14-150mm f/4-5.6 or 12-45mm f/4 on OM-D E-M5 Mark III

[dslrnew]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

 

[kaphinga]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses.... I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have both lenses, and I would lean toward the 12-45mm for three reasons:

* 12mm at the wide end is useful, especially if you are an urban shooter. I always get frustrated with 14mm at the wide end. Even when I was using the 14-150mm regularly, I would usually wind up packing either the 12-40mm or the 9-18mm with it.

* The close focusing ability of the 12-45mm comes in handy.

* You can always pick up the "plastic fantastic" 40-150mm really cheap (~$100) to handle the long end. It's an amazing lens for the price.

Of course, the upside to the 14-150mm, as you mentioned, is that you don't have to change lenses.

 

[softmarmotte]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

For me the 14-150 every time. 40 or 45mm is way to short for an 'everyday' lens for me. I go out walking mainly in the countryside and take landscape shots. I often see birds or wild animals. 45mm just doesn't cut it. Flowers at 100mm gives good isolation of the subject. The 14-150 also focuses very close. I also carry an extension tube just in case - it weighs 0 grammes...

Where I need 12 mm or wider I just use a 2 or 3 picture pano or vertical pano

There is no discernible softness at 150mm and the centre sharpness is stunning even better than the plastic fantastic

I do not have the 12-45 but do have the 12-40. Only ever use it at home or from the car

 

[Skeeterbytes]

The 12-45 is a very impressive little lens. Just getting to know it and am finding it terrific.

For a one-lens solution the 12-100 is how I'd go, would feel constrained by 14mm at the long end.

Cheers,

Rcik

 

[A_Mist]

12-45 hands down. Such a small lens with PRO grade image and build quality. And constant f4 aperture. After selling most of my Olympus gear, E-M1.3 and 12-45 is the combo I did keep.

 

[bluevellet]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

The 14-150? The mark II version of the lens, right? The one weather-sealed that should go well with the EM5III.

The EM5III compared to your old GF3 would be quite an upgrade. But are you sure you can deal with the extra size/weight after using your GF3 for a decade? Or maybe you are keeping the GF3 around just for those moments where small size is required? Ok makes sense.

I notice you have the 12-32 already. How do you like that lens overall? Does it leave you wanting in any way? You shoot at 12mm a lot?

Same with your 45-150mm, you use it a lot? At what focal lengths? You realize a new 14-150 is likely going to make your 45-150 obsolete? Answer all those questions and you are likely to get a better idea.


I'm not you and we probably don't shoot the same things, but in your shoes, I'd probably be very tempted with the 14-150, to the point of getting it (and I did 5 years ago). But as I found out later on, I care more about IQ than convenience, I care more about pseudo macro than having none of it and I care more about 12mm than... anything beyond 40mm so the 12-45 is probably the wiser choice long term (12-40 f2.8 essentially replaced my 14-150 for general use).

 

[gary0319]

I have both lenses and the E-M5 III.

I find the 14-150 is an exceptional match with my E-M5 III, and mine is sharp all the way out to 150mm, even wide open. The image quality is equal, IMO. So, the question I ask myself when selecting between the two.....will I want the wider FOV of the 12-45, or will I miss the reach of the 14-150? For me, most times I pick the 14-150 because of the reach, but I shoot a lot of bugs and flowers. If I am going in the city or for museums and galleries, the 12mm wins out.

You cannot go wrong with either on the E-M5 III.

 

[DLBlack]

I would choice the 12-45/4.0 over the 14-150/f4.0-5.6 for the following reasons:

1. Better image quality

2. Fixed minimum f-stop

3. Closer focus distance

4. Has 12mm on the wide range

5. More compact size

6. Faster f-stop at the long end

7. A great lens, while the 14-150 is just a good lens

You can use your 45-150 when you need more reach and your 20/1.7 for low light.

I have owned both the 12-45/4.0 and 14-150/4.0-5.6. I got the 14-150/4.0-5.6 for my kayaking lens. I passed the 14-150/4.0-5.6 on down to my to my wife after buying the 12-100/4.0. I use the 12-45/4.0 for a general as l walk about lens when put on family outings. It is a great lens.

--
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3571/3380136992_7c5a0986ea_m.jpg

 

[toporossa]

I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I would pick the 12-45mm because it's very compact and has top image quality and I would miss the 12mm with the other lens. And if you also want the flexibility of a superzoom I would buy the 12-200mm in addition (which I did and on the E-M5.3 it's very usable - not so much on my old E-M 5.1 because with this combination it was the first time that chromatic aberrations really annoyed me (on the long end) - the 5.1 obviously doesn't correct them automatically).

 

[BruceRH]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

You can’t go wrong with either lens, it really depends on how much you value reach vs wide. I have both and my 14-150 is excellent on the long end but I do wish it was 12mm on the wide end. For a general walk around lens, 45mm is not enough reach for me. For me personally, if I could only have one of the 2 lenses, it would have to be the 14-150. It is sharp, weather resistant and is the perfect size for the EM5 MKiii. As someone else mentioned, if you need a wider FOV, take a couple of images and stitch them together.

 

[kaphinga]

For a one-lens solution the 12-100 is how I'd go, would feel constrained by 14mm at the long end.

Yep. The 12-100mm give me both the wide end and the long end (at the expense of extra weight).

It's really a tough call between the 12-45mm and the 14-150mm.

 

[shinndigg]

Because there are (generally) too many compromises with super zooms. Particularly with barrel distortion and pin cushioning. That being said, in camera software takes care of much those issues.

--
shinndigg
www.pbase.com/shinndigg

 

[softmarmotte]

Because there are (generally) too many compromises with super zooms. Particularly with barrel distortion and pin cushioning. That being said, in camera software takes care of much those issues.

really ? this pic is full of distortion and pin cushioning ? i have thousands more. must get rid of the lens. poor image quality, terrible distortion, soft...

This choice comes down to weather sealing, size, focal length requirments not iq





--
anyone is welcome to do anything they want with my images except sell them for profit

softmarmotte1

Explore softmarmotte1’s 11,121 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[grcolts]

Since you already have the Panasonic 12-32 lens, I would opt for the 14-150 weather resistant lens. The 12-32 will work just fine on the Olympus. Also, for shooting in low light the constant 4.0 is not optimal if shooting in low light such as star shots, etc. A faster 12/2.0 or 1.4 would be much better.

 

[grcolts]

Yep...time to purge all your images and the lens too. LOL

I understand zooms can often be more problematic as the previous poster mentioned but it really depends upon the lens in use. Most minor problems can be corrected via software so usually is not a huge concern.

Because there are (generally) too many compromises with super zooms. Particularly with barrel distortion and pin cushioning. That being said, in camera software takes care of much those issues.

really ? this pic is full of distortion and pin cushioning ? i have thousands more. must get rid of the lens. poor image quality, terrible distortion, soft...

This choice comes down to weather sealing, size, focal length requirments not iq

--
GR

Gary Richards

Explore Gary Richards’s 476 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

http://photo.net/g_richards

Gary Richards

Landscape, Nature and Fine Art Photography https://fineartamerica.com/profiles/1-gary-richards.html

garyrichards.smugmug.com

 

[softmarmotte]

Thrown them all away now...

As I (and everyone else) haven't been on holiday this year i took a quick look at yours on your flickr and smugmug pages. nice collection and some great colours. thanks for that. i feel better already

Yep...time to purge all your images and the lens too. LOL

I understand zooms can often be more problematic as the previous poster mentioned but it really depends upon the lens in use. Most minor problems can be corrected via software so usually is not a huge concern.

