Replace my dead 12-32, or get an M100?

Since my 12-32 died from Costa Rican moisture, I am faced with a decision of how to replace it. Although I had it on my E-M5ii as a compact kit, it normally resides on my wife's E-PM2, which I will also use when I need something small. I've never liked it much, as the collapsible zoom defeats some of the compact advantage, so I have been thinking of replacing it with a prime for a few years, either a 17/1.8 (1st choice), 15/1.7 (too $$), 14/2.5, or maybe even a 12/2. The 20/1.7 might work but the noise and focus speed is annoying.

Or, for the same price as a new 17/1.8, I can get an EOS-M100 with the 15-45 kit lens. It's only a bit larger and 30g heavier than the E-PM2 body, and the lens is not much larger than the 17/1.8. I'm interested if anyone here has the M100 and can offer some feedback on how it might compare with an older MFT body like the E-PM2.

Alternatively, I can pick up another 12-32, as they are now pretty cheap.

I'm wishing now that I hadn't sold off the 14-42IIR - at least it would give me something to use on the little E-PM2 for a while.

I don't know enough about the M100 to comment on that. Given your comments on various lenses, though, I would say get the 17mm Oly, if you decide on buying a new lens. More versatile than the 12mm, IMO.

I would have recommended the 15mm, but you have ruled that out based on price. The 14mm has a lot of fans, but I never liked mine much.

enossified wrote:

Can't say I understand your logic. First you are looking at a fast prime, then you are looking at buying a third camera with a slow zoom that can't mount any m43 glass.

I agree that it doesn't sound very logical. If I have to buy another lens, I'd rather it be a compact, fast prime, as it is something I don't have, and I never much liked the 12-32. But the M100 kit would also serve to replace the all in one kit that has been the E-PM2+12-32's primary function for several years.

You could get another 14-42RII for less than the M100 or a prime, if the zoom speed isn't an issue.

I could, but I recently sold my 14-42IIR as I never used it - neither my wife nor I liked it with the fiddly release mechanism and not great IQ.

If you're considering an inexpensive zoom, the Panasonic 14-42 II is actually a very nice kit zoom. Smooth rings, fairly compact (barely extends at all when zooming), and has quite good IQ. I liked mine better than the 14-45, which has a certain cult status, it seems.

Good idea going to a prime, but then you need a focal length that serves general photography. Of the ones you listed that would be either the 17 or the 20. Each has its advantages and It depends on the kind of shooting you do. I have had the 20 and have the 17 currently - and I will say that the 20 has great IQ.

zuikowesty wrote:

Since my 12-32 died from Costa Rican moisture, I am faced with a decision of how to replace it. Although I had it on my E-M5ii as a compact kit, it normally resides on my wife's E-PM2, which I will also use when I need something small. I've never liked it much, as the collapsible zoom defeats some of the compact advantage, so I have been thinking of replacing it with a prime for a few years, either a 17/1.8 (1st choice), 15/1.7 (too $$), 14/2.5, or maybe even a 12/2. The 20/1.7 might work but the noise and focus speed is annoying.

Or, for the same price as a new 17/1.8, I can get an EOS-M100 with the 15-45 kit lens. It's only a bit larger and 30g heavier than the E-PM2 body, and the lens is not much larger than the 17/1.8. I'm interested if anyone here has the M100 and can offer some feedback on how it might compare with an older MFT body like the E-PM2.

Alternatively, I can pick up another 12-32, as they are now pretty cheap.

I'm wishing now that I hadn't sold off the 14-42IIR - at least it would give me something to use on the little E-PM2 for a while.

I think you should think of which focal length you used the most when you had your 12-32lm. All the focal lengths you list are different enough than you should choose based on focal length not on pure IQ difference between those lenses

Harold

Olympus 14-42 EZ with a JJC self-opening lens cap?

zuikowesty wrote:

Or, for the same price as a new 17/1.8, I can get an EOS-M100 with the 15-45 kit lens.

Wow, that is one spectacular deal.  I definitely go with Canon M100 with a 15-45.  It has a very reliable Canon Dual CMOSAF tracking, which is far more reliable and superior to Panasonic DFD that tend to pickup my background in vlogging

Can you give me a link to the deal?

traveler_101 wrote:

Good idea going to a prime, but then you need a focal length that serves general photography. Of the ones you listed that would be either the 17 or the 20. Each has its advantages and It depends on the kind of shooting you do. I have had the 20 and have the 17 currently - and I will say that the 20 has great IQ.

