens is and large aperture, the 16-70 on the a6000 might be better at giving me more comparable low light shots to my 12 f2 based on the better sensor.

I don't consider f/2.8 or f/4 to be "large aperture" lenses. Large aperture would be f/2 and faster which takes away your zoom options. Zooms, I see as a tool for convenience and versatility, as in a one-lens solution, not as a replacement for speed. This is why, as I said above, I compliment my 16-50/2.8 zoom lens with f/1.4-1.8 prime(s), former for versatility, latter for speed. So, you will not see me recommend f/2.8 or f/4 zooms as a substitute for f/2 or faster lens.

If you want a one-lens solution, consider Sony RX10 instead. You get 24-200/2.8 coverage in one camera. A MkII is now overdue so you can even expect good deals on the MkI. Then use rangefinder style cameras the way they were always meant to be: with primes.

JPTHEOG said:
it is also a slightly smaller package and has a bpunce flash which is actually quite important since the size of either lens would probably cast shadows. I suppose the flipside is I can get 12-40 factory reconditioned from Oly for under $500 when they have their promo but that is not really the deciding factor. I believe from looking at full res photos the Oly is sharper and generally a better lens while I'll probably achieve thinner DOF on the Sony.
anyways, hope that helps.

ultimately, I hate changing lenses.

JPTHEOG · Oct 7, 2014

quezra said:
How important is small size to you? It strikes me that you could simply get the FZ1000 and sell off the 12-32 and 40-150, keeping the 12/2 and 45/1.8 for your above-mentioned specialist use. I don't think the 16-70 will quite replace those two primes. It would however replace the 12-40 (since it is basically similar to a MFT 12-52/2.8)

let me highlight my issue. recentlu went to disney, numerous venues where I swapped between indoor and outdoor venues,constantly swapped between the 12 and 12-32, drove me nuts. I don't think going to a smaller sensor where the glass is not fast is the answer, and that is why I had such high hopes for the LX100. I think the 12-40 is big, but I think it would be fine if it accomplished what I needed. Since i'm not sure of that, this is why i'm looking at the 16-70 thinking maybe larger sensor, thinner DOF,ight give me the bokeh and all around lens, just not sure about indoor low light.......which is a lot of my photography, family! Another reason why the bounce flash appeals to be, help me capture the kids moving.

EinsteinsGhost · Oct 7, 2014

superstar905 said:
JPTHEOG said:

How important is small size to you? It strikes me that you could simply get the FZ1000 and sell off the 12-32 and 40-150, keeping the 12/2 and 45/1.8 for your above-mentioned specialist use. I don't think the 16-70 will quite replace those two primes. It would however replace the 12-40 (since it is basically similar to a MFT 12-52/2.8)

Click to expand...

let me highlight my issue. recentlu went to disney, numerous venues where I swapped between indoor and outdoor venues,constantly swapped between the 12 and 12-32, drove me nuts. I don't think going to a smaller sensor where the glass is not fast is the answer, and that is why I had such high hopes for the LX100. I think the 12-40 is big, but I think it would be fine if it accomplished what I needed. Since i'm not sure of that, this is why i'm looking at the 16-70 thinking maybe larger sensor, thinner DOF,ight give me the bokeh and all around lens, just not sure about indoor low light.......which is a lot of my photography, family! Another reason why the bounce flash appeals to be, help me capture the kids moving.

I'm not sure why you thought LX100 was going to break a new ground. It is simply a larger RX100 III with likely similar sensor performance and has the same lens specs. Neither is a solution to thin DOF.

The f/2.8 zoom on m43 won't be either. Or, Sony 16-70/4 on its APS-C sensor. The best bet for DOF control comes at the long end of the zoom where 70mm f/4 can be pretty good choice for a portrait option on APS-C.

For both low light and greater DOF control, consider no shorter than 50mm (equiv) FL, and no slower than f/2. A 35mm f/1.8 is borderline useful for that purpose on APS-C (25/1.4 on m43), a 50mm f/1.8 is very good on APS-C (35-40mm f/1.4 would give similar performance on m43).

This is using Sony Alpha NEX-6 at 70mm f/5.6:

NEX-6, Sigma 70/2.8 (at f/5.6)

JPTHEOG · Oct 7, 2014

Thanks! Nice photo by the way and good commentary by you and others.

I thought the LX100 would break new ground because if the fast lens and large sensor, I don't think that was unreasonable. I suspect there are simply too many compromises in the lens design.

Here is what the LX100 lens covers and its various F-stop values.

24mm = f1.7

25mm = f1.8

26mm = f1.9

27mm = f2

28mm = f2.1

30mm = f2.2

34mm = f2.3

37mm = f2.4

41mm = f2.5

44mm = f2.6

49mm = f2.7

52mm - 75mm = f2.8

My expectations for achieving nice Bokeh are not unreasonable, actually your 70mm sample would be sufficient for me. I'm thinking on the wide end I don't necessarily need the thin DOF, but more so the light gathering ability of a large aperture so that I can use lower ISO's. That said, the sharpness of the 12-40 or 16-70 and IBIS or OSS would potentially allow me to use slower shutter speeds and thus lower ISO, while knowing that both Sensors perform well at higher ISO's if necessary.

