.....Having a compact, reliable and competent setup for photo walks is invaluable. I like shooting the D750 with those ancient (by Nikon AF standards) primes, but even then, the camera is big and heavy (and you lose stuff *mumble*). I have switched to the 28mm; thanks to the days with the GR III, I'm pretty comfortable with the FoV, but the old first generation 28mm f/2.8 AF is a truely mediocre lens. That said, if you want a lens with a rather "classic" rendering for your Nikon DSLR, this is it (see my image for day 23).
The 20mm f/2.8D was surprisingly quite a bit of fun; I hope I'll remember that in the days and months to come ...
M.
It's funny, I never considered myself a prime shooter when I was shooting Nikon (the D750 and D800 were my last DSLRs). I owned:
- Nikon10.5mm DX fish
- Sigma 30mmf/1.4 DX
- Nikon 35mm f/2
- Nikon 85mm D F/1.4 & 1.8
- Nikon 105mm AF-S VR Macro
- Nikon 180mm D F/2.8
Thinking back, I used them as the tool they were and not "I want to go shoot say 28mm street stuff", if that makes sense. The 180mm was just my MUCH lighter than a 70-200mm f/2.8 event telephoto; the 35mm was what I used for details. I think I still look at the S56 in those terms, it's my portrait and low light short/medium telephoto for family and friend events around the house. But 25mm and under? I'm finding I'm enjoying intentionally picking a prime with mirrorless. Subconsciously it probably started with the P14mm, consciously with the Fuji X70.
So for my 25mm and under.......
I had the O25mm f/1.8, a really nice lens, but I'm finding I like the PL25mm f/1.4 even though the O25mm would be lighter on my Pen F (swapped the Oly for the PL before getting the Pen F). It's funny that I seems to go back to the O17mm even though I enjoyed the P14 and X70 so much. I think in the past I've been too concerned about things that shouldn't matter or other oddities.
- You have to upgrade from the p14mm, it's only an f/2.5.
- The O17 looks and feels so cool with it's MF clutch and proportions (wider at the mount / slimmer on the end).
- You can use the aperture ring on PL15 with an Oly body*. (Edit this should say CAN"T USE)
- The PL15 has the opposite proportional and feel to the O17 as the aperture ring makes the end bigger.
- You can't reverse the hood on the PL15 so it seems so much bigger.
But I've never had the P14. PL15, O17, and P12-32 all at the same time, I've always tended to sell one to help pay for the other. Hopefully as things warm up a bit, if I can continue to talk walks like I have been I can bring along a bag instead of just camera in gloved hand that makes it more cumbersome to swap 3-4 lenses for comparison shots. I'm going to interested to see if (as I've come to appreciate the PL25) if I'll finally come to appreciate the PL15's qualities. Time will tell.
* Though this was one of the things that also bothered me with my Fuji setup. Some of the lenses I used had aperture ring, some didn't; one had a marked ring, one didn't; so do control it on the body, on the lens, can see the selected value on the ring, on the lcd........
The 12-45mm is an ergonomic revelation. The 12-40mm may be even better constructed and more sophisticated, but the 12-45mm feels very satisfying in the hand, on camera and in use; the only thing that got me at first is the (comparatively) very light focus action, but that's not a downside. I still have to thoroughly test the lens (what with the April 2020 Challenge going on), but what I've seen so far, optics are top notch as well.
It finally transforms the E-M5 III into a camera I'd pick over just about any other ILC for casual walk arounds (and travel). The whole package weights just 720g (including the hand strap) - that's more than 500g lighter than the Z6 with 24-70mm f/4. I'm itching to take the combo out, but the switch to the D750 and primes for the challenge is now final - because it works......
Thanks for feeding the lens lust. I've been wondering if the 12-45 would be a suitable companion for the Pen F. On the other hand, I am sorely missing a light medium telephoto lens. the Lumix 35-100 2.8 and the PL 50-200 are highly regarded, but rather expensive. All the other smaller telephotos in the m4/3 universe are consumer grade lenses with less sterling reputations, although I did occasionally get some nice images with the Olympus 75-300 II when I had one.
I'm not 100% sure the O12-40 is better constructed than the O12-45. The O12-45 carries an IPX1 rating, were other O PRO lenses not tested or is the 12-45 better? I don't own either the O12-40 (did) or O12-45 (not yet), but I did get to play with both side by side at an Olympus event. The size and weight difference was not noticeable.....
ON THE E-M1x, however on the E-M5.3 and Pen F the it was a much better fit.
The PL50-200 f/2.8-4.0 is an interesting lens, one I had thought I would own. Why don't I?
Price, though I planned on getting a telephoto and put a good amount away from when I sold off my event gear, so I do have the funds. But it's just a little shorter than I REALLY want, I was very comfortable with 300mm on APS-C, so 225-250mm on m4/3. It's hard to find the 1.4TC and the thought of needing the TC 50% of the time or more isn't really appealing. Then there's the thorny issues of Panasonic's service of their pricey glass. If I'm going to spend that much, I want to know I can get it serviced and not just offered a refurb at a discount that would still be a good $$$. From all reports they are working to change this (or were before C-19
). It also played into my decision about G9 or E-M1.2. Had I gone got Panasonic I'm sure I'd have the PL8-18 / 12-60 / 50-200 trio with the G9.
But I'm happy with what I have and the Pen F plays a part of that. And who know what and when some of the place holders on the Olympus map will be.