General Purpose Lens Choice

D

dgwow123

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to buy a lens for a Panasonic GH3 that I can use for most of my shots on vacation. Here are the requirements:

-Budget: Not really a factor here, I was told to buy one lens and use it as often as possible so that's the plan (so I can learn about shot composition)
-Weight: Ideally not too heavy, although I have yet to try a heavy lens on my camera

-good at both street and landscape shots
-good in close quarters (indoors)
-good enough f-stop to blur objects close by (doesn't have to be full bokeh)
-decent low-light performer

I like the focal lengths between 14-25mm for walking around. These are the lenses I am deciding between:

-panasonic 14mm f2.5
-olympus 17mm f1.8
-panasonic 20mm f1.7
-voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95
-panasonic 25mm f1.4
-voigtlander 25mm f0.95

My favorites are probably the 20 & 25mm panasonic, 17.5 & 25mm voigtlander

I'm really impressed at how cinematic the Voigtlander lens looks, and would love to shoot a film with it, but not sure if that would turn out well with a documentary-style video of my vacation.

Would love to hear some of your advice :)
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
You don't mention the camera this is for nor budget, both variables that will affect (to a certain degree) lenses that are available.

However, since you're looking for a 'general purpose' lens, and it's for your vacation, your best bet would probably be to get a decent range zoom..

I'm assuming you've got something with a micro 4/3 mount as that seems to be the lens choices you've noted here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Honestly, I'd probably go with something like a $200-ish zoom. It won't be super fast, but you'll get a lot more options for focal length, and only have to haul around the one lens. Plus, should you drop it and break the lens or something, you're not out a huge amount of money... but the images will still look plenty nice, and you'll have the convenience of the single lens, which for a vacation, is really pretty ideal.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
Honestly, I'd probably go with something like a $200-ish zoom. It won't be super fast, but you'll get a lot more options for focal length, and only have to haul around the one lens. Plus, should you drop it and break the lens or something, you're not out a huge amount of money... but the images will still look plenty nice, and you'll have the convenience of the single lens, which for a vacation, is really pretty ideal.
Click to expand...

The only problem with the zoom lenses at that price is that I won't be able to do night shoots.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
There isn't a perfect solution (in your price range).

I'm a huge fan of primes and don't shoot zoom very often, EXCEPT when I'm on vacation or other situation where I don't want to lug around a bag full of lenses and have to stop and swap them out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gonzo_Entertainment said:
There isn't a perfect solution (in your price range).
Click to expand...
What price range? The OP still has not provided any budget information.

dgwow123: If you're willing to spend about $1k, you can get the lumix 12-35 f2.8, that's fairly fast, and it's apparently pretty nice glass. The cheaper panasonic 14-45mm is f/3.5-5.6, which while not super fast is still not terrible..

But, before this conversation goes any further, needlessly, you really should tell us what camera you're looking to get a lens for, and what your budget is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That Tamron is a pretty nice lens, but it's not a MFT lens, so an adapter would also be necessary (still working on the assumption this is for an MFT camera) and if that adapter were not a speedbooster/focal reducer, then it wouldn't really behave as a 17-50 on a micro 4/3 sensor, since it's a lens intended for an APS-C sensor which is roughly twice the size of a MFT sensor.

But ... again need to know the camera and the budget.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
That Tamron is a pretty nice lens, but it's not a MFT lens, so an adapter would also be necessary (still working on the assumption this is for an MFT camera) and if that adapter were not a speedbooster/focal reducer, then it wouldn't really behave as a 17-50 on a micro 4/3 sensor, since it's a lens intended for an APS-C sensor which is roughly twice the size of a MFT sensor.

But ... again need to know the camera and the budget.
Click to expand...

Ah, just seen the first post now says it's for a GH3
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
What price range? The OP still has not provided any budget information.

dgwow123: If you're willing to spend about $1k, you can get the lumix 12-35 f2.8, that's fairly fast, and it's apparently pretty nice glass. The cheaper panasonic 14-45mm is f/3.5-5.6, which while not super fast is still not terrible..

But, before this conversation goes any further, needlessly, you really should tell us what camera you're looking to get a lens for, and what your budget is.
Click to expand...

Good point. I was operating on the assumption he probably didn't want to spend $1000 plus on a lens, but he might.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok here we go...
Panasonic GH3

-Budget: Not really a factor here, I was told to buy one lens and use it as often as possible so that's the plan (so I can learn about shot composition)
Click to expand...

This is probably the best you can do for MFT zooms right now: http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_x_vario_12_35.html

Alternatively, you could get the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, and a regular MFT to nikon adapter along with an MFT to nikon speedbooster from metabones, all for just slightly more, and that would give you basically 11mm-32mm, with and without the speedbooster, and with the speedbooster at 11-16 it'd be a stop faster.

