Wide angle dilemma

In my FF film days, I had always enjoyed using a 24mm prime and, although later (with a DSLR now) I acquired a 10-22mm (14-32mm equivalent), it was the prime I favoured as a general lens.

For quite a few years I hardly used these cameras at all, prefering to use a decent compact. Then I discovered the Olympus PEN! The first additional lens I bought after buying my PEN e-pl3 was the 9-18m to recapture those wide perspectives. More recently, now with an OMD em10, I have added the 25mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8 to my setup and I must say, IQ aside, I am enjoying the primes over zooms.

My dilemma is this: I am very taken by the prospect of the 12mm f2 prime but, given the cost, I would almost certainly have to sell the 9-18mm to fund it. Like most people here, I suspect, I use wide angles for a mixture of landscapes and interior shots. Clearly, for the latter, if the 12mm was wide enough, I'm sure its speed would be a real benefit but would that outweigh the lack of the extra 3mm?! Aaargh!

Any advice/thoughts (especially from anyone who's used both) would be much appreciated.

David Seume wrote:

In my FF film days, I had always enjoyed using a 24mm prime and, although later (with a DSLR now) I acquired a 10-22mm (14-32mm equivalent), it was the prime I favoured as a general lens.

For quite a few years I hardly used these cameras at all, prefering to use a decent compact. Then I discovered the Olympus PEN! The first additional lens I bought after buying my PEN e-pl3 was the 9-18m to recapture those wide perspectives. More recently, now with an OMD em10, I have added the 25mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8 to my setup and I must say, IQ aside, I am enjoying the primes over zooms.

My dilemma is this: I am very taken by the prospect of the 12mm f2 prime but, given the cost, I would almost certainly have to sell the 9-18mm to fund it. Like most people here, I suspect, I use wide angles for a mixture of landscapes and interior shots. Clearly, for the latter, if the 12mm was wide enough, I'm sure its speed would be a real benefit but would that outweigh the lack of the extra 3mm?! Aaargh!

Any advice/thoughts (especially from anyone who's used both) would be much appreciated.

I'm in the market for a 9-18 myself, but for a specific subject of interior design photography, so a wide aperture is not really of concern to me. Now, there might be another option that will give you the chance to keep your 9-18, and that is the Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f:2.

It is highly regarded, and it should be as sharp as my 7.5mm, which I love. Is manual focus only, but, depending on your subject, that can be manageable.

To *me* the 12/2 is too specialized and pricey, when you have three zooms: (both 7-14s, and the 9-18).  Plus you have the inexpensive (defished) Rokinon

The 9-18 is sometimes available as reconditioned on getolympus.com for $399 + tax

bradevans wrote:

To *me* the 12/2 is too specialized and pricey, when you have three zooms: (both 7-14s, and the 9-18). Plus you have the inexpensive (defished) Rokinon

The 9-18 is sometimes available as reconditioned on getolympus.com for $399 + tax

Are you sure about the 9-18? There is one right now, but is the 4/3 version, which is cheaper than the Micro 4/3.

I would not find the f2 12mm adequate for interiors. That extra 3mm of the 9-18 delivers a dramatically wider angle.

I have two 12mm lenses -- the 12-32 and 12-35. In general use, they have reduced my use of the 9-18 compared with when I my previous "standard" was the Panny 14 BUT for the specific purpose of interiors, the 9-18 remains my go to lens.

In addition, there are landscapes where that 9mm angle of view is the only one to use.

That said, if I did not have the 9-18, I might try panoramas.

I have the 9-18 for over two years and I am very satisfied with the lens IQ. It is very sharp, except the corners are not tack sharp even at f5.6 (in need to pixel peep to see it). I recently acquired the 12mm f2 and I am very pleased. Obviously the 9-18 at 9mm is wider, but in most cases 12mm is wide enough for me. The 12mm f2 is very sharp across the frame at f4 and acceptable wide open when I need all the light. The manual focussing option is great when using the hyper focal distance for landscapes. Since I have the 12 I have used the 9-18 only a few times when I really need the very wide angle.

I recently sold my 14mm to offset the cost of a used 12mm f/2 and I'm pleased with it, though it is early days yet.  To my eyes, though it's worth more than the 14mm, it's not worth 4x the used value of the 14mm which goes for around $150 on Ebay.  I got it for about $550 used.

I do a lot of indoor photography and outdoors I like natural lighting, so the 9-18mm was never going to have a wide enough aperture for what I needed.

Martin Ocando wrote:

bradevans wrote:

To *me* the 12/2 is too specialized and pricey, when you have three zooms: (both 7-14s, and the 9-18). Plus you have the inexpensive (defished) Rokinon

The 9-18 is sometimes available as reconditioned on getolympus.com for $399 + tax

Are you sure about the 9-18? There is one right now, but is the 4/3 version, which is cheaper than the Micro 4/3.

Hi Martin,

the 4/3 is almost always there at $399 - in fact i ordered one without noticing it said Zuiko not M.Zuiko.

But I did get my order in for the m43 (at the same $399).  I ordered it on May 28th and not here yet.

Ordered but no sign that it has shipped yet...

