E
El Jeffe
Guest
42.5mm f/1.2 Nocticron.
Why? It made money.
Why? It made money.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What is your favorite lens (and why)?
- Thread starter dgrogers
- Start date
jeffharris
Forum Pro
Good question!
Probably my absolute favorite is the Voigtländer 42.5mm.
That’s part of my favorite trio: 17.5mm, 42.5mm and (adapted M mount) Nokton 75mm f1.5.
Lately, I’ve been using the Leica 50-200mm quite a bit…
But I still love my Voigtländers best of all!
E
El Jeffe
Guest
Good to hear. I am in the process of eBaying a bunch of lenses to pay for one. I’m not so sure it’s a good time to invest that much $$ in M4/3. I hope it’s as good as I hope it is.
Michael Meissner
Forum Pro
My goto lens is the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens. It is relatively fast, it does not have issues, it just is there producing good pictures. I do wish it was a bit longer (but not at the expense of slower aperture). I can easily shoot at f/2.8 with having to stop the lens down. Generally f/2.8 is fast enough that I don't need a flash.
My second favorite lens depends on the situation:
I have some lenses like the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 that have a specific use pattern, but aren't used in normal shooting. I have some lenses that I bought, but I find I don't shoot with that much, and I have a few lenses that came with camera kits, and I have upgraded to other lenses.
My second favorite lens depends on the situation:
- If I'm doing indoor shooting, particularly of stages, the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 becomes the second lens of choice.
- If I'm vacationing outdoors, the Olympus 12-200mm f/3.5-6.3 is now my lens of choice. Before I got it last year, the Olympus 14-150mm f/3.5-5.6 mark II was my lens of choice, and before the 14-150mm mark II came out, it was the 14-150mm mark I. Basically in good light, I like the superzoom because I don't have to spend time changing lenses. Particularly if I'm expecting rain, the 12-40mm goes on one splash proof camera, and the superzoom goes on another, and I don't change lenses, just change cameras.
- Now that I have the E-m5 mark III, if I know I'm wanting to shoot long distances, the favored lens is the classic 4/3rds 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 mark I. To the 50-200mm, I add the EC-14 tele-converter, give gives me the equivalent of 70-280mm f/4-5.0. I have the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens, but I am not enamored of the lens (but before getting the E-m5 mark III, the 50-200mm did sit at home due to focusing issues with older cameras).
I have some lenses like the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 that have a specific use pattern, but aren't used in normal shooting. I have some lenses that I bought, but I find I don't shoot with that much, and I have a few lenses that came with camera kits, and I have upgraded to other lenses.
Last edited:
marciah
Active member
I'm surprised not to see more prime lenses in the responses.
The Panasonic Leica 25mm/ F1.4 is my favorite. It's a focal length that is most natural for me, and I love the results I get with it.
The next lens that I would not ever part with is the Panasonic Nocticron 42.5mm/ F1.2. While I don't shoot many portraits, I shoot other things, such as seascapes, with it. I want to get out this spring and use it for some garden photos.
Until recently, the Panasonic Leica 15mm/1.7 was my widest lens. I've gotten really solid results from it, including many landscapes on a trip to New Zealand. I can count on it to deliver. Oh, and I also love, love, love the results from the Olympus 75mm. It would be a toss-up as to which of these are next favs.
I'm going to have to do a one day-one lens experiment at the local botanical garden as we ride out the pandemic to give them all equal playtime, and keep my creativity spirits high.
Cheers!
Marcia
The Panasonic Leica 25mm/ F1.4 is my favorite. It's a focal length that is most natural for me, and I love the results I get with it.
The next lens that I would not ever part with is the Panasonic Nocticron 42.5mm/ F1.2. While I don't shoot many portraits, I shoot other things, such as seascapes, with it. I want to get out this spring and use it for some garden photos.
Until recently, the Panasonic Leica 15mm/1.7 was my widest lens. I've gotten really solid results from it, including many landscapes on a trip to New Zealand. I can count on it to deliver. Oh, and I also love, love, love the results from the Olympus 75mm. It would be a toss-up as to which of these are next favs.
I'm going to have to do a one day-one lens experiment at the local botanical garden as we ride out the pandemic to give them all equal playtime, and keep my creativity spirits high.
Cheers!
Marcia
There is always a favourite :-D
I really like my Olympus 12-45 f4 for an everyday carry, and the Olympus 25mm f1.8, together they weigh next to nothing.
However the Panasonic Leica 10-25 f1.7 is the choice when I want the best results, yes it's larger and heavier but it's worth the load to carry. It's so good my full frame Sony stuff is off to a new home this week.
One day I will add the P/L 50-200 and I will be set for just about anything.
Stephen.
However the Panasonic Leica 10-25 f1.7 is the choice when I want the best results, yes it's larger and heavier but it's worth the load to carry. It's so good my full frame Sony stuff is off to a new home this week.
One day I will add the P/L 50-200 and I will be set for just about anything.
Stephen.
It depends on what I am shooting.
For general purpose, it was the Pana 14-140 and is now the Oly 12-100, despite its bulk and weight, because its range is more useful to me for 95% of my shooting (for the remaining 5%, I use the 8mm fisheye and the 40-150 Pro with 2x TC). When I need somthing smaller, I take the Pana 12-35, which is bigger than its 12-32 sibling but much more useful IMHO.
