When you have GAS and no money...

Having a major GAS attack. There are so many things I want.

I cancelled my order for a Kipon shift adapter and got a Fuji Instax printer instead.

I could really use a new laptop, but the way I want to use it I'd be better off waiting until USB-C is available in more machines.

What else in the digital camera world do I really, really want...

• The Olympus 14-150 f/4.0-5.6 II. That alone would solve every problem I have in Great Sand Dunes. But elsewhere? Probably unnecessary.
• Trade my 11-22 and 14-54 for a used 12-60. But I think I like the 11-22 more than I like the money that would net me.
• A lightweight wide zoom. I hate taking pictures on my phone, don't especially want a compact, so I need something to go lightweight but still flexible with my E-PM2 (I gave the 14-42 II R to my girlfriend, who's using my E-PL1). So I was looking at the Panasonic 12-35 or the Sony 16-50. Probably the Panasonic, because I'd also have to get a NEX telephoto if I got the Sony and that would make the whole thing less cost effective.
• The Sony 16mm f/2.8 is only $75 right now...lackluster lens according to all reviews but I think I could make it work...
• a used Olympus 50-200 f/2.8-3.5.
• a used Olympus 50mm f/2.0 macro. 

But I just saw a refurbished first generation Lytro for $50. So I pulled the trigger on that. I already have what I need, I think it's time to just have some fun.

Having both the 14-54 and the 12-60, I use the 14-54 more and would not see the added benefit of the 12-60 being worth the cost.

On the other hand the 11-22 can't compete on IQ with the 12-60 at the short end (so the reviews and samples say).  I was disappointed in the 9-18 as a natural landscape lens but it does a great job in cities.

The sharpest wide lens I have is the MFT Samyang 7.5 fisheye and it's small, light and cheap.

That set off another attack?

Andrew

Hey Klarno-

I had a GAS related quandry- you have the 14-54 mkII and the mZuiko 14-42 IIR- is it worth spending the extra money to get the EM1 if you have the 14-54 mkI for use as PDAF as compared to the images you get with the 14-42 IIR? Basically is the 14-54 worth paying a lot extra for the EM1 over the EM10 in order to preserve its compatibility? Or is the mZ 14-42 IIR "good enough" considering the EM10 with 14-42 and 40-150 can be had for $600, while the EM1 with mmf adapter would be >$1000? (I also have an old 40-150 mkI 3.5-4.5 which probably isn't as sharp as the mZuiko 40-150, but still makes nice images on my e520)? Thinking of the contrast, quality, etc. There are no camera stores near me which have EM1s in stock for me to see myself in looking to upgrade from my e520.  Especially as you listed the e520 as a previous stock for yourself.

Hi Klarno,

great post, i am a serial window shopper but don't often pull the trigger.

However, i just picke up an Oly 45mm 1.8, the deal was just too good (i think).

$283.00 AUD delivered, brand new (black only at this price).

For any other Aussies interested in this, i just checked and TED's camera store are still running this promo.

Cheers, Matt

I recently bought a new camera, didn't like, and returned it; it was the result of my most recent failed attempt to find a backup and daily shooter to compliment my E-M10. Instead of doing the intelligent thing and asking for a refund, I asked for a store credit. So, I bought a used GM5/12-32mm kit in excellent condition and still have a balance. Now I am having a What Should I Get attack.

So now I have a

• E-M10
• GM5
• Rokinon 7.5mm f/3.5 FE
• 12mm f/2.0
• 17mm f/1.8
• 45mm f/1.8

One thing I discovered over the past six months is that I will never be a zoom guy so I sold my 35-100mm f/2.8, have a 12-40mm f/2.8 in retirement on the shelf that I should sell, and now, a 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 sitting next to it. Also, as you can see no large primes; everything is small enough to fit in my pocket.

So for physically small lenses that I don't have, there is not a lot left to consider. I keep looking at the DigitalRevTV review of the Panasonic 15mm f/1.7 sitting on a black GM5 like mine. It looks like the perfect marriage but, I have the Olympus 12mm f/2.0 and the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 so, is there any logical reason to get the 15mm beyond the fact that it looks beautiful sitting on the GM5. There is the gap between 17mm and 45mm but, I have never been a fan of the 50mm focal length so, if I get the 25mm f1/8, will I use it enough to justify it's purchase. I thought about the 20mm f/1.7 but even if I ignore all the possible problems it has on Olympus bodies and just use it for my GM5, there's the slow and noisy AF to consider, plus it's closer to the 17mm than the 45mm.

