This may seem like a strange choice I'm trying to make - between the Olympus 50mm/f2 macro lens and the Panasonic 45-200mm lens. Here is the reason.
Yes, for those of you who might recall, I had purchased the 50mm/f2 a couple of months ago, but returned it because it was so slow in low light and kept hunting. I could not decide if I wanted to keep it before the return period was almost up, so I returned it in order not to lose money by having to sell it later. It is not a cheap lens (for my budget).
Then, I thought I would invest in another Canon dslr and the 50mm/f1.4 lens as I always got good results with this lens (smooth bokeh with portraits, flowers, etc.). However, I'm getting to the point where I think going back to Canon means using 2 systems, and after some research, I think it's possible to find what I'm looking for with the E-PL1 - with the right lens.
I found some amazing portrait samples shot with the Panasonic 45-200mm lens - and when you use this lens at about 80-100mm for portraits, it does give that smooth bokeh. It is a sharp lens even at the longer end.
The reason for my indecision is due to the fact that the 50mm is a better lens all around. However, it sells for $450-$500. Will I use it enough to warrant paying this much? I guess only I can answer that - but would like some feedback.
The 45-200mm does a good job with portraits, although you have to work at it. However, the lens is sharp - even at 200mm. And, it is more versatile with the zoom. So.....would I use it more?
I would be grateful for any input, thoughts or comments.
Thanks.
Liz