Embarrasment Of Riches (Zoom Lenses)
I have an embarassment of riches now, with several backups to my most used lenses and occasionally a backup for those.
8-18 Leica. Personally I feel no great need for a lens wider than 12 (24mm), but when working in this business your need has to be very specific to be able to honestly say you do not need either a very wide or very long lens occasionally. This has proven to be a brilliant lens to cover this range and was useful from day one. I am not a super wide convert, but this lens certainly comes through. It’s edges can get a little iffy at extreme settings, but nothing to stress over and it seems more obvious in video than stills (I owned the Canon 17-40L and got by, anything after that is a win).
Utter………madness.
Fine art grade snap shot.
I made no friends shooting real estate hand held with this lens. Apparently I needed to make it look more difficult…..
12-40 f2.8 the standard lens that needs a service. Ideal as a work horse video lens, but recently put back into my day bag and with use the “lumpy” sand gritted zoom seems to be easing. I love the images this lens creates, as it leans a little more towards a smooth-lush look. Only the slightly iffy zoom bothers me and the mk 1 version of this lens seems to occasionally have a few mechanical issues.
The three main advantages of this lens for work over the newer 12-60 Leica are (1) It owes me nothing (2) it zooms the same way as the 40-150’s, which for reactive sports is golden and (3) it has the constant aperture and manual focus clutch for video.
12-60 Leica bought to replace the above assuming it’s assumed pending mechanical failure, adding better AF performance on a G9 and a wider range. Every bit as good as the 12-40, though different, this lens is now my personal or “other” jobs standard. There is a little something extra to the Leica lenses. Hard to put my finger on, but something. I will never regret buying this lens even if the one above and the one below probably make it a luxury.
“Glowacious” as Brett Western would say.
It does shoot more than trees, but these really highlight it’s glow.
12-60 kit was to be the backup for the 12-40. It has been shunted aside by the Leica, but is still handy to have around. Like the 40-150 kit below, this is a stellar performer regardless of the price, that will likely be reserved for travel only. In all honesty, this would have been enough to backup the 12-40 Oly, but was bought after the Leica in a G9 kit for effectively nothing. Like many good modern kit lenses, the only thing to complain about are “on the label”, which are lens speed and build.
A very reliable image maker. Colour is less brilliant than the Leica, but still pro-grade.
40-150 f2.8 is the sports master. This lens is the most capable in lower light and takes the teleconverter without consideration. Without doubt one of my confidence boosting lenses, but also one of the biggest. I sold this to a friend for a year and am soooo glad he sold it back to me reasonably. Only reservation and this goes for many of the super sharp, high micro contrast Oly lenses generally, is slightly nervous Bokeh with busy backgrounds.
The reach and speed to handle basketball at both ends with one lens. Bokeh on this one is lovely unless the out of focus elements are complicated or fine, then they can look a little messy.
40-150 f4 has quicky become my work-horse tele, replacing the much bigger and heavier f2.8 model for most jobs unless low light is a genuine issue and even then, there is not much in it. I have seen no visible or mechanical difference between the two, except maybe Bokeh, where the slightly less powerful f4 lens seems to be smoother.
Just really sharp. The background trees with the f2.8 would likely be slightly softer, but a little more “nervous ringlet” looking. Even the M43 shallow depth of field sacrifice is tempered by the “snappiness” of the rendering.
Every little detail is there.
40-150 kit has got to be the best bang for the buck lens in the range. Seriously sharp and responsive, this lens is a no-brainer when travelling or for personal stuff, but I could also seriously use it for pro work (with a couple more for backup at $100 each :)).
Nuff said….
75-300 has gone from being my most used tele to hardly ever used lately, but Cricket season has given it new life. It provides the handy ff 500mm focal length and is very sharp at this length also, especially if stopped down to f8. I often cannot pick it from my other teles except that I appreciate it’s gentle handling of strong light and pleasant Bokeh. Cricket has less stressful AF and lighting needs, so this light-heavy weight is ideal. It is a little underwhelming to look at so I take the bigger lenses also, then pack them away confident I will get the shot. The rendering is most like the 12-40 lens, smooth and sharp. Slooow maximum aperture (something like an f13 at 600mm full frame equiv) but that strangely never holds me back and slightly plasticky build, but still seriously better than the 40-150 kit. This and the 12-60 kit provide a nearly unbroken 24-600mm range.
Sometimes 600mm is too tight and 400mm unnecessarily looses quality, so 500 is the best. Nobody ever noticed these files mixed in with the 300 f4’s! It is also better at handling high contrast than my Pro lenses which tend to run a little “hot” here and the Bokeh (such as it is) is very smooth.
Another ideal situation for this lens. How could anyone complain about such a nice image?
The lens I wish I could add here is the excellent 12-100, but I will put selling that down to a bad idea on a bad day and try to move on.
Next primes.