Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
IWBF
IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

...or are there other lenses for MFT that are either smaller (in length) or lighter and weather sealed?

Thanks.

kallekarl999 New Member • Posts: 13
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

The Panasonic Lumix 12-60  (Not the Leica version) is lighter but not smaller.

Jappie52 Regular Member • Posts: 188
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
4

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

kallekarl999 wrote:

The Panasonic Lumix 12-60 (Not the Leica version) is lighter but not smaller.

and cheaper

IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
1

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

Jappie52 Regular Member • Posts: 188
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
2

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Jappie52 Regular Member • Posts: 188
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
2

I just realized I forgot the Oly 60mm macro. Not exactly small, but definitely the lightest.

IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

Jappie52 wrote:

I just realized I forgot the Oly 60mm macro. Not exactly small, but definitely the lightest.

Yes, its a bit lighter than the PL25. For me its about balance on a small body and without handling one can probably not judge what feels right and what not.

mchnz Senior Member • Posts: 1,619
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
3

IWBF wrote:

...or are there other lenses for MFT that are either smaller (in length) or lighter and weather sealed?

Thanks.

A used 12-50mm would be a light (and cheap).  Plus it has an optional electronic zoom and an L-Fn button.

Orangorill
Orangorill Regular Member • Posts: 211
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?
1

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Fuji finally made a tiny WR lens... and bundled it with a non-WR camera.

Would love to see Panasonic release a WR GX10/20mm 1.7 II bundle, I'd pick it up day one.

 Orangorill's gear list:Orangorill's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +8 more
IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

Orangorill wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Fuji finally made a tiny WR lens... and bundled it with a non-WR camera.

That lens actually prompted my interest in the topic.

Would love to see Panasonic release a WR GX10/20mm 1.7 II bundle, I'd pick it up day one.

You probably meant 20mm 1.7 III

prsc Regular Member • Posts: 240
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

Harold66
Harold66 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,199
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

Unfortunately ,that s probably true 

This is why I think it would be better for Panasonic to come out with a more developed Leica version  of the 20mm , like a  weather sealed dual IS 1.4/20mm to have a more high  end option for this very popular focal length

Harold

-- hide signature --

FOLLOW me on IG @ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler

 Harold66's gear list:Harold66's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Ricoh GR Ricoh GR II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II +5 more
IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

I do not think so, in fact I see some incredible deals right now especially for FF. Canon RP body for 800 US$ equivalent. Nikon Z5 kit for 1'200, Pana S5 Kit for 1'500. That is the same territory as E-M5 III with 12-40 and much cheaper than E-M1 III. In my book size, weight and tele-reach are the only points in favour of MFT and it makes no sense to me that I even have to ask if there are small WS lenses.

Harold66
Harold66 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,199
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

IWBF wrote:

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

I do not think so, in fact I see some incredible deals right now especially for FF. Canon RP body for 800 US$ equivalent. Nikon Z5 kit for 1'200, Pana S5 Kit for 1'500. That is the same territory as E-M5 III with 12-40 and much cheaper than E-M1 III.

Yes this matters ONLY for those who think they might be better off with 35mm sensor. Me I am lucky that I could not use 35mm for my work so I would buy m4/3 even IF this was more expensive than 35mm system

In my book size, weight and tele-reach are the only points in favour of MFT

As you said each has his own. For me the main reason to choose m4/3 is not even part of your three reasons . so there are not three reasons in favour of met , just three that matters to YOU

Harold

-- hide signature --

FOLLOW me on IG @ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler

 Harold66's gear list:Harold66's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Ricoh GR Ricoh GR II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II +5 more
IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

Harold66 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

I do not think so, in fact I see some incredible deals right now especially for FF. Canon RP body for 800 US$ equivalent. Nikon Z5 kit for 1'200, Pana S5 Kit for 1'500. That is the same territory as E-M5 III with 12-40 and much cheaper than E-M1 III.

Yes this matters ONLY for those who think they might be better off with 35mm sensor. Me I am lucky that I could not use 35mm for my work so I would buy m4/3 even IF this was more expensive than 35mm system

In my book size, weight and tele-reach are the only points in favour of MFT

As you said each has his own. For me the main reason to choose m4/3 is not even part of your three reasons . so there are not three reasons in favour of met , just three that matters to YOU

Harold

Well maybe a fourth for me would be that I like the aspect ratio. But now I am curious: could you please give your reasons?

Harold66
Harold66 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,199
Re: Imy number 1 is your number 4
1

IWBF wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

I do not think so, in fact I see some incredible deals right now especially for FF. Canon RP body for 800 US$ equivalent. Nikon Z5 kit for 1'200, Pana S5 Kit for 1'500. That is the same territory as E-M5 III with 12-40 and much cheaper than E-M1 III.

Yes this matters ONLY for those who think they might be better off with 35mm sensor. Me I am lucky that I could not use 35mm for my work so I would buy m4/3 even IF this was more expensive than 35mm system

In my book size, weight and tele-reach are the only points in favour of MFT

As you said each has his own. For me the main reason to choose m4/3 is not even part of your three reasons . so there are not three reasons in favour of met , just three that matters to YOU

Harold

Well maybe a fourth for me would be that I like the aspect ratio. But now I am curious: could you please give your reasons?

Sure can 

My  income comes party from selling prints of my work . for me , the number one reason BY FaR is the 4.3 aspect ratio. Having grown my photography with medium format film cameras , I discovered early that I rarely hate the 3.2 ratio 

when shooting horizontally , this may work for landscapes for many but for other subjects not so much

PLUS , the 3.2 ratio when shooting verticals is simply HORRENDOUS and I shoot verticals like 80% of the time

I would even prefer a 5.4 ratio like in my day with 6x7 MF film cameras but 4.3 is still very nice and more proficient for horizontals images

so your number 4 reason is my number  1

I can think of FOUR more reasons in addition to these 4 that applies to me

  • my number 2 reason would probably be the extra DOF. contrary to popular myth , there are many times when more DOF is needed . in this case being able to shoot at base iso at F4 is better that having to shoot F8 at 800 iso . in my opinion , it kinds of erases the supposed two stops noise advantage  of 35mm over mft
  •  another advantage is the total cost for the investment . even if some aps and 35mm are coming in price , when one look at the total investment between cameras , lenses, accessories , mft is still ahead
  • lens line up. even if some other brands have good offerings , nothing matches in BOTH quantity and quality the m43 lens line up
  • Finally , there is that other thing . I started m43 with Olympus in 4/3 then old in m4/3 and they had some good models but  when my em5II broke (again with the same issue) I was forced to use the Panasonic G9 . what a revelation it was . as a reviewer and a photographer , I ve got to try many cameras and I have never have an ILC digital camera with so amazing ergonomics . Now that the price has come down under 1,000 euros or dollars it is such a bargain . I do not think that there is a digital cropped sensor camera with such good ergonomics  ( I have two g9 bodies and do not need anything else really )

I am confident that other may have additional reasons too 

Harold

-- hide signature --

FOLLOW me on IG @ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler

 Harold66's gear list:Harold66's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Ricoh GR Ricoh GR II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II +5 more
IWBF
OP IWBF Regular Member • Posts: 356
Re: Imy number 1 is your number 4

Harold66 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

I do not think so, in fact I see some incredible deals right now especially for FF. Canon RP body for 800 US$ equivalent. Nikon Z5 kit for 1'200, Pana S5 Kit for 1'500. That is the same territory as E-M5 III with 12-40 and much cheaper than E-M1 III.

Yes this matters ONLY for those who think they might be better off with 35mm sensor. Me I am lucky that I could not use 35mm for my work so I would buy m4/3 even IF this was more expensive than 35mm system

In my book size, weight and tele-reach are the only points in favour of MFT

As you said each has his own. For me the main reason to choose m4/3 is not even part of your three reasons . so there are not three reasons in favour of met , just three that matters to YOU

Harold

Well maybe a fourth for me would be that I like the aspect ratio. But now I am curious: could you please give your reasons?

Sure can

My income comes party from selling prints of my work . for me , the number one reason BY FaR is the 4.3 aspect ratio. Having grown my photography with medium format film cameras , I discovered early that I rarely hate the 3.2 ratio

when shooting horizontally , this may work for landscapes for many but for other subjects not so much

PLUS , the 3.2 ratio when shooting verticals is simply HORRENDOUS and I shoot verticals like 80% of the time

I would even prefer a 5.4 ratio like in my day with 6x7 MF film cameras but 4.3 is still very nice and more proficient for horizontals images

so your number 4 reason is my number 1

I can think of FOUR more reasons in addition to these 4 that applies to me

  • my number 2 reason would probably be the extra DOF. contrary to popular myth , there are many times when more DOF is needed . in this case being able to shoot at base iso at F4 is better that having to shoot F8 at 800 iso . in my opinion , it kinds of erases the supposed two stops noise advantage of 35mm over mft
  • another advantage is the total cost for the investment . even if some aps and 35mm are coming in price , when one look at the total investment between cameras , lenses, accessories , mft is still ahead
  • lens line up. even if some other brands have good offerings , nothing matches in BOTH quantity and quality the m43 lens line up
  • Finally , there is that other thing . I started m43 with Olympus in 4/3 then old in m4/3 and they had some good models but when my em5II broke (again with the same issue) I was forced to use the Panasonic G9 . what a revelation it was . as a reviewer and a photographer , I ve got to try many cameras and I have never have an ILC digital camera with so amazing ergonomics . Now that the price has come down under 1,000 euros or dollars it is such a bargain . I do not think that there is a digital cropped sensor camera with such good ergonomics ( I have two g9 bodies and do not need anything else really )

I am confident that other may have additional reasons too

Harold

Thanks!

mchnz Senior Member • Posts: 1,619
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

prsc wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

IWBF wrote:

Jappie52 wrote:

Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 II both lighter and smaller.

Ah yes, I tend to forget that one. Version I (non-sealed) was very popular if I remember correctly.

I wish there was something realy small like the 20mm or the 12-32...

People - at least on this forum - have been asking for small weather sealed primes for years now. So far no luck.

Would be nice but I don't think they would be willing to pay extra for that weather sealing. Many - at least on this forum and others - think that pretty much everything is already too expensive...

In several cases I've not even been willing to pay extra for electronics.

Of the last five primes I've purchased, two have been m4/3 manual lenses (Laowa 7mm and Meike 4mm), two have been adapted-film lenses (Zuiko MC 50mm f/3.5 Auto-Macro, Zuiko MC f/1.8), and the fifth was a second hand m4/3 300 f/4 (which is weather sealed, but definitely doesn't count for this discussion). I'm very tempted by the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4, which can be had for about US$70, but I'm resisting.

Michael Meissner
Michael Meissner Forum Pro • Posts: 27,192
Re: Is the Oly 12-45 the smallest and lightest sealed lens in MFT?

The old Olympus 12-50 f/3.5-6.3 lens is lighter, smaller, and has a slower aperture at the long end:

12-50 f/3.5-6.3 EZ: 211g, 48mm
12-45 f/4: 254g, 70mm

 Michael Meissner's gear list:Michael Meissner's gear list
Olympus Stylus 1 Olympus E-5 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 Olympus 14-150 F4-5.6 II +23 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads