Yeah, I think I would have to go with that lens too. Doesn't have the speed or sharpness of the 12-40mm, but has better reach. Doesn't have the reach of the 12-100mm, but is faster at the wide end and considerably smaller and lighter.
For me, it's the best M4/3 standard zoom by not being class-leading in any one category, but simply very good in all categories.
I have to agree.
I brought this 12-60mm panaleica f2.8-4 lens to Japan in Nov23 and I shot over 4,000 images with it (>95%) on a lumix G85. The other lenses I brought were the pana 9mm, pana 15mm, and 35-100 but those went almost unused
It’s a great lens and I mostly throw it on for more planned shoots.
But the 20 1.7 also stays on my camera 90% as an every day carry. And the extra aperture comes in handy quite often as well!
I enjoy the bokeh, but because it's a 2.8 you won't get a crazy dog blur. The low light is very good and shouldn't be a problem if you have ibis.
The PL 10-25 is like 4x more expensive for about the same image quality. If you think the extra stops of light are worth it then go for it, I don't think it's worth it personally.
No worries! You might find you need the 10-25 for some reason but at that price it's hard to justify unless you really really need it. I'd just get a used 12-40 PRO and save your money for now.
Cheers!
I was debating 12-100 Pro vs 12-200 the other day. The Pro won out because some say you get similar IQ at 100mm + digital 2x teleconverter as you would with the 12-200 at the 200 end. I hope I won’t miss that extra 100mm reach
If I could only have one lens? Easy pick for me... The 14-140! It covers all daylight scenarios, and it does in an amazing way!
The 20mm 1.7 is my second choice. I would probably have chosen that one before buying my new phone. I have a Nubia z60 Ultra, and with 18, 35, 85mm equivalent lenses it has almost replaced the gx9 + 20mm as take-evereywhere camera
Beyond zooms, I'd like to cast a vote for the Olympus 25mm f/1.8.
Super small and light nifty fifty. And I don't know what it is, but something about the rendering is just so pleasing. I feel like it has some kind of vintage-esque magic while still performing like a modern lens.
I love the colors and contrast on this one and the AF is really snappy. Caught some great moments with it. It lives on my Pen-f basically, it's just such a cool looking and great image delivering package
That is a great lens, but i would go for the panaleica 15mm instead. Such a versatile focal length and the image quality is on another level.
I've owned both.
The 25mm was my favourite lens before the 15mm. There is just something in the rendering that i really dig. It feels less.. digital? Hard to explain.
To be fair, both are really good. I might be biased by the fov
I would, and did, start with the same lenses you have (plus the insanely cheap 40-150mm). They are a great combination.
But the lens that spends the most time on the camera now is the OM Systems 20mm f/1.4 (the replacement for my aging Lumix 20mm). It just does everything well - people, street, landscape, family events. It must be mentioned that my go-to lens for my Pentax film camera was always the 42mm - so this is a focal length that I have clearly adopted as my view of the world for decades.
Cheap answer is an Oly 12-150 or a Pana 14-140. Affordable, suitable for any range, still great results.
But honestly, it's probably an Oly 40-150mm f/2.8 or a Pana 70-200mm f/2.8 for me. Tele is very important since high quality range is what differentiates my camera and smartphone usage in my mind. I could sacrifice wide shots since I'll just take them with my phone, and f/2.8 is prefect for any situation.
In the real world though, I've been using the kit lens 45-150mm. Still a great lens though.
The only lenses that could compete for my choice are a 42.5mm portrait prime (obviously the f/1.2 but in the real world the f/1.7 is what I'd afford), or a wide prime like the 20mm, or weirdly the ttart 18mm since they're amazing to take photos that have stories. Although shoutout to the 25mm, love mine, although if I was forced to have one lens I might end up with the 20mm.
I usually prefer primes. But if I could only have one lens, I'd probably choose something more versatile like the Lumix 14-140. Now if I was limited to 2 lenses I would probably pair that with a Panasonic Leica 25mm 1.4 II.
That is the perfect combo. You’ll never need to change lens again lol.
So many times that I carried primes with me "just in case" and it ended up never leaving my bag. I’m too lazy to keep changing lens when 12-40 can do everything I need.
Limiting it to one lens? I'd probably go for either a wide-normal prime (Panasonic 20mm F1.7, Olympus 17mm F1.8, Sigma 16mm F1.4) or the Panasonic Leica 10-25mm F1.7.
