Which lens should I get next?

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

Ckrol wrote:

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

Why do you want another lens? What's wrong with what you have?

All the lenses you mention are prime, but for street photography I often prefer a zoom, to give more quick flexibility.

Mike

1. Ckrol wrote:

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

Of course it's hard to pick what's right for you, are the manual focus lenses ok for you or would you prefer full function autofocus.

If it were me I'd look at a standard zoom. This allows you cover a lot and use the primes when something more specific is required

Ckrol wrote:

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

The Panny 42.5mm f1.7 would be good. It's a better lens than the 45mm f1.8. Sharper across the frame and close focusing ability, too.

Otherwise, something like the 14-140mm f3.5-5.6. Great little lens that pairs nicely with the GX7.

The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm that I won't find it nearly as useful as the 45mm. I would consider a zoom but low light and depth of field are things that matter for me.

Ckrol wrote:

The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm that I won't find it nearly as useful as the 45mm. I would consider a zoom but low light and depth of field are things that matter for me.

Well I have the Panny 20mm f/1.7, and can say it is very sharp, but slowish to focus (by today's standards), I have used it for street & candid photography since it was first released in 2009. But it's also a little too wide.

The Oly 45mm f/1.8 is also very sharp at full aperture and excellent at f/2.8, but a bit narrow for street stuff.

Nowadays I prefer the Oly 12-40mm f/2.8 - and, because sensors are a bit better now, the flexibility of the zoom makes up for the loss of 1.5 stops.

Hope that helps

Mike

for what you said I would go with the 20mm as you may want a normal lens

the 14 is a wide angle and you can benefit with either a 17mm lens or 20mm lens perspective.

I did not read anything that says get the 45 from you.

Ckrol wrote:

The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm that I won't find it nearly as useful as the 45mm. I would consider a zoom but low light and depth of field are things that matter for me.

If low light and depth of field are major concerns, why not take a look at the 15mm f1.7?

It’s a stop faster than the 14mm f2.5 and has nicer rendering and color signature.

The 14mm is nice because it’s so small, but it’s maximum aperture is a bit limiting. I have that 14mm, too, but never use it because it’s f2.5.

Allan Brown wrote:

Ckrol wrote:

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

I have both plus the 14. The 20 is a bit better for the street.

The 45 has, by design, field curvature which makes it not so good for landscape but it is good for portraits. Others suggest the Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7 instead of the 45.

My suggestion if you want something in between, is the Sigma 30mm f2.8. I also have this lens and it is very nice. It will be better than your old Olympus 28 f2.8.

But the OP mentioned in a later post that low light and depth of field were big concerns. That makes f2.8 no so good. If it were okay, I’d opt for one of the f2.8 zooms, not an APSC designed lens with a M4/3 mount.

this is an answer for me not the OP,

I think the OP wants a different focal length, and f2.8 is plenty for most street.

Tim Reidy Productions wrote:

this is an answer for me not the OP,

I think the OP wants a different focal length, and f2.8 is plenty for most street.

Unless it's DARK…

Ckrol wrote: "I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)"

"The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm that I won't find it nearly as useful as the 45mm. I would consider a zoom but low light and depth of field are things that matter for me".

There is a huge difference between 20 and 45mm. I think you simply have GAS.

Leave your money safely in the bank for now, earmarked for your hobby. Keep using what you have. Eventually, you will know exactly which missing FL is holding you back, and buy a lens you really use.

that is why your answer was for me,

I have no problems with street with that aperture,

I had some fun last year with some f 3.5 lens while the sun was going down and it was fine with my shooting then.

Ckrol wrote:

The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm . . . .

No, there is a significant difference in focal length (I have the 15 and the 20), and the 20 is also a better lens than the 14.

But the 42.5 f/1.7 is also a very good lens, perhaps better for portraits than for street. Your shooting style/preferences determine which focal length would be the most useful addition for you.

Ckrol wrote:

The reason I would like another is lens is while the 28mm equivalent is my favorite focal length I need more versatility, what I'm wondering is if the 20mm is too close to the 14mm that I won't find it nearly as useful as the 45mm. I would consider a zoom but low light and depth of field are things that matter for me.

Have you considered a nifty fifty, 25?

Or something wider than 14? Might be good for landscapes & some street scenes.

I have the 45 and it's a great lens - as are the panasonic 42.5s. The 45 is tiny & feather light and would always find room in your bag. But it is designed as a portrait lens so sharpness is best at the focus point (google 'field curvature' for more info). If you don't mind manual focus, the 45 is nearly the same as your 50 1.4.

In terms of angle of view, the difference between 14 and 20 is greater than the difference between 17 and 25 - two focal lengths many have (including me) and don't find duplicitous.

Welcome to micro four thirds, the candy store of lens choice

Ckrol wrote:

I recently bought a Panasonic gx7 and the Panasonic 14mm f2.5, and I also have a couple of old Olympus OM lenses (28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4) I'm looking to get another lens the question I have is wether I should get the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 or the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Which lens would be a better buy for me (I mostly do street photography and landscapes)

IBIS in your Panasonic GX7 is first generation 7 years old technology.

