What do you use a EF-M 32mm for?

I have to admit that I became a lazy photographer over the years and prefer the convenience of zooms over fix focal lenses.
These days, photography is mostly happening during excursions & holiday trips, apart from that there is not enough time left to go out for dedicated photography.

As so many are raving about the EF-M 32mm these days, I suffered of severe G.A.S. and, I came to ask myself how could I possibly make good use of one?
At the same time I was also thinking about the EF-M 28mm macro, because it offers IS.

What do you people use more often, zooms or, fix focals?

I do have already a 22mm, origanally intended for low light and reportage which I have rarely used.
The same goes for Sigma 56m which I bought for nicer portraits.

PS: I usually buy used at good/bargain prices.

J Peters wrote:

...

But I have to agree, I can cover 11mm to 400mm with zooms, and between them they get more than 95% of the time attached to the camera.

Thank you for saying so; I am feeling much better now!

J Peters wrote:

But I have to agree, I can cover 11mm to 400mm with zooms, and between them they get more than 95% of the time attached to the camera.

What kind of max aperture do you get with the zoom lens?

I recently got an M6 II with the 18-150mm lens and it is very good, but I am considering the 32mm to get the 1.4 aperture and sharpness that the zoom lens can't offer.

Maxmolly7 wrote:

I have to admit that I became a lazy photographer over the years and prefer the convenience of zooms over fix focal lenses.
These days, photography is mostly happening during excursions & holiday trips, apart from that there is not enough time left to go out for dedicated photography.

As so many are raving about the EF-M 32mm these days, I suffered of severe G.A.S. and, I came to ask myself how could I possibly make good use of one?
At the same time I was also thinking about the EF-M 28mm macro, because it offers IS.

What do you people use more often, zooms or, fix focals?

I do have already a 22mm, origanally intended for low light and reportage which I have rarely used.
The same goes for Sigma 56m which I bought for nicer portraits.

PS: I usually buy used at good/bargain prices.

I have the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, which is pretty similar. I use it mostly for people (portraits, events, family). Though it's considered a good general purpose focal length, personally I find it a bit too narrow for most other applications, but that's personal preference. I'd rather have a 35-40mm equivalent as a general walkabout lens. If you don't use your other primes much, you probably wouldn't use this one much either. That said, you could try setting whatever zoom you have to 32mm and leave it there for awhile and see if you like the perspective for what you do. The 32mm f/1.4 will certainly deliver top-notch IQ.

borris14 wrote:

J Peters wrote:

But I have to agree, I can cover 11mm to 400mm with zooms, and between them they get more than 95% of the time attached to the camera.

What kind of max aperture do you get with the zoom lens?

I recently got an M6 II with the 18-150mm lens and it is very good, but I am considering the 32mm to get the 1.4 aperture and sharpness that the zoom lens can't offer.

Right ?

32mm is sharp wide open and makes nice out of focus areas too.

Sometimes end up with a nice photo where most of the photo is not in focus and the main subject is very sharp.

Maxmolly7 wrote:

, I suffered of severe G.A.S.

This is a great lens to feed your addiction - me too.

Hardly ever use it - but brilliant results when I do.

I did sell the 56, f/1.4, albeit that is great too as did not want to carry it and the 60mm macro.  I also sold my 28mm EFM macro as too close to the 32mm.   The 16mm f/1.4 I still have because of G.A.S.

Thanx for your feedback, I still suffer from G.A.S. 😉

Maxmolly7 wrote:

As so many are raving about the EF-M 32mm these days, I suffered of severe G.A.S. and, I came to ask myself how could I possibly make good use of one?

I use it for almost everything. This is my go-to lens that I'm very sure of. The best possible image quality, very convenient angle of view.

Hi

Not been here a while and this topic caught my eye as I love this lens!

The 32mm prime is a stellar lens. I use it a lot for flower portraits. The f1.4 aperture and close focus distance give you opportunities to blur out backgrounds creatively. The colour rendition and sharpness are superb.

Thank you very much for these fine samples!

They get me thinking...

PhotoKhan wrote:

...

This said, to me, the choice is obvious: Go with the 28mm, gain this advantage and add macro and ring light to boot.

PK

Interesting approach, thanx for the feedback!

I like the fast 32 primarily for shooting my events, esp wide open and in low light! The very sharp images this lens produces (due to the large aperture and high lens sharpness) make a huge difference when noise reduction is applied. Noise reduction has a very detrimental effect on soft images!!

R2

Maxmolly7 wrote:

I have to admit that I became a lazy photographer over the years and prefer the convenience of zooms over fix focal lenses.
These days, photography is mostly happening during excursions & holiday trips, apart from that there is not enough time left to go out for dedicated photography.

As so many are raving about the EF-M 32mm these days, I suffered of severe G.A.S. and, I came to ask myself how could I possibly make good use of one?
At the same time I was also thinking about the EF-M 28mm macro, because it offers IS.

That's a good reason.  At the same time: the zooms are stabilized too, and f/3.5 isn't crazy bright compared to the zooms.

What do you people use more often, zooms or, fix focals?

I mostly use zooms, but the most keepers are coming from primes.  Zooms are about shooting fun, primes are about less pictures but more keepers.

I do have already a 22mm, origanally intended for low light and reportage which I have rarely used.
The same goes for Sigma 56m which I bought for nicer portraits.

Yeah, the laziness, that's the disadvantage of 22mm+56mm over a 32mm.

Personally I can live with a 32mm and no 56mm, however, not being able to go a bit wider than 32mm can be a pain sometimes.

If you don't like too many lens changes but you do like to benefit from both the benefits of primes and zooms just a standard zoom and the 32mm could be the best solution. Sell the rest.

PS: I usually buy used at good/bargain prices.

Same here.

Thanx, good food for thought! 😀

Very beautiful! Touching!:-D

the 32mm is glued to my M5 and I use it to accompany my 35mm on FF so I have 35mm and 50mm FOV on two bodies.  you could argue that the (equivalent) FL is close (35 & 50) but I still use them differently which is why I have both of them in my kit.

specifically, I use the 32mm for taking photos of people.  at the moment, it is used for taking photos of my family at home or when we are out.  I also use it for events (birthdays and weddings) for taking photos of people as well as the nice little things/details that people tend to overlook at the event. sure, it ain't a macro but the MFD comes in very handy because I don't always need to shoot things in macro (I do have a dedicated macro lens).  Although there's always a debate about the versatility (or not) of a 50mm (equivalent) lens, I find that I'm more engaged with the 32mm because of its standout qualities such as: sharpness, color, f/1.4 aperture (low light, DOF control, bokeh).  the 50mm (equivalent) FL comes secondary to those.  I do wish it focused just a bit faster on my M5 (you could say that my M5 is the weak link, but my sigma 16mm f/1.4 focuses noticeably faster than the 32mm on the same M5).

and finally, it's this forum that "caused" me to buy the lens...so I blame y'all for making me spend on it haha!

Yaixi wrote:

Very beautiful! Touching!

+1 A fine testament to the versatility of this lens.

R2