Best MFT kit lens
- Thread starter PatrickO
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,656
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It certainly fits the bill but whilst they seem cheap as part of a kit I haven’t been able to find a decent priced second hand one, by all means point me to a sub £100 one!
Otherwise I’d just get the non pancake version which can be had very cheaply.
Otherwise I’d just get the non pancake version which can be had very cheaply.
- Messages
- 1,347
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I used to like the pancake lens on the m10, you can pretty much hold the camera in your hand and it’s pretty unobtrusive.
Should have really kept it when I bought my e-m1 mk2.
They can have issues with an internal ribbon cable, although I never had this issue
Should have really kept it when I bought my e-m1 mk2.
They can have issues with an internal ribbon cable, although I never had this issue
- Messages
- 23,537
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 9,260
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm a great fan of (dare I say it) Panasonic's compact 12~32mm.
I have one on a GM5 and another on a GX7. They're democratic little devils and wouldn't mind working with an Olympus, I'm sure.
The 12mm wide end is so much better than 14mm, in confined spaces...
I have one on a GM5 and another on a GX7. They're democratic little devils and wouldn't mind working with an Olympus, I'm sure.
The 12mm wide end is so much better than 14mm, in confined spaces...
- Messages
- 15,387
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
12-50 electric zoom is a little gem .but each to there own
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Olympus 12-45, not a budget lens, but small, light, weather sealed and very good image quality.
- Messages
- 3,656
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I completely agree and it can be had for less than £300.
badlywornroy
I am not macho
- Messages
- 2,644
- Name
- Roy
- Edit My Images
- No
Why do you say "I'm a great fan of (dare I say it) ?I'm a great fan of (dare I say it) Panasonic's compact 12~32mm.
I have one on a GM5 and another on a GX7. They're democratic little devils and wouldn't mind working with an Olympus, I'm sure.
The 12mm wide end is so much better than 14mm, in confined spaces...
View attachment 381130
This lens has been rightly lauded by the great and the great unwashed. Sure cheap and plastic construction but image wise it punches above it's price point.
- Messages
- 15,484
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Didn't like the 12-32 and sold it on pretty much straight away.
Image quality was acceptable, but really dislike this wind out style of lens.
Same feeling about the Olympus 9-18, didn't think much of the image quality either.
Image quality was acceptable, but really dislike this wind out style of lens.
Same feeling about the Olympus 9-18, didn't think much of the image quality either.
The 12-32 is a tiny jewel of a lens - but against the size advantage there are tradeoffs - the maximum aperture is limited - and there is no manual focus ring.
(It pairs well with the reasonably compact 35 to 100 F4.)
- Messages
- 9,260
- Edit My Images
- No
Alas! My humour is as perls cast before swine...
My recommending a Panasonic lens be placed upon an Olympus body might be thought an act of sacrilege in the eyes of some of our fellows.
- Messages
- 2,639
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
I hope not as I was going to recommend the Panasonic Lumix 12-60mm.Alas! My humour is as perls cast before swine...
My recommending a Panasonic lens be placed upon an Olympus body might be thought an act of sacrilege in the eyes of some of our fellows.
- Messages
- 767
- Edit My Images
- No
I have the 14-42mm EZ and the slightly larger 14-42mm II R.
There is nothing between them for image quality (IMHO)
I liked the manual zoom on the II R and the tiny size of the EZ.
I bought the 12-40 PRO and never looked back at either lens though.
The quality is worth the weight and it's not that expensive used.
I shoot with an OM-D E-M10ii - on the E-M1 I would have thought the size advantage of the EZ is outweighed by the big body,
You might also consider the 12-50mm Olympus which was bundled with the E-M5.
IIRC you get a macro mode and it's weather sealed.
There is nothing between them for image quality (IMHO)
I liked the manual zoom on the II R and the tiny size of the EZ.
I bought the 12-40 PRO and never looked back at either lens though.
The quality is worth the weight and it's not that expensive used.
I shoot with an OM-D E-M10ii - on the E-M1 I would have thought the size advantage of the EZ is outweighed by the big body,
You might also consider the 12-50mm Olympus which was bundled with the E-M5.
IIRC you get a macro mode and it's weather sealed.
- Messages
- 9,077
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Same here.
I haven't tried all the lenses mentioned, but I know the Panasonic Lumix 12-60mm is good & sharp throughout the range. I prefer its build size & weight to that of the 12-32.
The Lumix 12-60 is just so versatile, a great allrounder. I use it at 12mm quite a bit, verging on the ultra-wide yet rarely need wider. (my 7-14 doesn't get to sees the light of day).
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,168
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
These are the ones I have as a size comparison.
The first image is of the lenses at their longest physical length, and the second at their shortest physical length.
I have included the 14-140 as it is hardly any bigger than the 12-60, and much more useful for general purpose use.
From left to right
Panasonic Lumix 12-32
Panasonic Lumix 14-42
Olympus 14-42 (no OIS)
Panasonic Lumix 14-45 (the 14-42 is just about the same size)
Panasonic Lumix 12-60
Panasonic Lumix 14-140
The first image is of the lenses at their longest physical length, and the second at their shortest physical length.