What to do?

I would say, looking over your portfolio of gear, that you already have quite a selection most imaging tasks.  If funds are short, i would focus on making the most out of what you have and enjoying the process.

I lack the GAS i think; i buy things when i have an idea of a class of image that i wish to take that my current gear poorly supports, or for a specific dissatisfaction with my current gear.  So i can easily tell you right now what i would buy if the price was right:  a better mid-zoom for my Nikon FF d600 (it gets soft away from the center at many apertures & focal lengths) or -- when they are available -- another Oly m4/3 body with a better DR/high ISO sensor than my EM5.  I know of none such available now, so that will be in a few years.

But i am in no rush, and enjoying my gear now.  On the Oly body, i would *never* buy it until well after introduction to give Oly to work the bugs out.  Sorry.  But they have a record.

phaet2112 wrote:

Hey Klarno-

I had a GAS related quandry- you have the 14-54 mkII and the mZuiko 14-42 IIR- is it worth spending the extra money to get the EM1 if you have the 14-54 mkI for use as PDAF as compared to the images you get with the 14-42 IIR? Basically is the 14-54 worth paying a lot extra for the EM1 over the EM10 in order to preserve its compatibility? Or is the mZ 14-42 IIR "good enough" considering the EM10 with 14-42 and 40-150 can be had for $600, while the EM1 with mmf adapter would be >$1000?

I'd say a better reason isn't to use the one lens alone (close to $1600 from mainline photo retailers is a lot of cash to put behind a lens that goes for about $200 used), but it's to open yourself up to the market of really, really good Olympus 4/3 HG and SHG glass, some of which is getting quite inexpensive on the used market (saw a 50mm f/2.0 for $200, the 50-200 is always a favorite and the 7-14 f/4 is one of the best values out there right now).

(I also have an old 40-150 mkI 3.5-4.5 which probably isn't as sharp as the mZuiko 40-150, but still makes nice images on my e520)? Thinking of the contrast, quality, etc.

I don't put that much stock in quibbling over lens resolution differences. Things like that are never gonna make or break your photos. But the 14-54 is over a stop faster than the 14-42 at the long end, and it has a longer end to boot. The 14-42 IIR is really, really good, especially as kit lenses go, but sometimes it's just not fast enough.

There are no camera stores near me which have EM1s in stock for me to see myself in looking to upgrade from my e520. Especially as you listed the e520 as a previous stock for yourself.

For low light and for lifting shadows, any current MFT camera is at least four stops better than the E-520. The E-520 I found had issues with banding in low light/high ISO that just isn't an issue at the same level with newer MFT cameras, and I find banding and pattern noise much more problematic than poisson noise. Most will have mostly similar AF performance, but only the E-M1 is especially well-geared for use with Four Thirds lenses, and is one of the two best cameras for overall AF performance in the system.

Have to admit I am quiet frequently in the same wagoon. So many usefull things available around everywhere. What works for me to get out of the trap - I make a good coffe or take my gear out for walk, or just have a good sleep. No need to resolve it right now. The morning is said to be wiser than evening and for me it surely works like that. Next day I know more clearly what I want and what I really need.

just my 0,02$

Skeeterbytes wrote:

The 25/1.8 is a tiny jewel--got mine at incentive pricing when buying a camera and found it to be a super "standard" prime. There's also the Lumix 25/1.4 of course. FWIW I like the 25 more than my 20.

Either 25 fills an obvious gap in your collection. The other tack would be going beyond the 45, either the 60 macro or the 75/1.8, which is a lens all-star from any point of view. Phenomenal lens.

Good shopping,

Rick

Sometimes opportunity knocks and overrides logic. I decided to round out my small pocketable prime collection with the 25mm f/1.8, went to B&H where I have the rest of my credit and surprise; a like-new, in the box 15mm f/1.7 popped up in their used department. So I grabbed it and still having some money left over, I ordered the 25mm f/1.8 while they are on sale.

I gave my Sigma 30mm f/2.8 DN and 60mm f/2.8 DN to my son and I don't do macro so, I have no interest in the Olympus 60mm Macro. While the 75mm f/1.8 is considered a great lens, it doesn't fit in with my fit-in-my pocket concept. So for now I'm done; with two small, but excellent, M43 bodies and six primes.