DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Would you bother with the 12mm F2, 17mm f1.8 or 45mm f1.8 if you had the 12-40 f2.8 Pro?

Started Jan 20, 2016 | Questions thread
haslo
haslo Regular Member • Posts: 411
I have both :P

...the 12-40 and the 40-150, and the entire range of primes (12, 17, 25, 45, 75). They have different uses for me. There definitely is the size advantage of the primes. Even the full bag of primes with one body is easily carried around.

The zooms are much larger. Even though the image quality of the 12-40 is better than the one of the 17mm, I find myself shooting more often with the latter.

But the pro zooms have definite advantages, too. They're awesome for social situations, and events when you can't be switching lenses all the time and have changing focal length requirements. They're great for photographing kids. Generally, whenever you need flexibility and don't mind a bit more bulk, they're awesome.

I like my system both ways, and I love the flexibility it offers. The E-M1 with 40-150mm f/2.8, battery grip and red dot sight is a beast, both in terms of size and in terms of shooting capabilities. On the other hand, the E-M5ii with a small prime, or even a body cap lens, still gives me great quality in a tiny package.

If I had to choose between the primes and the zooms, I'd want to keep the primes. I think I have better shot discipline with them, and I like their size. But I don't think that either of the two are superfluous for me.

 haslo's gear list:haslo's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow