Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Repp, Jul 2, 2012.
And maybe keep the Panasonic 14-45 for event shoots?
Any thoughts as to which of these I should lean towards? Or what would be the best/smallest bag to carry everything in (I currently have a Hadley small, and a Lowpro Adventura 100, but often I just throw some lenses in a satchel when I'm traveling)? And finally, what kind of kit's is everyone planning for them selves?
Do you want a dedicated camera bag? Or a pack with a camera insert? I prefer the latter when traveling, and tend to keep a spare lens and battery in a pocket. I'm traveling with my full m43 kit right now (E-M5, GF2, 7-14, 14/2.5, 20/1.7, 45/1.8 and 12-50), with two spare batteries for each, and it really is a stupid tiny kit. Takes up maybe 1/3 of the volume of my 13 liter (tiny) ortlieb pack when packed in an insert from a fairly small crumpler shoulder bag. I think bags are so personal that you need to simply take your gear to a store and try out a few and/or figure out what works best for you. I'm currently leaning strongly towards simply making/buying a few custom inserts for various other bags.
In terms of what glass suits you best, you're the best judge of that. My m43 kit will probably end up mirroring my EOS kit - selection of faster primes and a couple of good zooms. There are some situations where primes are simply too limiting or impractical, and others where the size and speed advantage (and in most cases, quality) of the primes wins out.
I do like the optical quality and size of the 45/1.8, but I'm not overly fond of 85-90mm focal (full frame equivalent), while I very much do enjoy 135mm and 150mm FF equivalent fields of view (preference thing). For certain kinds of travel (wildlife) I would be tempted to add a tele zoom; still hoping for a higher end zoom that goes at least to 200, or maybe just get the 100-300.
For the EOS I'd stick with 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 135/2.0, 24-105/4, 100-400/4.5-5.6 for wildlife. Really can get by with just the 24-105 and one prime in most situations.
Mattia, I agree that bags are very personal, I still havent found exactly what I'm looking for yet. I'm interested in the Crumpler Haven insert though, as most of the time I just throw some lenses in a wrap and put them in my large Saddleback Satchel. Sadly I live in rural Japan and don't have access to a well stocked camera store.
As for your lens choices, I agree that the 14 is great for how compact it is, but I don't see a reason to keep the 2.5 when the pany 12-35 is a 2.8?
Toshiro, to date the zooms I own are my least used as well... but sadly necessary for things like inside event photography. I'm also torn on the 75/1.8 as it looks amazing, but I don't have a oly camera w/ ibis, and that worries me a bit.
That's accounting for (hopefully) spotting some wildlife and doing some shooting of the Aurora Borealis. If not doing those two I would probably leave home the 100-300 and the 12mm.
The 7-14mm I don't use all the time, but I absolutely love UWA shots in the right circumstances. That said, 12mm is reasonably wide so the 12-35 zoom may mean I cut the 7-14 for some trips when I want to save space & weight. I may miss the longer reach occasionally with this kit versus my current 14-140, but it makes up for it in low light capability which is a tradeoff I'm willing to make most times.
So for the sake of size, I'd like to limit myself to a 5 (maybe even 6) lens kit + flash, and start cleaning house on everything else.
I've started with the 14-42PZ, 45/1.8, 20/1.7, 7-14, 45-175, then sold the 14-42PZ and got the 12-35 & 12-50 (last one for sealed macro). Today I was walking around Boston, I brought along the 12-35 on the E-M5, 7-14 on the GX1, had the 45/1.8 & 45-175 with me. Two months ago I was traveling with the GX1, constantly switching between the 7-14, 20 and 45, some shots on the 14-42PZ. Today I have not switched lenses, shot only with mounted zooms. I only see myself using the 20/1.7 in the future when I would need more light than the 12-35.
- Don't get rid of the 9-18 yet, it takes filters unhacked and towards 18mm the FOV is long enough to normal looking shots of people, less so at 14mm with the 7-14.
- I don't see the case for the 75mm, costs as much as the 12-35 in Japan.
- I agree with selling the PL45/2.8 & 14/2.5 and the 14-45 if you get the 12-35. I'm not sure what to say about the 45-200, I'd keep it until the 35-100 is out, see if it's worth paying for that. I got the 45-175 as it's lighter and a lot more compact than the 45-200.
For strobist in my limited experience it's not really a matter of lenses at all... You're usually going for longer exposures, so you don't need very fast lenses unless the light is very low to begin with. The tripod is more important than the glass!
The 7-14mm would make more sense, fisheye is more of a specialty lens. If you rarely go below 12mm (=24mm equiv.) though, you may consider it just for the interesting effect.
An absolute must for your event shooting, though Olympus may come up with an almost equally efficient 12-60mm (for events). Bear in mind that, up to 35mm, the Oly will be half a stop to less than a stop slower than the Pany. And much cheaper.
Or you may consider the Oly 75mm, if most of the work you do in that focal range is portraiture and generally people shooting.
If space is a premium, then this is an excellent choice over the 25mm f/1.4. We have to see if rumors about an Oly 25mm f/1.8 materialize.
Either the Pany 12-35 or the Oly 12-60. The later could completely replace my 12-50 kit lens, esp. if it is weather proof. The former would partially replace it and both also replace the Sigma 19mm.
Waiting to see the rumored 25mm before I pull the plug on the Pany 25mm f/1.4. Apart from cost, there are also size and AF speed considerations on my Olympus bodies.
I'm seriously GASing over the Oly 75mm and I honestly don't see myself avoiding buying it... It shall depend on a number of paid jobs I may get from September.
I have no real need for a fast UW lens (like the 12mm Oly). I'd much prefer a fisheye or a UW toy/CCTV lens, just for special effect.
All this boils down to 4-5 native lenses for me (including the Oly 45mm) that would cover 99% of my current needs.
For your shooting needs this sounds perfect. 7-14mm f/4 + 12-35mm f/2.8 + 35-100mm f/2.8 is a classic workhorse kit for event photography. The primes will supplement the others nicely just as you said for low light situations and for lighter outings.
A 5 lens kit is perfectly do-able and capable!
This kit will cover a huge range of imaging opportunities with truly excellent IQ.
I'll likely replace the 45/1.8 portrait lens with the 75/1.8 portrait lens - that would be the 5th.
I pretty much never shoot my 14, so it'll be gone soon. Same with a number of legacy lenses.
to be able to make up a versatile, light-weight, very compact kit for times when I want to carry a very lightweight and even more compact kit.
I will likely keep the 12/2, as well, as a street photography lens. And the 14-140 for a one-lens, highly versatile optic.
Personally, I have little-to-no use for a m4/3 lens longer than about 100 (200mm 135 equivalent). A 100-300 would be nice to have once-in-a-while, but I, personally, would not shoot with it very much.
The only reason I've been iffy on the Oly 75/1.8 is that I'm currently using a GX1, would such a long lens be ok if it's not stabilized?
So many 5 lens kits consisting of Panasonic lenses!
I'm a bit more frugal. While it is unbeatable to have the fast zooms I know realistically I'll never be able to justify the expense.
Any pancake for evening outings, bar events, portability. I picked up the 14mm for cheap on eBay for this purpose. 20mm would have been better but it'll be 2.5x the cost of my 14mm.
If 12-60mm materializes and isn't outrageously expensive. I would likely sell the 12-50mm and 14-150mm for it, and add the 40-150mm for telephoto. It would need to be weather sealed though, I see the need of a weather sealed lens in my kit.
I've carried heavy loads of equipment on assignment to 27 countries on five continents. I don't want to do that any more. In fact, five lenses will be too many.
My ideal outfit, for now, would be the Olympus 12-60 (if the rumors are true), which would live on an OM-D body. The Panasonic 20mm f1.7 would live on my E-PL1 body, and the bag would also hold an Oly 9-18 and 40-150 which would get very occasional use.
I've been thinking about this a lot and find it a really tricky question!
And slightly unfair, as well, because for the price of a Panasonic 7-14mm or 12-35mm, or an Olympus 75mm, you can buy a selection of other really useful (and excellent) lenses, not all of which have to travel with you all the time.
I'm more interested in putting together useful pairs of lenses, ie one on the camera, one in the pocket, as one of the earlier posters put it.
Of course it would. People shoot longer than that without stabilization all the time on other systems. For instance, the Canon 200 f/2.8 is a great lens, and reasonably popular (has been eclipsed recently by the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II), and it is not stabilized either. All you have to do is make sure you use a shutter speed of 1/150 or better, which should not be that hard.