Author Topic: What lens? (Read 1169 times)

pretzston · « **on:** October 06, 2010, 07:06:48 PM »

I am having a lot of fun with photography and with Xmas coming (as well as a baby!), it is probably my last Christmas for a long time where I get something for myself! I'm really enjoying my EPL1 and have been shooting a lot with the Canon FD 50mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8. I have the m4/3 kit lens 14-42mm but haven't used it too too much. I also have Albinar 100-200mm, Canon FD 80-200mm and another 85-135 or something like that.

What do you think is a good lens to shoot for?

Olympus 17mm ? Panasonic 20mm?

Panther · « **Reply #1 on:** October 06, 2010, 07:11:46 PM »

Impossible question to answer unless we know what you want to shoot...

cosinaphile · « **Reply #2 on:** October 06, 2010, 08:21:26 PM »

sounds like you have the bases covered , i would get some extension tubes on the bay for 10 to 15 bucks for the 50 fd
and then you have good macro action happening maybe a 50 1.4 fd for next to nothing, all the best on your happy news

niva_explorer_photo · « **Reply #3 on:** October 06, 2010, 08:44:28 PM »

Quote from: pretzston on October 06, 2010, 07:06:48 PM

Olympus 17mm ? Panasonic 20mm?

In my experience, for for the Panasonic 20mm, sharper and offers you a max aperture of f1.7 while the Olympus gives you only f2.8.

Regards!

pretzston · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2010, 07:12:27 AM »

I'd like to get into some scenic photography and also more wide street photography. I feel as if the 50mm, which I primarily use, gets me so close to the subject a lot of the time...

Thanks for the input!!

Centauri27 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2010, 09:51:36 AM »

In this case, you'll probably want to consider the Olympus 17mm. Although almost everyone agrees that the Panasonic 20mm is superior, the extra field of view provided by the 17mm may be more useful to you.

voyager · « **Reply #6 on:** October 07, 2010, 11:55:31 AM »

The Olympus 17mm is half the price and is actually not that bad of a lens either.

Centauri27 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 07, 2010, 12:00:33 PM »

Actually, the price differential is must narrower now. I just checked Amazon.com and the 17mm is $260, while the 20mm is down to $335. Given it's only $75 difference (assuming you're in the U.S.), I'd definitely go for the Panasonic.

voyager · « **Reply #8 on:** October 07, 2010, 12:14:51 PM »

I just saw a used 17mm for $150. The price difference is interesting there.

alxcoghe · « **Reply #9 on:** October 07, 2010, 12:20:35 PM »

Quote from: Centauri27 on October 07, 2010, 09:51:36 AM

In this case, you'll probably want to consider the Olympus 17mm. Although almost everyone agrees that the Panasonic 20mm is superior, the extra field of view provided by the 17mm may be more useful to you.

I quote this. The 20mm is a superior lens but for me oly 17mm is perfect. You know me: street photography, urban shots...the pancake is a good friend.

Centauri27 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 07, 2010, 12:59:16 PM »

I would agree: if street shooting is your main love and low light is not a problem, go for the 17mm.

pretzston · « **Reply #11 on:** October 08, 2010, 07:55:33 PM »

I'm sort of an all around just taking shots man myself. I live up on the scenic parts of Pennsylvania so I would reallyike to get some wide. Both the 17 and the 20 look pretty neat. If I can get my friend to give me his Zuiko 9-18mm at a steal I think I'll def go with the 20mm.

Wish lenses weren't so expensive!!

What lens?