What Pana Lens is worth considering Over Olympus lens if you use OLY body?

The total cost of ownership over ten years, the difference that is, regardless of selling it at the end, is going to be pennies per day. Some lenses are worth the money - for a stop, or bokeh, or contrast - but next to FF prices, all m43 lenses are a steal. Smaller lighter and sharper for the money. So get the best that you prefer and can afford or don't. Sell the ones that you don't use, and let someone else enjoy them. There is no algorithm or spreadsheet or formula to quantify a lens like the 42.5 f1.2 or 25f1.4 - you are missing out without, or I would be. The provided spreadsheet does not help me decide what to buy - they are all evenly priced from a certain vantage point - price per picture.

Robert Evagelista wrote:

What Pana Lens is worth considering Over Olympus lens if you use OLY body?

It's generally accepted that lenses are a more long term investment than a body.
One would be misguided to base a lens purchase solely on which body is currently being used.

If there's even the remotest chance you'd have a Panasonic body in the future shouldn't that be taken into consideration to some small degree ?

rd

Robert Evagelista wrote:

I don't know.

The M.Zuiko 45mm F/1,8 is very good but the Lumix 42,5mm F/1,7 is better.

The M.Zuiko 12-50mm is handy (being a macro lens) but the Lumix 14-42mm is sharper.

Both are cheap and very good.

Hands down, the two lenses I would recommend in the whole M/43 lineup are:

Olympus 75mm F1.8 & the Leica Nocticron. I've owned several lenses in Micro Four Thirds and these are BY FAR the best lenses I have owned. Trust me, they are worth the investment.

Those three simply because they have no equal on Oly's side of the fence. The 15mm is a fantastic lens as long as it doesn't have AF issues with your Oly body and offers an interesting field of view. The 42.5 f1.2 is the crown jewel of lenses for this system and I think the 35-100mm f2.8 is the perfect balance of performance, size and price (can be found on Amazon for $850). Oly's 40-150mm is a better performer overall than the 35-100... but it makes up for it by being MUCH bigger and heavier.

Robert Evagelista wrote:

Trying to compare the closest Focal Length and Aperture Lenses Between Pana and Oly.
It appears that the Panasonic Lenses OIS is significantly driving the cost of each Lens purchase.

Question
1.What Pana Lens is worth considering Over Olympus lens if you use OLY body?
I found 1 focal length range is cheaper in Panasonic.
That is the Panasonic 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 (165 USD) vs Olympus 12-50 f/3.5-5.6 (500 USD)

Well, if price is the only criteria, pick the cheapest!

I sold my Pana-Leica 25mm f1.4 and bought an Oly 25mm f1.8 because technically it's sharper accross the frame, but I kinda miss how the PL25 renders and wish I'd kept it, despite it's significant size difference.

The new Oly PRO line of lenses are bigger than the Pana f2.8 equivalents, so if size and weight is an issue, then the Panas are going to be better for you.

It also depends on where you buy from. For some reason, Olympus gear here in Australia is the cheapest anywhere in the world, so the Panasonic stuff has to be significantly better for Oly users to choose Panasonic over Olympus because the price different is almost universally substantial.

I'd consider getting a Panasonic 20mm f1.8 pancake though, simply because there is no alternative. That would be a handy lens to have.

… WHEN MAKING COMPARISONS, COMPARE LIKE WITH LIKE.

Robert Evagelista wrote:

Trying to compare the closest Focal Length and Aperture Lenses Between Pana and Oly.
It appears that the Panasonic Lenses OIS is significantly driving the cost of each Lens purchase.

Question
1.What Pana Lens is worth considering Over Olympus lens if you use OLY body?
I found 1 focal length range is cheaper in Panasonic.
That is the Panasonic 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 (165 USD) vs Olympus 12-50 f/3.5-5.6 (500 USD)

Comparison:

Panasonic 15mm is a considerable amount wider in view than the Olympus 17mm. It makes quite a difference.

The Oly 12-50 is incomparable. The 12-50 is one of a kind -- it is the only lens with those zoom boundaries in the m43 range. Forget comparing it with anything.

In the middle range, compare the Panny and Oly 14-42s -- they have a whole bunch of them.

Did you mention the Oly f1.8 45 and the Panny 1.7 42.5? One is old and the other new. That accounts for any price difference.

The Oly 40-150 and the Panny 45-150 -- for the longest time, these two were comparably priced with the Panny just upwind a little. I paid that price for each of them and considered I was doing very well what with the lovely results I got. Then Oly started to throw out the f4~5.6 40-150 -- I presume to put the emphasis on the f2.8 40-150. Both these Oly and Panny lenses are first quality -- I have used/use them both and am unstinting in my praise for them. Lots of other people on this forum are too.

At $99 it is practically criminal neglect for any m43 owner not to grab the Oly lens. I am not doing so as I now have the Panny 45-150. That's all.

Ken Christie wrote:

In your 3rd comparison you're not comparing like with like.

Either you neeed to compare 12-50 from both manufacturers, or 14-42 from both. (Oly has 2 versions of the 14-42)

Of course one can make the comparison if one is trying to fill a need. That is 'like with like' for someone who wants a zoom that's about 14-45 and about f3.5-5.6, By your reasoning, one can't compare between P42.5 and O45, or P20 and Sigma 19. I'm not particular about the length of a 'normal' lens, so I'd compare 20s and 25s.