Thus, as regards the 45ish prime lens, the OIS in Panasonic 42.5 f1.7 will help you to get better results in low light than the non stabilized Oly 45mm.

Both lenses are very close in size and optical performance. I have the Pany 42.5 and its OIS is very efficient even on my non stabilized G7 and GM5.

You dont mention whether your two Olympus lenses are 4/3 or legacy 35mm film lenses. Film era lenses are MF only when adapted to M43, 4/3 Olympus lenses can be AF when using the OEM Olympus 4/3 to M43 adapter (which is not cheap).

I suggest you buy a cheap generic M43 adapter (price rates from 20 to 30 €/$) to check what will be your photographic experience using your adapted legacy lenses.

But if you want to really enjoy your GX7, AF modern lenses are a must, whether zoom or primes.

I have 8 Panasonic lenses, 4 zooms (12-32, 12-60 f3.5-5.6, 14-140 and 35-100 f4-5.6), 3 f1.7 primes (20, 25 and 42.5) and the 25mm f2.5.

They all deliver sharp and contrasty pictures and their AF is OK on all my Pany bodies, including the GM5 which I guess must have an AF technology close to your GX7.

IMO, any M43 lens will deliver good enough IQ, almost undistinguishable at normal viewing size or printing. What matters most is the angle of view (=focal length) and maximum aperture (low light and subject separation).

Primes and high end lenses also deliver more native out of camera contrast and clarity, but post processing can improve the rendering of entry level zooms to almost as good looking results.

The 20mm f1.7 AF-S performance is OK, even in dim light on contrasty targets. IMO, most complaints about its subpar AF applies to early M43 bodies.

Beware it cannot use AF-C, because it focuses by moving the whole lens. On my Pany bodies, when using the 20mm, AF-C is grayed and the camera asks you to switch to AF-S.

The Panasonic 20mm rendering is very pleasing, almost like high end pro lenses, with a lot of contrast. You easily get a kind of 3D pop in your photography.

There is no OEM hood, but it is very resistant to flare.

The field of view is equivalent to 40mm in 35mm film cameras, just a tad wider than the nifty-fifty standard lenses in film cameras, which is very versatile, and f1.7 allows for low light shooting and also some bokeh.

I enjoy using it fully open in museums. I am rather a zoom shooter and it is the prime I use the most when sightseeing.

The 14mm f2.5 is a very small and light lens, whith a very efficient AF design. The wider angle of view, equivalent to 28mm on 35mm film cameras, is, IMO, the most useful for street photography, close to the angle of view of most smartphones: wide enough for fast framing in street photography or for group photography indoors, but not too wide to distort the perspective. There is no OEM hood but it has a good resistance to flare.

The 14mm field of view is also convenient for landscapes or cityscapes but, because of the pancake design, there is some field curvature which will be visible in some scenes at widest apertures: far away corners will be slightly out of focus when the center will be focused to infinity or closer. Yet it can only be an issue when viewed at pixel size. Closing to f4 will avoid this issue.

The 25mm f1.7 is a cheap "plastic wonder", with good optical performance and sold with an OEM hood. It is an alternative to the 20, with excellent AF-S and AF-C performance, but bigger and lacking the outstanding rendering of the 20.

The 42.5 f1.7 is an excellent lens, with fast AF-S and AF-C, sharpness across the frame and a lot of contrast. The in-lens OIS is much more efficient than Panasonic first generation IBIS in GX7/GX8. I enjoy it for subject isolation, portrait and also low light video.

As other posters said, you might also enjoy a transtandard zoom lens. The 12-32 and 12-60 f3.5-5.6 are optically very good for entry level lenses, and excellent AF performance.

As they are usually sold as kit lenses in bundles with a new body, you can easily find cheap new "white box" o,es (dekitted by pro sellers, with legal guarantee), or second hand.

They both deliver their best performance at their wide end, which is the cheapest and most convenient way to get a 24mm film era equivalent angle of view (there is a noticeable difference between 12 and 14 in M43).

The 12-32 collapses to a very tiny and light size when not in use, easy to add to any bag or jacket pocket. Extended for use, it is still compact and thus is very unobstrusive for street shooting. The focal range (24 to 64 FF equivalent) makes for a versatile enough go-around lens, and the OIS allows shooting hand held in low light. Its only limitation is it has no MF ring: manual focusing is possible, with all focusing aids, but must be driven from the camera body.

The 12-60 goes to medium telephoto (120 mm equivalent), which makes it very versatile, it can be your only lens for travel or sightseeing. It is light and rather compact, with good haptics and a more rugged build than the 12-32. However it is a bigger lens that may catch people's attention while street shooting.

If you dont mind loosing the 12-14 range, there are also different 14-42 f3.5-5.6 OIS Pany kit lenses, and the 14-140 f3.5-5.6 which is better  than it should be expected from a 10X superzoom, and is the most convenient travel all in one zoom.

There are equivalent or better zooms offering from Olympus but either non stabilized or much bigger and more expensive like the 12-100 f4.