Next lens: Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7 or Olympus 12-40mm?

My primary use is taking portraits outside in natural light, with lots of nature and scenery for context. I also take photos generally walking around nature spots, picking out interesting details and compositions of nature.

I feel like I need to re-invigorate my photography, and what better way than spending money on nice new gear?

Current setup:

Panasonic G80

Olympus 17mm f1.8 (the bokeh and handling of light/dark in out of focus backgrounds looks so lovely).

Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4 (favourite lens in the world for the same reason).

Sigma 60mm f2.8 (I purchased this a year ago to reinvigorate portrait photography, but I've found it difficult to use due to the large distance from camera to subject. On the plus side I love the deep colours and crazy sharpness.)

I have some standard-grade zooms which I'm just not enthusiastic about (eg. Olympus 12-50mm). I really prize sharpness, 'micro-contrast' and strong colours with very natural gradients.

Argument for buying an Olympus 12-40mm f2.8: lots of variety of focal lengths. Should be sharp enough. I don't have to switch lenses.

Argument for buying Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7: wow factor of very soft backgrounds, crisp details.

Stuff I should probably sell: Leica 15mm f1.7. Olympus e-pl9. Standard grade zooms (2x Oly, 1x Panasonic).

Is a pro zoom just boring? Or should it be an essential part of my kit?? Should I walk in to a shop and buy whatever feels right at the time, or should I plan purchases properly? Existential questions. Welcome your feedback.

Alex_UK_Asia wrote:

My primary use is taking portraits outside in natural light, with lots of nature and scenery for context. I also take photos generally walking around nature spots, picking out interesting details and compositions of nature.

I feel like I need to re-invigorate my photography, and what better way than spending money on nice new gear?

Current setup:

Panasonic G80

Olympus 17mm f1.8 (the bokeh and handling of light/dark in out of focus backgrounds looks so lovely).

Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4 (favourite lens in the world for the same reason).

Sigma 60mm f2.8 (I purchased this a year ago to reinvigorate portrait photography, but I've found it difficult to use due to the large distance from camera to subject. On the plus side I love the deep colours and crazy sharpness.)

I have some standard-grade zooms which I'm just not enthusiastic about (eg. Olympus 12-50mm). I really prize sharpness, 'micro-contrast' and strong colours with very natural gradients.

I like my 12-50 especially for outside.  but it is always your call I bought my second sigma 60 because it is so good

Argument for buying an Olympus 12-40mm f2.8: lots of variety of focal lengths. Should be sharp enough. I don't have to switch lenses.

This lens has lots of uses and does go to 40mm.

Argument for buying Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7: wow factor of very soft backgrounds, crisp details.

It is a  standard portrait lens, the big reason to buy this is the low amount of weight.

Stuff I should probably sell: Leica 15mm f1.7. Olympus e-pl9. Standard grade zooms (2x Oly, 1x Panasonic).

Is a pro zoom just boring?

no I may get one next year, just have to see what my need is in this regard.

Or should it be an essential part of my kit?? Should I walk in to a shop and buy whatever feels right at the time,

You should buy the gear you need for the shots you take.

or should I plan purchases properly? Existential questions. Welcome your feedback.

If you don’t use much the zoom that you already have (the 12-50mm), a 12-40mm (even at F/2,8) won’t make a big difference.

A 42,5mm or 45mm prime lens is a very good choice for portrait. But if you’re serious about it, I would recommend to buy a brighter lens, like the PanLeica 42,5mm F/1,2 (or the Olympus 45mm F/1,2 which is one of the sharpest μ4/3 lens).

It’s a little intimidating for subjects because of its size. But once they are familiar with it, you’ll appreciate the total control that you’ll get over depth of field.

For interesting details in nature, this is the result that I’m getting:
https://jpmartel.quebec/?s=Leica+42%2C5mm (skip the French text).

The Panasonic 42.5/1.7 is a very good lens. I was surprised at its quality. Small, light, sharp, supports dual-IS.

Osa25 wrote:

Sell the 60mm and replace With the 42.5mm. Sell the 17mm and replace with the vs 12-40 zoom. Used. No need to shell out big money. See how it goes. If not happy keep selling and buying.

