Micro 4/3 Lens: What should I buy to complete my kit?

[Liz]

Erik.....thanks for the update. Reading your post, I agree that you made the best decision. It is certainly well thought-out and the most important part of this decision is that you know what you want.

I love my Olympus E-M5. HOWEVER, there are times when my hands "itch" to play with a Canon dslr. I have to say, I would not go back, though. Even if I wanted to I can't carry heavy equipment anymore - my original reason for selling my gorgeous Canon lenses and going to M4/3. I haven't regretted it!

Also, I do get images comparable to what I got with the Canon "L" lenses.

I'm happy for you. I look forward to seeing more of your work.

Liz

[Erik_Olympus]

I'm sure I'll be concentrating on the MFT gear for the next 6 months or so. I'm really starting to like the 17mm. Looks great on the camera too!

[tooljunkie]

So it's a month later, whats your opinion of the E-PM2 and the lenses that you purchased?

[Erik_Olympus]

I just returned from vacation so I really put the camera through its paces. I brought the 14-42, 40-150 and 17/1.8 with me, as well as a Konica 50mm/1.7.

Overall, I am pleased with the camera. It performs better than my E-520 in many ways, especially in low light. Couple it with the 17mm and you have a great tool for low light and street photography.

Here's a sample

[/url][url=https://flic.kr/p/ngftuz]by erikzen, on Flickr

The 40-150 also does surprisingly well:
P4191458 by erikzen, on Flickr

The 14-42 is probably my least favorite lens but it's handy for snapshots and the like. It also makes a pretty good "drive by" lens.

P4150454 by erikzen, on Flickr

I'm surprised at how crisp the shots from the 40-150 are. Looking back on my 1300 vacation shots, most were with the 17, followed by the 40-150. I could have probably left the 14-42 at home but sometimes it's nice to have that wider field of view.

All in all, I'm happy with the camera and the system. My next lens will probably be the 75-300. After that, I think I could be pretty happy for a while.

[Liz]

These are beautiful images, Erik. I'm glad you like your new gear!

I hope you keep posting......I'm enjoying your images.


Liz

[tooljunkie]

I just returned from vacation so I really put the camera through its paces. I brought the 14-42, 40-150 and 17/1.8 with me, as well as a Konica 50mm/1.7.

Overall, I am pleased with the camera. It performs better than my E-520 in many ways, especially in low light. Couple it with the 17mm and you have a great tool for low light and street photography.





The 40-150 also does surprisingly well:

The 14-42 is probably my least favorite lens but it's handy for snapshots and the like. It also makes a pretty good "drive by" lens.


I'm surprised at how crisp the shots from the 40-150 are. Looking back on my 1300 vacation shots, most were with the 17, followed by the 40-150. I could have probably left the 14-42 at home but sometimes it's nice to have that wider field of view.

All in all, I'm happy with the camera and the system. My next lens will probably be the 75-300. After that, I think I could be pretty happy for a while.

I'm almost always happy with the shots I get from my M Zuiko 40-150. It will even take good close-ups if you can get back far enough. I also have the M Zuiko 75-300 and it's good except right at 300, not so crisp.

If you don't mind the size and weight, the M Zuiko 12-40 PRO is phenomenal. Crisp through out the focal length and unbelievable for close ups, although no macro.

[Erik_Olympus]

Here's a close up using the 40-150. The more I use the lens the more I like it. It seems sharper than the original 4/3 version.