That's my thinking. When I reviewed the shots taken with my 12-40, then only FF which stood out other than 12 and 40 was 17, by a decent margin. On 135 film, a 35mm was often my standard lens.

JaKing wrote:

Olympus 14-42 EZ with a JJC self-opening lens cap?

I've tried it, but dislike the e-zoom, and the IQ is not stellar. For me, the main advantage of the 12-32 was the 12mm wide end, and the decent IQ. The EZ has neither (it's not bad, just not that good either)

007peter wrote:

zuikowesty wrote:

Or, for the same price as a new 17/1.8, I can get an EOS-M100 with the 15-45 kit lens.

Wow, that is one spectacular deal. I definitely go with Canon M100 with a 15-45. It has a very reliable Canon Dual CMOSAF tracking, which is far more reliable and superior to Panasonic DFD that tend to pickup my background in vlogging

Can you give me a link to the deal?

I'm using Henry's and Photoprice.ca as a reference, but I imagine US prices are similar. About $479 CAD.

hindesite wrote:

Your logic is really all over the place.

I like to be flexible in my approach to logic.

Being recently retired means I also have more time to ruminate on such trivia, and less inclination to part with my money...

What does acquiring yet another camera system achieve? You can't use the lens with either of your existing bodies, and the IQ is a matter for some discussion anyway, given that it is yet another pancake zoom lens.

Since I've had two E-M5 bodies for almost 2 years, the E-PM2 is no longer a backup body that it once was, and is more like a grab and go, or leave in the glovebox/purse camera. But it is also 5 years old, and could die tomorrow. An M100 or similar would seem to fulfill this role ok.

I have a couple of EOS-Ms (only because one is IR converted) and they are nothing to write home about; even the IQ (specifically, colour) from my old E-P1 is far superior, even with all that camera's shortcomings, and I don't even like Olympus cameras particularly.

I thought everyone raves about Canon colour?

While the M100 might be better, using an EOS-M is like going back to the dark ages, the only thing that makes it tolerable is Magic Lantern.

In trying one a year ago, I do recall it being very primitive and limited in manual functions. Again, for the intended use, this might be fine.

Just buy a 14-42II Lumix (these are dirt cheap and very, very good) and you're done.

I haven't tried one, but will keep an eye out.

Thanks

mchnz wrote:

zuikowesty wrote:

Since my 12-32 died from Costa Rican moisture, I am faced with a decision of how to replace it. Although I had it on my E-M5ii as a compact kit, it normally resides on my wife's E-PM2, which I will also use when I need something small. I've never liked it much, as the collapsible zoom defeats some of the compact advantage, so I have been thinking of replacing it with a prime for a few years, either a 17/1.8 (1st choice), 15/1.7 (too $$), 14/2.5, or maybe even a 12/2. The 20/1.7 might work but the noise and focus speed is annoying.

Did you use the zoom at primarily one focal length? If yes, then maybe you could go with a prime. If no, then are you prepared to buy more lenses to cover your desired range and are you prepared to change lenses while out and about?

WIth my 12-40, the most common FL were: 12 (landscapes), 40 (closeups), 17 (general), in that order, so 17 seems like a good choice for an all round lens.

I've mostly been a zoom person, but I bought the 17mm a few months ago. It was quite a satisfying purchase from an nostalgic point of view:

My E-M5 II + 17 f1.8, OM-2 and 50 f1.8 in the background.

But there is a downside. Not all subjects suit the focal length. It's often not possible to substitute moving the camera for zooming. Opportunities may be missed or ignored due to the need to change lenses. I think it's a fun lens, but I wouldn't go on holiday without a zoom.

Or, for the same price as a new 17/1.8, I can get an EOS-M100 with the 15-45 kit lens. It's only a bit larger and 30g heavier than the E-PM2 body, and the lens is not much larger than the 17/1.8. I'm interested if anyone here has the M100 and can offer some feedback on how it might compare with an older MFT body like the E-PM2.

If you're not tied to the m4/3 system and you like what the EOS-M100 produces, then selling off the E-M5 II, and switching systems isn't a silly idea. It seems to me that switching systems needn't be a major concern if you current investment is small. Would you miss all the E-M5 II's bells and whistles?

Not a chance! I pretty sure Canon does't offer anything that will entice me to part with my E-M5ii. This is just to replace the pocketable E-PM2.

Alternatively, I can pick up another 12-32, as they are now pretty cheap.

I'm wishing now that I hadn't sold off the 14-42IIR - at least it would give me something to use on the little E-PM2 for a while.