The point of M43 is the huge variety of these to try, used and therefore affordable. Don’t be shy to buy and sell.

I have the 42.7 and am really happy with it. It replaced the Oly 45mm 1.8. Great lenses both, but different strengths. No regrets.

Similarly, I enjoyed the 25 mm 1.4 but replaced it with the 20mm. Not quite as unique but still great and more versatile.

M43 is fun for gearheads. Enjoy it.

Yes, I agree, it's a great strategy to keep trying different lenses until you find ones which earn a permanent place in your kit. Sigma 60mm f2.8 wasn't a great purchase for me. I'm not yet completely sold on the idea of longer primes at all yet.

I like your idea to try both of my options (Oly 12-40 f2.8 and Pana 42.5mm / Oly 45mm prime) by letting go of current gear.

Samuel Dilworth wrote:

Standard zooms are boring in that they don’t have attention-grabbing angles of view, sure.

So your photograph needs to have something in it to be interesting, such as a good subject, a well-timed moment, beautiful light, satisfying or provocative graphic design, etc.

Another thing is that the standard zoom’s f/2.8 on a 4/3"-type sensor seldom lets you blow the background away completely. So some attention to composition is needed or the result is a mess. That’s maybe a good thing. You’ll have noticed great cinematographers rarely use this crutch in their work. Readable backgrounds are complementary if chosen with care.

A fast long prime has more wow factor, but will that take you far? Acquisition is no substitute for work. But it all depends how ambitious you are about your photography.

Thanks, that's a compelling argument in favour of me buying the Oly 12-40mm f2.8. I certainly use my current Olympus 12-50mm. It actually has really nice colours (provided there's sufficient light), and it has very low distortion even at 12mm. However, the lack of really crisp sharpness, especially to separate the foreground model from the background, means I rarely use it for portraits. Furthermore, the small aperture means that ISO quickly climbs up past 800 during sunset and when in tight spots, and this really takes the edge off of colours and sharpness.

I like the idea of having backgrounds only just a little out of focus, which then forces me to learn to find pleasing backgrounds. I agree that strongly blurred backgrounds is a lazy way to create a striking image!

As much as I love prime lenses, I'm not sure how much I love dancing around changing lenses. I haven't had this problem so much with the 25mm f1.4 as it can stay on the camera for such a wide range of uses.

I'll have to part with either the Panasonic 15mm F1.7 or the Olympus 17mm f1.8. My actual buying decisions will be based on what good deals I can find, either new or used (I'm based in China and travel in SE Asia.)

The 12-40 will make you a lot better photographer in shooting environmental portraits because you can perfect composition so easily. Sometimes just changing the focal length 2-3 mm can make all the difference in composition to get the best out of a scene. This can be done so quickly. I will occasionally orchestrate what I want my companions to do and can do that with little loss of time in hiking so that I don't ruin their experience.

So I have the 42.5 f/1.7 and I love that lens.  Its a wonderful piece of glass that does a great job on waist up portraits.

The biggest problem with it is its not as flexible as you may want.  I think as a walking around lens, you wont beat the 12-40.  If you dont love your standard zoom lenses sell them, the 12-40 or 12-35 would be an awesome addition to your kit.  They will handle low light better than your standard zooms, give much sharper results, and probably satiate what you are looking for.

The 42.5 is sort of a two trick pony.  With good macro rings it can make for a decent macro substitute (there is some focus breathing though), and its an awesome portrait lens when it comes to that style of shot.

The 12-40 is a great wide angle lens, a good portrait lens, and a total all around workhorse lens that will do everything within its range pretty darn well.

As a guy who has and loves the 42.5 f/1.7 I say its awesome when the need arises, but if you aren't happy with your existing standard zooms, that's where I'd start.

Check out

https://dofsimulator.net/en/

For a visual idea.

On a waist up portrait oriented shot

The 42.5 f/1.7 gives you about 3.1" DOF

The 12-40 f/2.8 @ 40 f/2.8 gives you 5.1" DOF

Both can do a nice job of obscuring the background and focusing your attention on your subject.  Both will give you a similar perspective.  Yes the 42.5 should be sharper, but would you even notice it in print?