Because there are (generally) too many compromises with super zooms. Particularly with barrel distortion and pin cushioning. That being said, in camera software takes care of much those issues.

really ? this pic is full of distortion and pin cushioning ? i have thousands more. must get rid of the lens. poor image quality, terrible distortion, soft...

This choice comes down to weather sealing, size, focal length requirments not iq

--
anyone is welcome to do anything they want with my images except sell them for profit

softmarmotte1

Explore softmarmotte1’s 11,121 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[DAEMANO]

I would choice the 12-45/4.0 over the 14-150/f4.0-5.6 for the following reasons:

1. Better image quality

2. Fixed minimum f-stop

3. Closer focus distance

4. Has 12mm on the wide range

5. More compact size

6. Faster f-stop at the long end

7. A great lens, while the 14-150 is just a good lens

You can use your 45-150 when you need more reach and your 20/1.7 for low light.

I have owned both the 12-45/4.0 and 14-150/4.0-5.6. I got the 14-150/4.0-5.6 for my kayaking lens. I passed the 14-150/4.0-5.6 on down to my to my wife after buying the 12-100/4.0. I use the 12-45/4.0 for a general as l walk about lens when put on family outings. It is a great lens.

Agreed on every point.

The 12-45/4.0 will likely upgrade most of the OP's day to day photography. This matters most. It's a step above all of the zoom lenses he owns and the 14-150 he's considering in IQ.

His currently owned Lumix 45-150 will match the Oly 14-150 in image quality and speed if he needs telephoto reach.

Convenience of using just 1 lens matters less if image quality suffers in the most used range. Also, you don't buy an ILC to not switch lenses when needed.

Finally, as mentioned, his Lumix 20/1.7 will deliver indoors and in low light. So that aspect is already covered.

This is the way.

 

[grcolts]

Thank you for your input on my photo pages...

I too looked at yours and enjoyed viewing them as well.

I am getting anxious for a road trip...Covid-19 really interfered with life for sure. Thankfully, neither myself or my wife contacted it but some of our friends did, including a couple who did not make it. Sad. Hopefully, better times are near.

Thrown them all away now...

As I (and everyone else) haven't been on holiday this year i took a quick look at yours on your flickr and smugmug pages. nice collection and some great colours. thanks for that. i feel better already

Yep...time to purge all your images and the lens too. LOL

I understand zooms can often be more problematic as the previous poster mentioned but it really depends upon the lens in use. Most minor problems can be corrected via software so usually is not a huge concern.

Because there are (generally) too many compromises with super zooms. Particularly with barrel distortion and pin cushioning. That being said, in camera software takes care of much those issues.

really ? this pic is full of distortion and pin cushioning ? i have thousands more. must get rid of the lens. poor image quality, terrible distortion, soft...

This choice comes down to weather sealing, size, focal length requirments not iq

--
GR

Gary Richards

Explore Gary Richards’s 476 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

http://photo.net/g_richards

Gary Richards

Landscape, Nature and Fine Art Photography https://fineartamerica.com/profiles/1-gary-richards.html

garyrichards.smugmug.com

 

[tammons]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

Oly 12-45 F4.

My Oly 14-150 never gets sharp around the edges even stopped down. And 14mm isnt wide enough on the short end.

 

[softmarmotte]

I am thinking about getting an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III. The bundle deal is either with a 14-150mm f/4-5.6 or a 12-45mm f/4. I like the the idea of a superzoom (14-150mm) that I don't have to change lenses. I understand images may be soft at the long end. I read from the web that 12-45mm is very sharp. I never use any of them. I would like to get your opinions on this. Which lens would you pick?

I have a Panasonic GF3 from many years ago with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7, a 12-32 mm kit, and a 45-150 mm kit. Thanks for your help.

Oly 12-45 F4.

My Oly 14-150 never gets sharp around the edges even stopped down. And 14mm isnt wide enough on the short end.

would you care to post a couple of photos so we can all see this ?