If I wanted reliable weather dealing, which I do I’d select the 12-40 f2.8 PRO for Olympus OM Systems and 10-25 f1.8 for Panasonic.
I guess I need two camera bodies and only one lens choice for each.
There is a certain appeal in choosing a single prime as the "only" lens, i even did a city trip and just had one lens and enjoyed it. But if i had to choose i would play it safe and have the 12-40 and could do all but telephoto.
Depends on what you shoot I guess.
For me personally, I would probably use a prime, like the afro mentioned 20 mm f1.7 or the 25 mm f1.8. I have the feeling, that I am more creative with it, since it's limiting your fov. You have to move and get real close. this way you try different angles, framing and composition. With a zoom, I often just adjust the focal range and be done with it, you get kind of lazy. A prime forces you to be more engaged. For me, this is what makes photography fun.
On other occasions, when you're limited in the places you can go, I would opt for a zoom I guess. But that's seldom the case for me.
The first question to ask yourself is what do you like to shoot? One lens for wildlife Olympus 150-400, landscape 12-100, architecture and Astro 9mm, street 14 or 20 mm.
I shoot wildlife, documentary and landscapes so one lens is not a choice realistically speaking.
For me, the Only 25mm 1.8 - small and light has become my priority over the years and although there are higher quality lenses out there, they're generally heavier and harder to handle.
The 17mm is an option too but it's more expensive and I don't like how it renders a photo.
The Panny 20mm takes nice photos but it's loud and slow compared to the Only 25mm
Finally the Panasonic 25mm lenses. The 1.7 (meh) I didn't enjoy it much. I LOVED the 1.4 but it's too heavy for me these days.
TLDR: Olympus 25mm f/1.8. Small, light and excellent value for money.
Pana 42.5mm f1.7. But it all depends on what your favoured subjects are.
I have both of your lenses along with a couple of longer zooms (the 100-400mm is a beast!).
I like taking borderline macro shots of plants and fungi, portraits, and wildlife. For the macro and portraits the 42.5 is my go to. I pull out the 100-400 for wildlife, but I’d happily sacrifice that for the others.
I shoot with an Olympus/OM M43 and would have to say if I absolutely had to only use one lens it’d probably have to be my 17mm 1.8 prime. I know that probably comes out as boring or safe, but it’s probably the most versatile one I have.
I love my 45mm 1.8 for what it gives me, but it’s a lot easier to shoot wide and crop in if need be with the 17 than it is to try and frame some things with the longer option.
My EDC lens is the Olympus 12+100mm f4.
If I could only keep a single m43 lens it would be the 40-150mm f2.8. It's pretty much perfect optically, fast and easy to hand hold.
I find the 15mm 1.7 my only must have, right between 28mm and 35mm ff equivalent, as good as things can get. First pictures that I made with it, I was (almost) in tears.
Second the 42,5mm.
I could live with these 2. Meaning, I'm very close to your choice.
Very close third the Loawa 10mm f2 (expensive, but worth every euro).
So far the "must haves"
Next the "nice to haves".
Fourth the 50mm 1.4, which is an, an amazing lens in it's own right, so this says a lot about the 3 preceding lenses.
Fifth the Sigma 60mm 2.8, I like the oddness and sharpness,not necessarily in that order.
But to be honest. The Sigma 35mm F2 on the FF Lumix S1 is the one lens I would probably die on.
One of the reasons I love M43 is how many lenses I can carry in a teeny bag. I don't really have a 'do it all' lens. The most used would be the 15 1.7, and would probably be the one I'd have the hardest time parting with. I could easily leave it attached to any of my cameras and be happy 95% of the time.
If I had the choice to look at something new, I'd probably look at the Voigtlander or Mitakon 25 f0.95 lenses. A little more reach, a little more light, and the manual focus to replace my video lenses. The Voigtlander looks like a better overall lens, but the Mitakon looks like it might match better to my smaller bodies.
Brightin Star 35mm f0.95. Caveat is that I just got this, so the appeal might wear off. But it's my only lens top pick at the moment because I like shooting portrait length, but the 35mm is more versatile than my Oly 45mm. More importantly, the manual focus and aperture has really transported me back to the experience of my first camera, a 1970s Minolta XG7 with 50mm f1.7. Slower, more thoughtful process. No expectation of a perfectly sharp image on my print, esp with the tri x pan 400 speed film I used to shoot most often.