Osa25 wrote:

Sell the 60mm and replace With the 42.5mm. Sell the 17mm and replace with the vs 12-40 zoom. Used. No need to shell out big money. See how it goes. If not happy keep selling and buying.

Yeah I agree. You specialize in portraits, get a specialized lens for it - the 42.5 is great for this. The 12-40 is a generalist lens, good at everything but not great at anything, at least not portraits.

People will tell you the 12-40 (and 12-35) are "like a bag of primes." They aren't really, but are my most-used by far unless I need a specialized solution.

Greg

You know what you want and you have done your research well.

You're asking between two different lenses; the 1.7 is nice for smooth backgrounds, although 60mm is already too much tele for you and your favourite lenses are shorter;

Or the 12-40 Pro, which is 1.3 stop smaller; no worries about sharpness, it matches your favourite focal lenghts ... but you won't smooth the background as much.

Rent the 12-40 and try it out.

m4/3 is small and light enough that I just carry 2 primes: 25mm  & 42.5. It's difficult getting decent background blur with the smaller aperture zooms so I usually avoid them.

Thanks for all the great feedback and advice! I've now decided on my buying strategy:

1. First, purchase a f2.8 standard zoom (either Panasonic 12-35mm or Oly 12-40mm). This will open up my creative portrait options in the focal range I know I like (around 25mm, perhaps a little longer, and definitely wider too).

2. Second priority, sell the Sigma 60mm f2.8 and then buy an Olympus 45mm f1.8 or panasonic 42.5mm f1.7. I'm thinking not spending a lot of money as I've not yet owned and enjoyed a long prime lens, so I'm not sure how much I will warm to it. I often take portraits in temples and enclosed spaces such as hotels. I don't want to keep backing up and finding I don't have enough space!

I once owned the Olympus 14-54mm back in the days of the Olympus e-510. I've tasted that level of quality before. I think this is eating away at me and preventing me from loving the slower zooms for micro four thirds.

Remaining issue is buying new or used. I'll be in Tokyo in a couple of weeks. No idea if that is a good place to buy new or used? I'm tempted to buy the new Pana 12-35mm mark ii brand new if I can get a great price. Another option is to split my flight from China and have a day in Hong Kong. A lot of hassle but I think prices are good there. I may start another thread about where best to buy in Asia.

Thanks again for the help and advice!

Replying to Burritos and beer:

Yes, I'm basically in full agreement with you. I agree the 42.5mm focal length is getting a little specialised. Not sure how much I will like it - zooms are so different as you can zoom out and the restriction of a narrow prime is gone. Beautiful effects (bokeh, compression) and restrictive use (needing space) seem to go hand in hand.

Alex_UK_Asia wrote:

My primary use is taking portraits outside in natural light, with lots of nature and scenery for context. I also take photos generally walking around nature spots, picking out interesting details and compositions of nature.

I feel like I need to re-invigorate my photography, and what better way than spending money on nice new gear?

Current setup:

Panasonic G80

Olympus 17mm f1.8 (the bokeh and handling of light/dark in out of focus backgrounds looks so lovely).

Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4 (favourite lens in the world for the same reason).

(snip)

You already have a good kit for environmental portraiture.

The somewhat wider angle of view of the 17 and 25 are commonly used for this purpose, and you don't always want a extremely shallow depth of field. You seem happy with both of these fine lenses. What do you want that you don't already have?

Having said that, a while back I picked up the Olympus 45/1.2 precisely for portraits, and recently added a 17/1.2 to add a different perspective. Absolutely thrilled with these lenses. So I'd agree that a 42.5/1.7 would be nice addition to your kit.

But as an alternative suggestion, perhaps you might consider looking into lighting as a way to freshen up your approach. There are excellent and reasonably priced options for mFT lighting available from Godox, Adorama Flashpoint, and others. Lighting makes a huge difference, and might add a different dimension to your work that a another lens wouldn't.

There are many videos on using lighting for outdoor portraiture ... here's one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zwGhemguHk

My 2 cents.