If you're intent on going to steamy wet places, perhaps a weather sealed zoom would be worth adding to the 17mm, perhaps the Oly 12-50 or 14-150 II. Personally I been happy with the inexpensive 12-50 - it's been dropped and bashed about in forests, mountains and volcanoes, still working like a champ, and cheap as chips to replace.

I mainly use my 12-40 and 7-14 which are sealed, the 12-32 was an attempt to save weight since I travelled for a month with a 30L pack. After 10 days, my wife joined me and brought the 12-40 with her...

Thanks

zuikowesty wrote:

JaKing wrote:

Olympus 14-42 EZ with a JJC self-opening lens cap?

I've tried it, but dislike the e-zoom, and the IQ is not stellar. For me, the main advantage of the 12-32 was the 12mm wide end, and the decent IQ. The EZ has neither (it's not bad, just not that good either)

You do realise that you can set the camera to remember the FL previously zoomed to? Ameliorates the constant hassle of the reset from 14mm after turning the camera off!

The 12mm is harder to get around, Shawn ...

I have found the IQ of the 14-42 EZ to be acceptable for the sorts of shooting where my camera would be wearing it. The 12-50 is better again. Then my FTs 14-54 MkII and f/4 12-100.

The 14-42 EZ also appears to be far more robust than the 12-32, judging from the number of posts here.

Why not just buy a s/h (or new) 12-32, and forget all the angst you are putting yourself through?

I had the original EPL1 and liked it, but sold it awhile ago. Tried Sony A6000 but did not impress me. I bought the Canon m100 and really liked it, and the touchscreen is really responsive, and the kit lens was very sharp indeed. I wanted a few more buttons and dials on the outside so I traded up to the Canon m6 and this one is perfect, as you can add flash if you like to for bounce fill flash, and buy a third party adapter which I bought the Commlite (low priced) so now I can add EF and EFS lenses, and the autofocus works well with adapter. I was impressed on the image quality of this latest 24MP sensor (similar as the 80D with very good dynamic range, and works well in low light). So recommendation is, if cost is an issue, the m100 is very good, and the m6 is only one model up and has a few more features for expansion. I totally like both cameras. It was because of the m100 that I bought the m6 to add flash when I need it and extra outside dials. If you do not need that extra stuff the m100 is still an awesome small camera and you can add about 5 other m series lenses if you need zoom in native lenses.
The m6 has all the features of the m50 (best mid level mirrorless) except 4K and an EVF which I do not need. The 1080 60P with dual pixel focus is awesome on m6 and on m100.

I bought an returned m100 for $359C and it is a nice camera at that price. Why I did it was to see just how the two sensor sizes compare. First it is a pleasant camera to use with reliable exposure ( set at 1/3 stop under) and focussing is pretty good. But for the sensor comparison I really did not see a benefit. The 15-45 lens on mine is sharp except at the extreme edges. What really matters is the lens. My em10ii with my 12-60 is sharper or equal so choosing one as a replacement for a broken lens would not be my first choice. Stay with good 4/3 lenses and take advantage of Oly IS. If you want a replacement small camera and do not want an assortment of m lenses the m100 is rather nice. Similar Panasonic/Oly Models are more expensive and in my opinion less desirable. If in the US look to Canon refurbished at Canon USA. --
JDW

JaKing wrote:

zuikowesty wrote:

JaKing wrote:

Olympus 14-42 EZ with a JJC self-opening lens cap?

I've tried it, but dislike the e-zoom, and the IQ is not stellar. For me, the main advantage of the 12-32 was the 12mm wide end, and the decent IQ. The EZ has neither (it's not bad, just not that good either)

You do realise that you can set the camera to remember the FL previously zoomed to? Ameliorates the constant hassle of the reset from 14mm after turning the camera off!

I didn't know that... but would the E-PM2 support this?

The 12mm is harder to get around, Shawn ...

Yes, but I have looked at the WA converters in the past. Now, I'd probably just take a few shots and stitch later.

I have found the IQ of the 14-42 EZ to be acceptable for the sorts of shooting where my camera would be wearing it. The 12-50 is better again. Then my FTs 14-54 MkII and f/4 12-100.

My two copies of the 12-50 were poor, so any less IQ than that would drive me crazy, I think.

The 14-42 EZ also appears to be far more robust than the 12-32, judging from the number of posts here.

That's good, although the trim rings seem to be the weakest part of the 12-32. I haven't heard of other problems, but I also haven't followed things much recently.

Why not just buy a s/h (or new) 12-32, and forget all the angst you are putting yourself through?

One person's angst is another's hobby...

Did I mention I'm also thinking a GoPro might be an alternative?