I have included the 14-140 as it is hardly any bigger than the 12-60, and much more useful for general purpose use.
From left to right
Panasonic Lumix 12-32
Panasonic Lumix 14-42
Olympus 14-42 (no OIS)
Panasonic Lumix 14-45 (the 14-42 is just about the same size)
Panasonic Lumix 12-60
Panasonic Lumix 14-140
- Messages
- 338
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Is that the none Leica version Steve? I'm guessing it is based on the 12-60 not being orange/gold (but thats just guessing based on pictures of the Leica lens having that difference).
I'm still debating which direction to go with lens choice. I am getting on ok with the 12-32 but wish for a focus ring as have had a couple of shots where the AF just missed (I know it can be done on the touch screen but would prefer on the lens) and on occasion a bit more reach.
I like the 12 end and the extra on the 12-60 might fit the bill.
It is considerably bigger than the 12-32 however it seems.
Would you say that translates into a noticeable improvement in IQ and general use.
Wondering if it'll be 'big' on the GX9 too.
Have you compared the non Leica 12-60 to the 12-32?
How to they stack up against each other at the same sort of focal range?
Are they much a muchness in the 12-30 range with the only real benefit to the 12-60 being the extra 28mm and the focus ring?
Possibly the OIS too? I'm assuming Power OIS is better than Mega OIS.
The faster Leica version whilst tempting is starting down another expensive rabbit hole that buying the GX9 was never meant to be(!) so interested in feedback on the 'poor mans' 12-60!
(Sorry for the slight hi-jack too OP)
- Messages
- 2,168
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I use both the 12-60 regularly on the GX9, they are not heavy, and it is quite comfortable.
The image quality is good, I think better than the 12-32, but hard to say without spending time doing detailed tests, in other words effectively no difference at the same focal length. They are both good, and I have had no cause to do side by side tests because one seemed lacking.
I don't think the Leica 12-60 is worth it, had one and sold it an bought another Panasonic one, then borrowed it back again to compare, but would not own one again.
Yes the 12-60 is Power OIS, and so is the 14-140, the Mega OIS 14-140 is quite a bit bigger and heavier.
Where you will gain with the 12-60 is when you need to crop, that would be less with the 12-60
I very rarely use manual focus, as I find it hard to see on a small screen if it is in focus precisely or not. Peaking helps, but the only times auto focus has not worked has been operator error, usually having touched the screen and moved the focus point but not noticed.
None of them are pro lenses, and I don't think image quality is a factor with any of them, decision is just down to what type of OIS and the zoom range for me.
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 6,644
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
No, I've never owned the 12-32.
I have owned the Leica version. Yes, there is a very slight IQ improvement with the Leica, but most reviews confirm my experience that there's very little in it. The Leica version, whilst being f2.8 at the wide end, drops straight to f4 almost as soon as you start to zoom. The basic version gets to f4 at about 19mm and f5.6 at 43mm. And it too is Power IOS. Not that this matters if it's on an Olympus body - in which case only the body's IBIS is used.
- Messages
- 338
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
All sounds good to me.
Intention is still to pick up some primes but for days like Monday when I was on a 22mi hike I want minimal kit and weight with me but once or twice I wanted just a touch more reach than the 12-32 could provide.
A bit of Googling suggests Power O.I.S can be worth an extra stop over Mega so of benefit probably if accurate.
I will have a look at that 14-140 too.
Just read a review of the two which pretty much said as much so I can safely discount the Leica for me.
Out of interest are those focal length/apertures something you checked or just roughly from memory?
I’ve just checked the 12-32 and at 18mm it was f4.2 so nothing in it but at 32mm it was at f5.6 so if the 12-60 doesn’t hit f5.6 until 40+ mm then another slight advantage.
Other than that they both have the same close focus at the wide end and the 12-60 has a hood which is good!
It will be going on a Pana GX9 so will be able to make use of the dual i.s and any benefits that Power O.I.S brings.
I think this might fit the bill tbh. Just need to read up on the 14-140 @Sangoma mentions.
Thanks both.
Stephen L
I asked a Stupid Question Once...
- Messages
- 6,644
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- No
Checked them on the E-M5iii. Having said that, it reported the maximum aperture as being f3.7! Not that it makes any difference.
- Messages
- 929
- Name
- Maarten
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The Oly 12-42 EZ has a reputation for failing. I also didn't like the "power zoom".
The Panasonic 12-32 is very good and super compact but reach is limited.
The Panasonic 14-45 is excellent. I only sold it because I ended up getting the Oly 12-45 f/4. The hood on my copy was also a bit loose - not sure if that's a consistent issue across the board.
The Panasonic 12-60 is good; probably better on the wide end than the tele end. But you get a lot of reach in a very light and compact package.
I think most of these points have been made above but this was my experience.
The Panasonic 12-32 is very good and super compact but reach is limited.
The Panasonic 14-45 is excellent. I only sold it because I ended up getting the Oly 12-45 f/4. The hood on my copy was also a bit loose - not sure if that's a consistent issue across the board.
The Panasonic 12-60 is good; probably better on the wide end than the tele end. But you get a lot of reach in a very light and compact package.
I think most of these points have been made above but this was my experience.