The Rokinon 7.5 is on sale now for $199, that might help for when you need wider than 12mm.  Alternatively, there's always panorama that's more accessible now that LR6 includes it.

bradevans wrote:

Martin Ocando wrote:

bradevans wrote:

To *me* the 12/2 is too specialized and pricey, when you have three zooms: (both 7-14s, and the 9-18). Plus you have the inexpensive (defished) Rokinon

The 9-18 is sometimes available as reconditioned on getolympus.com for $399 + tax

Are you sure about the 9-18? There is one right now, but is the 4/3 version, which is cheaper than the Micro 4/3.

Hi Martin,

the 4/3 is almost always there at $399 - in fact i ordered one without noticing it said Zuiko not M.Zuiko.

But I did get my order in for the m43 (at the same $399). I ordered it on May 28th and not here yet.

Ordered but no sign that it has shipped yet...

Good to know. Sadly, I'm saving on Amazon gift cards, so I'll have to buy through Amazon. Still a long way to go, though.

David Seume wrote:

In my FF film days, I had always enjoyed using a 24mm prime (...)

I must say, IQ aside, I am enjoying the primes over zooms.

My dilemma is this: I am very taken by the prospect of the 12mm f2 prime but, given the cost, I would almost certainly have to sell the 9-18mm to fund it. Like most people here, I suspect, I use wide angles for a mixture of landscapes and interior shots. Clearly, for the latter, if the 12mm was wide enough, I'm sure its speed would be a real benefit but would that outweigh the lack of the extra 3mm?! Aaargh!

You're a prime guy and you already have the M.Zuiko 45mm and the M.Zuiko 25mm. So that's obvious: the M.Zuiko 12mm will be a good choice to complete your lens collection.

David Seume wrote:

In my FF film days, I had always enjoyed using a 24mm prime and, although later (with a DSLR now) I acquired a 10-22mm (14-32mm equivalent), it was the prime I favoured as a general lens.

For quite a few years I hardly used these cameras at all, prefering to use a decent compact. Then I discovered the Olympus PEN! The first additional lens I bought after buying my PEN e-pl3 was the 9-18m to recapture those wide perspectives. More recently, now with an OMD em10, I have added the 25mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8 to my setup and I must say, IQ aside, I am enjoying the primes over zooms.

My dilemma is this: I am very taken by the prospect of the 12mm f2 prime but, given the cost, I would almost certainly have to sell the 9-18mm to fund it. Like most people here, I suspect, I use wide angles for a mixture of landscapes and interior shots. Clearly, for the latter, if the 12mm was wide enough, I'm sure its speed would be a real benefit but would that outweigh the lack of the extra 3mm?! Aaargh!

Any advice/thoughts (especially from anyone who's used both) would be much appreciated.

Have you considered the Samyang 12 f/2 @ $349.  Half the price, but is manual focus.

I bought a Bower 14mm f/2.8 and a Mitakon focal reducer for $359 which makes it a 10mm f/2, which is a 20mm f/2 FF FOV.  It's wide enough for my interior shots.  Sharp at center at f/2 but not so hot on the corners.  The native Samyang 12 f/2 performs better on the corners by 1 stop from my Bower.  I'm saving up to buy a refurbished Olympus 9-18 just for the times I need autofocus to complement the Bower.  I find that at times, I like the flexibility of a UWA zoom where my movement is restricted in confined spaces.

I have the 9-18mm and the 9mm@f4.0 is wide enough(both angle of view and aperture) for outside enclosed areas (e.g. courtyards in medieval castles, etc).  For interior purposes, in low light, f4.0 is a challenge as I like to keep my ISO no more than 1600 if I can help it.

There's when I use my Panasonic 14mm f2.5 coupled with a 0.76x wide converter adapter converting my 14mm f2.5 into a 11mm f2.5, a 1 1/3 stop faster than f4.0 but 2/3 stop slower than a f2.  However my used 14mm was only $150 and another $12 for the wide converter.

I own both lenses and honestly, I'm glad I do, the 9-18 only becomes fully sharp at F/5.6 the Olympus 12/2 is fully sharp wide open, the difference in sharpness is more than noticeable, the 12mm F/2 is wide enough even if the 9-18 is wider.

David Seume wrote:

My dilemma is this: I am very taken by the prospect of the 12mm f2 prime but, given the cost, I would almost certainly have to sell the 9-18mm to fund it. Like most people here, I suspect, I use wide angles for a mixture of landscapes and interior shots. Clearly, for the latter, if the 12mm was wide enough, I'm sure its speed would be a real benefit but would that outweigh the lack of the extra 3mm?! Aaargh!

Any advice/thoughts (especially from anyone who's used both) would be much appreciated.

If you think you'll miss the 9mm end, you will! I have the 7-14mm f4 and would never give up the wide end for anything!

I have an SLR MAgic 12mm T1.6 that I thought would be great for my interior shooting in low light, but at least for me, 12mm just doesn't cut it!

When I'm not doing quick progress shots of renovations, where I crank up the ISO a bit, I just carry my tripod and cable release.

Thanks to all who have contributed answers to my question.

I guess I need to be patient and a) assess all the photos I have taken using between 9mm and 12mm, b) keep on using my 9-18 and analyse my images and c) try to take note of any photos I might miss through not having the faster lens/wider FL.