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
sean000 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,727
Re: Would you bother with the 12mm F2, 17mm f1.8 or 45mm f1.8 if you had the 12-40 f2.8 Pro?

NCV wrote:

One you have a good 2.8 zoom, the primes within that range are in the real world of actually taking pictures redundant. Full stop.

Don't you mean "full stop and a half?" Because that's how much faster the typical prime is 

I know it seems redundant, but there are times when I would rather carry around the E-M5 with a small prime attached, and other times when I need the extra stop and a half. I take a lot of photos of our kids indoors at night. f/1.8 lets me shoot at a significantly lower ISO.

If you rarely find yourself needing to shoot moving subjects under such low light (and wanting to do so without flash), then yes... it is quite possible you may never use the primes again. Even though the 12-40mm is heavier and bulkier, the convenience of a zoom is nice to have. I also use the Lfn function button on the lens, and the manual focus ring on the 12-40mm is far better than manually focusing a lens like the 45mm f/1.8.

Sean

 sean000's gear list:sean000's gear list
Olympus E-M1 II Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 Fisheye Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Olympus OM-D E-M5 +6 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