So I'm thinking that these Zooms will be enough for my purpose, and I already have an EP5, so naturally the 12-40 is an option. I'm still intriqued by the longer reach of the Sony and the a6000 camera looks very interesting and sharpness while not as sharp as the 12-40, may be just fine for my purposes, but maybe the camera is not as engaging as the EP5....not sure

I probably will try to handle one.

EinsteinsGhost said:
superstar905 said:

EinsteinsGhost said:

How important is small size to you? It strikes me that you could simply get the FZ1000 and sell off the 12-32 and 40-150, keeping the 12/2 and 45/1.8 for your above-mentioned specialist use. I don't think the 16-70 will quite replace those two primes. It would however replace the 12-40 (since it is basically similar to a MFT 12-52/2.8)

Click to expand...

let me highlight my issue. recentlu went to disney, numerous venues where I swapped between indoor and outdoor venues,constantly swapped between the 12 and 12-32, drove me nuts. I don't think going to a smaller sensor where the glass is not fast is the answer, and that is why I had such high hopes for the LX100. I think the 12-40 is big, but I think it would be fine if it accomplished what I needed. Since i'm not sure of that, this is why i'm looking at the 16-70 thinking maybe larger sensor, thinner DOF,ight give me the bokeh and all around lens, just not sure about indoor low light.......which is a lot of my photography, family! Another reason why the bounce flash appeals to be, help me capture the kids moving.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you thought LX100 was going to break a new ground. It is simply a larger RX100 III with likely similar sensor performance and has the same lens specs. Neither is a solution to thin DOF.

The f/2.8 zoom on m43 won't be either. Or, Sony 16-70/4 on its APS-C sensor. The best bet for DOF control comes at the long end of the zoom where 70mm f/4 can be pretty good choice for a portrait option on APS-C.

For both low light and greater DOF control, consider no shorter than 50mm (equiv) FL, and no slower than f/2. A 35mm f/1.8 is borderline useful for that purpose on APS-C (25/1.4 on m43), a 50mm f/1.8 is very good on APS-C (35-40mm f/1.4 would give similar performance on m43).

This is using Sony Alpha NEX-6 at 70mm f/5.6:

NEX-6, Sigma 70/2.8 (at f/5.6)

captura · Oct 7, 2014

Not been said yet, but you may find the handling of the A6000 preferable to the EP5.

cptobvious · Oct 7, 2014

I've owned both the E-P5 and NEX-6 and various lenses. I can tell you they are both excellent choices (I've shot with the A6000 and it is even better than the NEX-6) and either will get the job done.

Some considerations:

The Olympus 12-40 is IMO the best standard zoom for mirrorless optically. However I feel it isn't a good match for the E-P5 due to the camera's lack of grip or grip options, and the pair is noticeably front heavy. All of the lenses you currently own are a better fit for the E-P5 weight-wise. The 12-40 is really made for the E-M1 in mind IMO. Also the E-P5 is not weather-sealed which negates one of the main benefits of paying so much for that lens.

E-P5 vs. A6000 is a wash IMO. I much prefer the dual control dial system of the E-P5 vs. the top + back setup of the A6000, as well as the touchscreen of the E-P5 for setting focus points. The E-P5 has superior stabilization to any lens-based stabilization I've used for E-mount. On the other hand, I much prefer the 3:2 native format of APS-C to the 4:3 format of MFT, which I never got used to.

I would either upgrade to the E-M1 if getting the 12-40, or if keeping the E-P5 I would go with the Panasonic 12-35 for size/weight. I feel like the Sony 16-70's f/4 max aperture would be limiting for low light on a crop sensor.

superstar905 said:
I am truly searching for a one lens solution. As many folks on the m43 forum know I am not a professional, and rather i'd consider myself to be a amateur who wants the best quality in the event a large print is wanted, but mostly views at normal sizes up to 8x10. I do not pixel peep, but the knowledge that one cam/lens resolves better than the other is something I desire for when I do need it.

I have the EP5 m43 cam with 12mm f2, 12-32mm f3.5 - 5.6, 45mm f1.8, and 40-150mm f4 - 5.6.

I was hoping the Lumix LX100 would be a great walk about lens with fast glass and m43 sized sensor (albeit cropped to 12mp thanks to it being multi aspect). However the early samples aren't that promising from what I can gather.

Anyways, that said I have been thinking about the 12-40 F2.8 lens which rates highly in all area's. My main photography is architecture, landscapes, and mostly family shots indoors. I'm finding though that as my kids are growing, photographing their sports is becoming more frequent.

I'd be remiss if I didn't look at my options though, and the a6000 + 24-70z combo seems like a solid competitor.

I like the bounce flash, phase detect AF, viewfinder (though this is not a must for me), larger sensor of the a6000. However I like the 1/8000 max shutter speed, touch screen, 5 axis IBIS, and art filters in the EP5 (yes I know, to many art filters are gimicky, but I just love the dramatic tone Oly offers, and now the selective colour option).

I need good low light performance, that is a must and hence why I had been using my 12mmF2 lens as the one on my camera 90% of the time, and video is also important for capturing family memories.

I'd appreciate comments on the pros and cons of the comparison of combination in my title. This range covers 95% of my range so i'd be satisfied not having to change lenses.

I've posted this in the m43 forum as well, figure i'd try and get as many balanced views as possible.

Oly EP5 with 12-40 F2.8 vs Sony a6000 with 24-70Z

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Keyboard shortcuts