I have the 8-18 (great lens) and 12-60PL (also very good but I tend to use primes or the 12-45/4 more often as I'm often chasing compactness) . Their choice of the 20/1.4 is very interesting, as I have that lens and also the 17/1.2 pro and the Pro is definitely the sharper , "better" lens. The 20/1.4 is quite a polarising product and I wonder whether there's a broader than usual sample variation in this lens. I like it, and the size is good, but I can't state that it's the one to get over the 1.2's optically.
I've hired a 300/4 and it was brilliant.
I'll never ever be able to afford a 150-400/4.5.
My copy of the Oly 100-400 is fantastic and it's my recommendation to anyone who can't afford the big white beast.
I had a 40-150/2.8 and it was razor sharp. I then took a fall and destroyed the lens. I bought a replacement and it's not as sharp as my previous one to my eye.
The PL15 is a brilliant little lens , I recommend it to all MFT users. Particularly on Panasonic bodies due to the aperture ring, but it also seems a little special on the Em5iii in certain conditions. Occasionally, the tones and rendering of that combo just blows me away.
The O75 has some magic pixie dust involved. Awkward focal length but when it works you just sit back and admire the focus transitions. It's a lens that I should use more, I have a theory that it would be incredible for moody monochrome shots but I've not spent the time to find out and learn how to use it well, as yet.
I would love to own the 200/2.8 , the 300/4 and the 1.7 zoom twins but I've really stretched my budget as far as practical already 😄
But I will find a way, somehow, to fund the OM 90mm macro. My typical camera usage these days probably justifies it.