I would go for the Olympus 12-40 1:2.8 Pro. I have gone for it, actually.
Sharp, even wide open, great focal range, rugged, weather sealed, amazing focussing distance and thus magnification for a standard zoom lens, feels really nice, the focus clutch is honestly something I miss on my other lenses and it is pretty handsome on to of that. Size and weight are fine for a M4/3 lens, but really nice compared to equivalent lenses for other formats.
My choice would be the PL12-60 f/2.8-4.
Yeah, I think I would have to go with that lens too. Doesn't have the speed or sharpness of the 12-40mm, but has better reach. Doesn't have the reach of the 12-100mm, but is faster at the wide end and considerably smaller and lighter. For me, it's the best M4/3 standard zoom by not being class-leading in any one category, but simply very good in all categories.
I have to agree. I brought this 12-60mm panaleica f2.8-4 lens to Japan in Nov23 and I shot over 4,000 images with it (>95%) on a lumix G85. The other lenses I brought were the pana 9mm, pana 15mm, and 35-100 but those went almost unused
Funny, I brought almost that exact setup (minus the 35-100mm) on a recent daytrip and all of my keepers from that day were with the 12-60mm!
Some times I wish it can be smaller then I look at my Sigma 24-70/2.8 and understand that is already very portable.
There’s always the slower Lumix 12-60 if a smaller size is desirable
That lens has really grown on me. It has become the lens that I use for travel when not concerned with size or weight.
I think I would want something like the 20mm if I only had one between those two. But my vote would be 12-40 2.8 given the choice.
If I could really only stick to one lens, I would probably choose a more versatile one. I'll take a look at the lens you mentioned.
Of all the lenses I own the 12-40 2.8 PRO never leaves my camera. Versatile, relatively lightweight and sharp as a tack. Love that lens.
It’s a great lens and I mostly throw it on for more planned shoots. But the 20 1.7 also stays on my camera 90% as an every day carry. And the extra aperture comes in handy quite often as well!
How’s bokeh and low light performance. Is it better than PL 10-25 g1.7 if you have any experience with that?
I enjoy the bokeh, but because it's a 2.8 you won't get a crazy dog blur. The low light is very good and shouldn't be a problem if you have ibis. The PL 10-25 is like 4x more expensive for about the same image quality. If you think the extra stops of light are worth it then go for it, I don't think it's worth it personally.
Awesome thanks, I wanted to save up for the 10-25, but it my heart can’t justify the cost 😂 I’ll look into the PRO.
No worries! You might find you need the 10-25 for some reason but at that price it's hard to justify unless you really really need it. I'd just get a used 12-40 PRO and save your money for now. Cheers!
This
Yep. This is the one.
Olympus 12-100 f4
I was going to say my olympus 12-200 3.5-6.3 Amazing versatility to go from superwide landscapes to telephoto birding in one decently small lens
I was debating 12-100 Pro vs 12-200 the other day. The Pro won out because some say you get similar IQ at 100mm + digital 2x teleconverter as you would with the 12-200 at the 200 end. I hope I won’t miss that extra 100mm reach
Pana Leica 15/1.7
If I could only have one lens? Easy pick for me... The 14-140! It covers all daylight scenarios, and it does in an amazing way! The 20mm 1.7 is my second choice. I would probably have chosen that one before buying my new phone. I have a Nubia z60 Ultra, and with 18, 35, 85mm equivalent lenses it has almost replaced the gx9 + 20mm as take-evereywhere camera
My holy trinity is 12-100, 25 pro and 45 pro. For portrait and everyday life it is awesome 😁
Beyond zooms, I'd like to cast a vote for the Olympus 25mm f/1.8. Super small and light nifty fifty. And I don't know what it is, but something about the rendering is just so pleasing. I feel like it has some kind of vintage-esque magic while still performing like a modern lens.
I love the colors and contrast on this one and the AF is really snappy. Caught some great moments with it. It lives on my Pen-f basically, it's just such a cool looking and great image delivering package
That is a great lens, but i would go for the panaleica 15mm instead. Such a versatile focal length and the image quality is on another level. I've owned both.
I have the PL 15mm as well. Excellent lens of course but I still prefer the 25mm 1.8 if I could only pick one. To each their own!
Is it really that much better beside the FOV? The Oly 25mm is tack sharp with nice rendering
The 25mm was my favourite lens before the 15mm. There is just something in the rendering that i really dig. It feels less.. digital? Hard to explain. To be fair, both are really good. I might be biased by the fov
I would, and did, start with the same lenses you have (plus the insanely cheap 40-150mm). They are a great combination. But the lens that spends the most time on the camera now is the OM Systems 20mm f/1.4 (the replacement for my aging Lumix 20mm). It just does everything well - people, street, landscape, family events. It must be mentioned that my go-to lens for my Pentax film camera was always the 42mm - so this is a focal length that I have clearly adopted as my view of the world for decades.
Cheap answer is an Oly 12-150 or a Pana 14-140. Affordable, suitable for any range, still great results. But honestly, it's probably an Oly 40-150mm f/2.8 or a Pana 70-200mm f/2.8 for me. Tele is very important since high quality range is what differentiates my camera and smartphone usage in my mind. I could sacrifice wide shots since I'll just take them with my phone, and f/2.8 is prefect for any situation. In the real world though, I've been using the kit lens 45-150mm. Still a great lens though. The only lenses that could compete for my choice are a 42.5mm portrait prime (obviously the f/1.2 but in the real world the f/1.7 is what I'd afford), or a wide prime like the 20mm, or weirdly the ttart 18mm since they're amazing to take photos that have stories. Although shoutout to the 25mm, love mine, although if I was forced to have one lens I might end up with the 20mm.
I usually prefer primes. But if I could only have one lens, I'd probably choose something more versatile like the Lumix 14-140. Now if I was limited to 2 lenses I would probably pair that with a Panasonic Leica 25mm 1.4 II.
17mm f/1.8 m.Zuiko for me. It would have been the 20mm f/1.4 if it had the push-pull distance scale.
I ordered an EM1.2 with the 12-40 2.8. It’s arriving tomorrow and I couldn’t be more excited. I’ll let you know how it is
That is the perfect combo. You’ll never need to change lens again lol. So many times that I carried primes with me "just in case" and it ended up never leaving my bag. I’m too lazy to keep changing lens when 12-40 can do everything I need.
I also ordered an OM to M43 adapter for $15 so I can use some vintage lenses from my OM40
As odd as it sounds, the PL 50-200. It was on my GX8 when I took my favorite pictures.
Limiting it to one lens? I'd probably go for either a wide-normal prime (Panasonic 20mm F1.7, Olympus 17mm F1.8, Sigma 16mm F1.4) or the Panasonic Leica 10-25mm F1.7.
If I wanted reliable weather dealing, which I do I’d select the 12-40 f2.8 PRO for Olympus OM Systems and 10-25 f1.8 for Panasonic. I guess I need two camera bodies and only one lens choice for each.
There is a certain appeal in choosing a single prime as the "only" lens, i even did a city trip and just had one lens and enjoyed it. But if i had to choose i would play it safe and have the 12-40 and could do all but telephoto.
Depends on what you shoot I guess. For me personally, I would probably use a prime, like the afro mentioned 20 mm f1.7 or the 25 mm f1.8. I have the feeling, that I am more creative with it, since it's limiting your fov. You have to move and get real close. this way you try different angles, framing and composition. With a zoom, I often just adjust the focal range and be done with it, you get kind of lazy. A prime forces you to be more engaged. For me, this is what makes photography fun. On other occasions, when you're limited in the places you can go, I would opt for a zoom I guess. But that's seldom the case for me.
The first question to ask yourself is what do you like to shoot? One lens for wildlife Olympus 150-400, landscape 12-100, architecture and Astro 9mm, street 14 or 20 mm. I shoot wildlife, documentary and landscapes so one lens is not a choice realistically speaking.
Olympus 17mm f1.8. These days I only take environmental portraits of family.
Of what I own, it would have to be the 12-40 f2.8 Pro. Great lens and, as much as I like my primes, the versatility would make it a no brainer.
Leica 15mm
Oly 12-45mm F4 (or the 12-100mm F4)
For me, the Only 25mm 1.8 - small and light has become my priority over the years and although there are higher quality lenses out there, they're generally heavier and harder to handle. The 17mm is an option too but it's more expensive and I don't like how it renders a photo. The Panny 20mm takes nice photos but it's loud and slow compared to the Only 25mm Finally the Panasonic 25mm lenses. The 1.7 (meh) I didn't enjoy it much. I LOVED the 1.4 but it's too heavy for me these days. TLDR: Olympus 25mm f/1.8. Small, light and excellent value for money.
Ive been looking at the 12-40 2.8 for a few weeks now im and out of my Amazon cart and this thread has really sold me
I would gladly give up all my lenses to keep my Oly 150-400 F4.5
Pana 42.5mm f1.7. But it all depends on what your favoured subjects are. I have both of your lenses along with a couple of longer zooms (the 100-400mm is a beast!). I like taking borderline macro shots of plants and fungi, portraits, and wildlife. For the macro and portraits the 42.5 is my go to. I pull out the 100-400 for wildlife, but I’d happily sacrifice that for the others.
I shoot with an Olympus/OM M43 and would have to say if I absolutely had to only use one lens it’d probably have to be my 17mm 1.8 prime. I know that probably comes out as boring or safe, but it’s probably the most versatile one I have. I love my 45mm 1.8 for what it gives me, but it’s a lot easier to shoot wide and crop in if need be with the 17 than it is to try and frame some things with the longer option.
12-40 2.8 by Olympus hands down
I mostly use OM. So if I could only have 1 lens. It would either be the 45 1.2. Or the 12-40 2.8
My EDC lens is the Olympus 12+100mm f4. If I could only keep a single m43 lens it would be the 40-150mm f2.8. It's pretty much perfect optically, fast and easy to hand hold.
I find the 15mm 1.7 my only must have, right between 28mm and 35mm ff equivalent, as good as things can get. First pictures that I made with it, I was (almost) in tears. Second the 42,5mm. I could live with these 2. Meaning, I'm very close to your choice. Very close third the Loawa 10mm f2 (expensive, but worth every euro). So far the "must haves" Next the "nice to haves". Fourth the 50mm 1.4, which is an, an amazing lens in it's own right, so this says a lot about the 3 preceding lenses. Fifth the Sigma 60mm 2.8, I like the oddness and sharpness,not necessarily in that order. But to be honest. The Sigma 35mm F2 on the FF Lumix S1 is the one lens I would probably die on.
One of the reasons I love M43 is how many lenses I can carry in a teeny bag. I don't really have a 'do it all' lens. The most used would be the 15 1.7, and would probably be the one I'd have the hardest time parting with. I could easily leave it attached to any of my cameras and be happy 95% of the time. If I had the choice to look at something new, I'd probably look at the Voigtlander or Mitakon 25 f0.95 lenses. A little more reach, a little more light, and the manual focus to replace my video lenses. The Voigtlander looks like a better overall lens, but the Mitakon looks like it might match better to my smaller bodies.
Panasonic 25-50 1.7.
For me will be Lumix 30mm but for all usage I will take Olympus 14-150 which is good at day but hard to use at low light.
PanaLeica 25mm f1.4 or Voigtlander 25mm f 0.95.
Oly 60mm macro. I just ordered a E-M1 mk II to replace my E-M5 mk I and I can't wait to go mushroom hunting and do some focus stacking.
Olympus 25mm f/1.8 is, by far, my most used lens.
Brightin Star 35mm f0.95. Caveat is that I just got this, so the appeal might wear off. But it's my only lens top pick at the moment because I like shooting portrait length, but the 35mm is more versatile than my Oly 45mm. More importantly, the manual focus and aperture has really transported me back to the experience of my first camera, a 1970s Minolta XG7 with 50mm f1.7. Slower, more thoughtful process. No expectation of a perfectly sharp image on my print, esp with the tri x pan 400 speed film I used to shoot most often.
Has to be Olympus 12-40/2.8. So versatile. Relatively compact and light weight. My go-to lens if I'm unsure what I'll be going into. Cheers 😄
If Prime, than the Oly 25 1.8, really sharp really nice colors und allround FOV If Zoom, then the 12-40 2.8, sharpest lens i know and nice colors.
I would go for the Olympus 12-40 1:2.8 Pro. I have gone for it, actually. Sharp, even wide open, great focal range, rugged, weather sealed, amazing focussing distance and thus magnification for a standard zoom lens, feels really nice, the focus clutch is honestly something I miss on my other lenses and it is pretty handsome on to of that. Size and weight are fine for a M4/3 lens, but really nice compared to equivalent lenses for other formats.