otto k wrote:
What about 4k on NX500,have you shot it and if yes, what was the quality like? If it's at least decent I might try to find one for that use.
No, I haven't. I tend to use smaller lenses with the NX500 (PZ, pancakes, primes).
If I am going to use a bigger lens, I prefer one of my NX.
I believe the 16-50PZ and the 50-200mm combined are performing better, but if you want an 1 lens solution, then it is the only choice anyway! The thing is that I love shooting 24-26mm (16-17 in APS-C), so I do not particularly like zooms from 18mm. I own the 18-135 EF-S, only because I use it with Canon C cameras for video, which is a good run n gun lens, and the fastest focusing and silent EF(-S) lens (together with the 70-300). I also have an 70-200mm 4f for longer reach, and because every pro has to own a white lens, but usually I am missing something when I shoot 18mm in APS-C..
For the same reason, I am ordering the 12-100mm Olympus, for use with m43 cameras (GH5/Pocket4K/JVC LS300/e.t.c). It is only a 4f (in m43 that is not great..), but the 24mm-200mm range is liberating, especially for documentaries, run n gun and live TV. Great focus mechanism too.
Right now I have a photo backpack with me and I have. NX1+45mm NX1+16-50S NX500+PZ and NX3000+fish eye. Just a random selection, but shows what I most use.
If I was going for a more remote place with the family, maybe an NX1 with the 18-200mm or the NX500 with the PZ. I seriously prefer the 2mm at the wider end, than the 150mm at the tele end!!
For soccer/football, the 18-200 is your only choice if you are near the field - on a big field, or just the 50-200mm if you are further away or at the stands.
Because I live in Greece, there are occassions I shoot run n gun in boats. Then the 18-200mm is so convenient (do not have to worry much about the sea water on my more expensive lenses or have to change lenses, e.t.c).