What's your Holy Trio? Primes.

I don't own any zooms, I use all primes. My 25 is the most used, followed by the 47.5, followed by the 75. I use the 17 sometimes, but that is already getting on the wide side for me. If I had a better option at that focal length, I probably would use it more, but not a fan of the 17/1.8, and the 17/1.2 is too extreme.

I have the 12/2, which is the worst photography purchase I have ever made, I think I have used it about twice. I used to use the 60/2.8 a lot for macro and close-up work, but have not done any of that in a really long time.

jh2bh wrote:

Seems like everybody's favorite primes are pretty wide angle and mid range, no one mentions telephotos.

Well, the OP did ask for "small".

If you want big and expensive, then here is my "Holy Trio", along with adapters, TC's and Extension Tube:

This is really why the next 4/3 iteration was called "micro 4/3".

Harold66 wrote:

Carol T wrote:

I have the 12/2, which is the worst photography purchase I have ever made,

can you tell us why ? Isn’t it sharp enough,

What I consider mediocre performance, especially considering what I paid for it (and then an expensive fidgety hood on top of that). My guess is the unimpressive performance is related to the massive optical distortion that is corrected electronically.

The worst thing is that it was, and is, the only real choice other than the 17/1.2 monstrosity, which blows my mind, considering how the 35mm equivalent focal length is supposed to be the most popular. I might actually buy an optically better f/1.8, or perhaps f/1.4, but noone is making that. I guess it doesn't matter for me, at this point I am pretty unlikely to buy any more m4/3 gear anyhow. I guess I am fortunate that I don't find wide angle that compelling.

17mm 1.8

45mm 1.8

Not sure where or why I'd need a third lens.

I guess I could have 12/17 + 25 and then use a telezoom for the reach (I don't shoot traditional portraits so 45mm is kinda meh), but this wasn't about zoom lenses. I don't own any zooms currently though, it's all about primes.

Mindcraft wrote:

17mm 1.8

45mm 1.8

Not sure where or why I'd need a third lens.

I guess I could have 12/17 + 25 and then use a telezoom for the reach (I don't shoot traditional portraits so 45mm is kinda meh), but this wasn't about zoom lenses. I don't own any zooms currently though, it's all about primes.

I have the 45 and I love it.

I think about maybe get the 17 or the 25 as a general prime. how is the 17 vs the 45 in terms of quality?

amit190 wrote:

Mindcraft wrote:

17mm 1.8

45mm 1.8

Not sure where or why I'd need a third lens.

I guess I could have 12/17 + 25 and then use a telezoom for the reach (I don't shoot traditional portraits so 45mm is kinda meh), but this wasn't about zoom lenses. I don't own any zooms currently though, it's all about primes.

I have the 45 and I love it.

I think about maybe get the 17 or the 25 as a general prime. how is the 17 vs the 45 in terms of quality?

I use the 17mm almost all the time. To me the quality is equal, but 17mm is way more versatile.

I know most people(?) rank the 45mm higher, but I think that’s mainly because the way the focal length and shallow depth of field make the images look.