Which Micro 4/3 lens should i buy ?

Drofnad wrote:

I'd say that the "hence the bumps at the ends of its zoom" has elements of non-sequitur to it, in that one might think you got as far towards what was wanted as one could, and in both directions one wanted OUT !

Usually that can be explained by the fact that I'm on holidays when I'm busiest and have one chance at many shots, so grab and shoot is the way to go, instead of fumble for another lens and - oh bother, the scene has evaporated.

Plus of course shoot now and crop later explains at lot of the 12mm bump.

If I could somehow chart the final cropped version I may use then the chart would be a little different. As for keepers, I keep everything bar the total mistakes, and we find that we very often need to dig back to some seeming uninteresting shot to get details of something or to read a sign that was in the frame, storage is so cheap now that it's no problem to do that and also to have what seems to be about 5 backups sets as well.

Had you the 7-14 & 35-100 say ready to go --and I mean mounted on bodies, not needing a lens swap--, those bumps might cascade into FLs outside of 12-40!? --a thought. (Otherwise, yes, such FL frequencies do often reveal what lens, by being at a zoom end.

Yes, if I set up two bodies, but usually the spare is immediately out of reach either in the car or back at the hotel or whatever. But if packing two bodies it would always be a case of having one with a normal lens and one with a wide lens and suddenly I need a tele lens, so should I carry 3 bodies?

(In my case, I've just complemented the agreed wonderful 12-40 with Pany's 35-100/2.8 & 7-14/4, which are on used markets for WAY less than the newly issued Oly counterparts, and are much smaller/lighter (despite the telephoto's having OIS !). And I got a GX7 to have one ready. I've done some casual swapping between bodies & lenses but can't say for sure if I see much difference, or preference for E-M5 + IBIS w/35-100 or w/o & OIS of lens. With its long hood reversed, the 35-100 is shorter than the 12-40 + hood normal.)

The Pana 35-100/2.8 is slowly getting more of my attention as I see that as an answer to the little use I give tele, but need f/2.8 more than I need f/5.6 of my current tele lens. Maybe the after Christmas discount days may see me spending more of the kid's inheritance. I looked at the Oly 40-150/2.8 and that is just way too stupidly large for the very little use that I'd get out if it. It would end up being a stay-at-home lens - and I have no more room in my dry cabinet for more stay-at-home lenses.

-d.

ps : I saw that "LX3" in the photo EXIF... >> 24-60 eq. from a fine little "camera you have with you", now well aged, and still MUCH appreciated !

Panasonic LX3, the oldie but goodie, nothing comes near to it as far as I'm concerned, as long as you can work at ISO 400 or lower. Same batteries as my old Ricoh R3 and none of that user unfriendly battery chipping nonsense, also a CCD sensor so videos of fast moving things look normal. A keeper for ever.

Regards...... Guy