The Last Lens I Needed.............
Weight.
When it all comes down to brass tacks, weight is the limit of your comfortable kit. It determines what you have at hand on any given day, how your bag handles and your maximum potential creative capabilities.
The big Nikon kit reminded me of the bad old days, days when limiting options due to physical limitatins was simply a reality. Want your big lens, leave most everything else behind and concentrate on it and it alone. Zooms remove the need to carry several primes, but often weigh as much as many of these combined anyway (the original 180 + 85 combo vs the 80-200 “stovepipe” Nikon is a classic example).
I went another way.
After only a few weeks with the paper, a very different dynamic to my school duties, I have become keenly aware of weight. At the school I tote to a place, often with just exactly what I need, then work from a dropped bag. With the paper, mobility is key. No dropped bags, no multi camera and lens setups, just lean and mean.
A G9 and EM1.2 carried together give me more depth and speed than the other guys who go out with just a single full frame Nikon DSLR and need to change lenses, but my size and weight advantage has been lost here slightly. Lenses are the only way.
In my recent post, I compared the lenses the the paper issued me with my current kit. Huge differences in size and weight with little or no difference in performance make it a no brainer (a no back strainer), to stick with the road I have taken.
So, I bought the 35-100 f2.8 II, a lens that by even MFT standards is small. Compared to a Nikon (Canon, Sony etc) 70-200 f2.8. It feels like a toy copy, but it is the real deal.
There are plenty to choose from, but overall, this one makes the most sense in my densely populated MFT arsenal so why this lens?
The new Olympus 40-150 f4 is much the same size, price and weight, but with a the full stop less light and an extending barrel, as well as the opportunity lost to get a long Pana lens into the fold. I think I would still feel something would be missing in my kit. The option of carrying one G9 only would be nice, but without a dedicated tele, it is fragile, limited.
The 50-200 Leica is only a third dearer than this lens, adds more reach and metal build, but it is really a duplicate of the Oly lens, so it is a bit bulky and is actually slower in aperture at the shared longer end (100mm) than the little Pana lens. It would fit into my F3x bag, but not as neatly as the Pana.
The 75mm, which has been my go-to up until now is roughly the same size, but lacks range and weather sealing. This lens will be kept for special occassions and tasks like indoor sports, the 35-100 will be the day to day work horse.
My 40-150 plastic fantastic is probably close to this lens in sharpness, but lacks the Bokeh quality and is so very slow in comparison. F5.6 is workable in many situations, but not the ones the Paper sends me into. The other issue is weather proofing and build quality generally. When it comes to travelling, I will be torn here.
So, in summary, the Pana lens offers a genuinely small, consistently fast, tough and robust short tele option with quality, but more importantly pleasant imaging qualities, which no other lens I have or can get can offer.
Would it be my only option?
If I only had this, many sports will be out of reach, literally, but it would be fine for a travel or street kit.
Minimum focus is good, but not great.
AF is interesting. The rippling effect is there in spades on the G9, but it is plenty fast. The effect is less obvious on an EM1, but is also very fast and smooth. I am getting better with this. I realise that within the chaos that is the DFD focussing process, sharp capture is usually nailed, you just have to go with it. I can’t focus 240+ times a second.
This is important. I need a lens that will work better on both platforms, something that does not seem to happen as well the other way around, although if pushed, I know I can manage.
An issue I need to get to the bottom of is the red stabiliser warning on the camera when the lens I.S. is disengaged. It seems if I turn it off on the lens, I loose it all together. Need to research this.
Without testing, the colour and contrast look to be a good match to the Oly cameras. Mixing the two brands can have benefits. The more organic, richer look of Olympus files and the lighter, brighter Pana lens look gives me a balance that sticking to one brand only, lacks.
The same works with Oly lenses and Pana cameras, but I must admit to liking the formar most*. Just this morning I shot a Fathers day function with a G9 and Sigma 30mm and EM10 mk2 and 15mm Leica. There was something about both sets of images, but the Oly/Pana ones were a touch more stable.
I have bought a lot of lenses lately with generally a growth in my capabilities.
The 15mm Leica. Total win. Mounted on my G9 as the first go-to option for close work involving people.
The 12-60 Leica. Another win and a good replacement for the 12-40 Oly. My core “one lens” option. I will get the 12-40 serviced, but it will still likely be my video standard.
The kit 12-60. An eminently sensible purchase and surprisingly reliable. My core travel lens. In good light, it handles anything the Leica can.
The Sigma 30. A fun addition, less practical and stable than the others, but very powerful when applied logically. This is my “cut-out” lens at closer distances. It has a very delicate rendering with Bokeh in bucket loads, but I am not super keen yet to trust it in critical situations.
The 35-100. An itch scratched and sensible need fulfilled. My EM1 kit tele for the every day kit, trading a 50mm reduction in range for a 50% reduction in weight and size compared to the 40-150 Oly.
*My order of preferrence is roughly this;
Oly cameras with Pana lenses (depth and balance and on older EM5 mk1’s a delicateness)
Pana with Pana (bright and light, good in poor coloured lighting)
Oly with Oly (rich and deep colour, struggles a little in bad lighting colour)
Pana with Oly (some function issues and colour similar to option 1).
Please keep in mind though, the EM1x and Pen F are slightly different to the rest of the Oly stable, so micro climates abound.