For low light, I like the Pana 15mm or the Voigtländer 25mm.
Cheers!
Abbazz
Last edited:
Of the eight lenses I own right now, I would say its my Summilux 15mm f1.7 but, over the past couple of weeks, my preferred weapon of choice has been the Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f3.5-5.6. I have never been a zoom guy, always preferring primes, so this has completely surprised me and put a real wrench into my photographic thought process.
larsbc
Forum Pro
Great AF performance, great image quality, OIS, weatherproof, compact, constant f/2.8 and a very versatile focal range. For me, it aptly demonstrates the ethos of micro four thirds.
Last edited:
TomCak
Forum Enthusiast
I appreciate the sentiment on primes.
I'd like to get the Oly 12-40/2.8 and 7-14/2.8 zooms for convenience at times. I may do so. I purchased the 12-40/2.8 for a relative and it seems to produce outstanding results.
OTOH, after using multiple camera and lens brands over the last 25 years (Pentax, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Tamron and Sigma, and the Korean MF primes)...
If one has a choice, and conditions are fairly static, a prime is usually a better option, in my opinion. This is said after examining thousands of my images. Of course any number of inferior images could be due to user error (myself).
If conditions are highly variable, and one doesn't know what they'll encounter around the next corner, then a high quality zoom certainly is called for.
Tom
I'd like to get the Oly 12-40/2.8 and 7-14/2.8 zooms for convenience at times. I may do so. I purchased the 12-40/2.8 for a relative and it seems to produce outstanding results.
OTOH, after using multiple camera and lens brands over the last 25 years (Pentax, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Tamron and Sigma, and the Korean MF primes)...
If one has a choice, and conditions are fairly static, a prime is usually a better option, in my opinion. This is said after examining thousands of my images. Of course any number of inferior images could be due to user error (myself).
If conditions are highly variable, and one doesn't know what they'll encounter around the next corner, then a high quality zoom certainly is called for.
Tom
Harold66
Forum Pro
Well
I could say the Lumix 1.7/20 mm because 40mm is my absolute favorite focal length
or
i could say the PL 50-200 because it is the absolute best zoom I have ever used
Harold
I could say the Lumix 1.7/20 mm because 40mm is my absolute favorite focal length
or
i could say the PL 50-200 because it is the absolute best zoom I have ever used
Harold
TomCak
Forum Enthusiast
And to be clear, I'm not anti zoom.
I've used too many super zooms in the last 30+ years and they're almost always inferior.
A high quality zoom is certainly a good lens choice.
I have always found odd these comparisons between the merits of prime lenses and zooms. A zoom and a prime have very different uses and a prime will rarely be able to replace a zoom.
A zoom will allow one to adapt the framing by varying the angle of view for a specific shooting distance / perspective.
On the other hand, a prime is for when you already know that you are going to shoot at a particular distance and need a specific angle of view, for example for static posed portraits in the studio. Chosing a prime will usually give you better image quality -although this issue is more debatable nowadays- and also a greater max aperture combined with reduced weight and bulk.
There is no "zooming with your feet," since moving the camera relatively to the subject will modify perspective among other parameters of the picture. You will certainly not get the same picture with a 20mm lens at 50cm from your subject and with a 100mm at 2.5m from your subject, although the subject will occupy the same space in the frame.
Cheers!
Abbazz
That's not true. When one shoots primes, competently, you already have an idea of your subject size & composition, the perspective you want to create, so choose the appropriate focal length and aperture beforehand, & then zoom with your feet. I still do this with my zoom lenses, to create the desired perspective, & distortion -or lack thereof, that I have in mind. Of course if you're on Safari for example, then it's a completely different kettle of fish
When you zoom, you modify the framing of your picture without altering the perspective. When you move your camera to get closer or further away from your subject, you modify both the framing and the perspective. A different kettle of fish, as you say.
Cheers!
Abbazz
George1958
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,475
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,259
12mm F2.0 a it’s so light and matches well with my EM5 iii, great for walk around, street and landscape . Makes for a small package .
Not an mft lens, but the OM 50mm f1.4 right now is my favorite lens. Maybe tied with my 45mm f1.8.
It's a film lens and as such is beautifully built.
The 50mm f1.4 has amazing background blur. It's like the background almost melts away. It is soft wide open but it works for the lens. Stop it down to f2 it is very sharp.
Manual focus only but film lenses combined with focus peaking/punch in, focusing is very easy.
It's a film lens and as such is beautifully built.
The 50mm f1.4 has amazing background blur. It's like the background almost melts away. It is soft wide open but it works for the lens. Stop it down to f2 it is very sharp.
Manual focus only but film lenses combined with focus peaking/punch in, focusing is very easy.
Well, yes and no. It depends how you look at it. If you want to stand there with your feet glued to the spot, and simply " fit it all in" then yeah, a zoom is for you. A prime makes you think more about what you want to achieve. Both ways work, neither is right or wrong, whatever makes you happy
PS I shoot both, I tend to mainly use my zooms like primes ie choose specific focal lengths then sneaker zoom to frame, but whatever works for you
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum