Tele lens for E-M5 Mark II (or E-M1)

[Matus]

Hi,

I have not been around since a while (becoming a father AND getting new hobby at the same time), but I getting slowly back.

I am planning to get either E-M5II or E-M1. I would like to get two quality zooms (for travel). The first one will be the 12-40/2.8, but I have hard time deciding on the tele-zoom.

The obvious choice quality wise would be the 40-150/2.8 but it is more than I would like to spend and is also rather heavy. So I am looking at some 'slower' options. The problem is, that there do not seem to be any 'middle class' tele lenses for m4/3. There is a lot of cheap glass with not too impressive performance (at least based on what I read online). And then there is the Panasonic 35-100/2.8 which is probably very good lens, but has less reach (the price could be acceptable).

My question would be - should I just bite the bullet and get (and carry) the 40-150/2.8 or is there any lens (apart from the 35-100 Panasonic) that would be worth getting?

Ideally Olympus would introduce f/4 high quality zoom for just under 1000€, but that lens only exists in my imagination so far :angel:

thanks

 

[Matus]

Now this place is quite 🙂 Anyhow - I have just ordered The E-M5II with 12-40 (but need to wait for amazon to get them in stock again). I have since 'discovered' the rather new Panasonic 30-100/4.0-5.6 lens which is tiny and seems to be a very good performer. It weight and costs 1/5 of the Pro Olympus. I guess I will first make myself familiar with the camera and order both of these lenses and compare them.

 

[Lss]

The cheap zooms may work very well for travel, you can't beat the size and weight. If you actually use a tele lens a lot, especially in more demanding scenarios (think light level and focus speed), a pricier and heftier pro lens is probably worth the money. But buying is only part ot the cost for any lens that doesn't live on you camera.

 

[Matus]

That is a ver good point. I think that I can actually do without f/2.8 aperture, but what I would like to avoid is to get a lens that is not particularly good at any aperture.

I used to have Minolta 7D and the old AF 70-210/4.0 zoom lens (the 'beer can'). The lens needed to be stopped to f/5.6 to get reasonable results what often meant I left it home (the 7D actually had in-body IS). Had the lens been really good at f/4 it would have been different ...

 

[traveler_101]

The cheap zooms may work very well for travel, you can't beat the size and weight. If you actually use a tele lens a lot, especially in more demanding scenarios (think light level and focus speed), a pricier and heftier pro lens is probably worth the money. But buying is only part ot the cost for any lens that doesn't live on you camera.

To OP: Sorry I didn't this thread earlier. I just want to endorse the comments above. If you are a zoom shooter I would strongly recommend the 12-40. From what I've read on the d-preview site the tested image of this lens is consistently high and of course your photo opportunities @ 2.8 are better than with cheap zooms that oscillate up to 5.6

There is an alternative however. Buy light weight and fast primes for normal to wide shots and pair that with one of the best and cheapest telephoto lens in m43: the Olympus 40-150/4-5.6. That is a surprisingly good lens especially between 50-100mm for very little money and it is incredibly light.

 

[Matus]

I have bought the camera and lenses just before Easter - I have finally decided for 12-40/2.8 and 40-150/2.8 + the 1.4x tele-converter. Both are truly excellent. Indeed - the 40-150 is a bit on the larger side, but still manageable hand-hold and I found the weight still OK to carry around the shoulder. As was mentioned elsewhere - this lens is a bit too large for city shooting (in particular if you do some street photography which I do not do quite as much). If I needed ultimate compactness with some reach I would probably give the tiny Panasonic 35-100/5.6 a try, but for now I am set.

I will surely get a few primes down the road (probably the 60/2.8 macro I plan to use to "scan" my films and some 35mm equiv. lens), but my account needs to recover first 🙂

If I were to travel really light and compact I would probably just pick 2-3 primes (12, 17, 45) and be set, but my concern was to minimize lens swapping while keeping the IQ up there.

I will post some photos soon 🙂