That tamron 17-50 with the same two adapters won't go as wide, but would be slightly cheaper, same f-stop at its widest, and again a stop faster with the speed booster, and would net you an effective focal range of 17mm-100mm with the speedbooster from 17-50 and with the non-speedbooster adapter ~34mm-100mm

So, an MFT lens that'll do 12-35mm, or a couple of nikon mount lenses plus adapters that'll have roughly the same performance, and a larger focal range.

Those are the options I'd probably narrow it down to if I were only going to pick a single lens.

Since this is for your vacation most immediately, I'd probably lean more toward a larger focal range, so you can really reach out to those bits of scenery or whatever that you want to capture but can't physically get closer to for whatever reason.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
Ok here we go...


This is probably the best you can do for MFT zooms right now: http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/g_x_vario_12_35.html

Alternatively, you could get the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, and a regular MFT to nikon adapter along with an MFT to nikon speedbooster from metabones, all for just slightly more, and that would give you basically 11mm-32mm, with and without the speedbooster, and with the speedbooster at 11-16 it'd be a stop faster.

That tamron 17-50 with the same two adapters won't go as wide, but would be slightly cheaper, same f-stop at its widest, and again a stop faster with the speed booster, and would net you an effective focal range of 17mm-100mm with the speedbooster from 17-50 and with the non-speedbooster adapter ~34mm-100mm

So, an MFT lens that'll do 12-35mm, or a couple of nikon mount lenses plus adapters that'll have roughly the same performance, and a larger focal range.

Those are the options I'd probably narrow it down to if I were only going to pick a single lens.

Since this is for your vacation most immediately, I'd probably lean more toward a larger focal range, so you can really reach out to those bits of scenery or whatever that you want to capture but can't physically get closer to for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Thanks Will,

Actually, I don't need a zoom lens anymore :)
Dad has the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens you mentioned (it's made for Canon camera though) for a camera he is not using anymore, and so I just purchased the canon EF to m4/3 adapter. Won't have AF but that should do the trick? I also have a variable ND filter that will fit it with a step-up adapter.

So you were mentioning the Metabones Speedbooster. I would attach this onto the adapter I already purchased? I would love to purchase the Canon FD to m4/3 adapter from them for 100$, but I don't know if I can use the Canon FD speedbooster for a Canon EF lens.

There are also other speedboosters you can find on ebay it seems, mostly chinese, that do Canon EF to m4/3, if the Metabones doesn't work (http://www.ebay.ca/sch/i.html?_trks...non+ef+to+m43+speedbooster&_sacat=0&_from=R40).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
dgwow123 said:
Thanks Will,

Actually, I don't need a zoom lens anymore :)
Dad has the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens you mentioned (it's made for Canon camera though) for a camera he is not using anymore, and so I just purchased the canon EF to m4/3 adapter. Won't have AF but that should do the trick? I also have a variable ND filter that will fit it with a step-up adapter.

So you were mentioning the Metabones Speedbooster. I would attach this onto the adapter I already purchased? I would love to purchase the Canon FD to m4/3 adapter from them for 100$, but I don't know if I can use the Canon FD speedbooster for a Canon EF lens.

There are also other speedboosters you can find on ebay it seems, mostly chinese, that do Canon EF to m4/3, if the Metabones doesn't work (http://www.ebay.ca/sch/i.html?_trks...non+ef+to+m43+speedbooster&_sacat=0&_from=R40).
Click to expand...

You'd need an FD to EF adapter to use the MFT->FD adapter.

The ebay speedboosters aren't quite as good as the metabones, but they'll certainly do the job for most people. As for a regular non speedbooster adapter, metabones is overpriced.. one of these from amazon for $15. I just got one and it works great...

With a speedbooster and a non speedbooster you'll basicall double the focal range of that one lens... and you'll wind up getting it all pretty cheap. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
You'd need an FD to EF adapter to use the MFT->FD adapter.

The ebay speedboosters aren't quite as good as the metabones, but they'll certainly do the job for most people. As for a regular non speedbooster adapter, metabones is overpriced.. one of these from amazon for $15. I just got one and it works great...

With a speedbooster and a non speedbooster you'll basicall double the focal range of that one lens... and you'll wind up getting it all pretty cheap. :)
Click to expand...

Will the aperture control work with these cheap speedboosters electronically? From what I hear, the cheap chinese canon EF to m43 adapter (if you get an adapter with aperture control) doesn't control the depth of field, closing the iris within the adapter introduces vignetting past f5.6, because the Canon lenses have no aperture control, only the Canon cameras. So unless I shell out $400 for an electronically-integrated Metabones FD to M43, i have to stay under f6 all the time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you're looking at lenses with an adapter I'd consider the sigma 18-35 f/1.8, in nikon mount with or without a speedbooster. The nikon mount allows the adapters to manually control the aperture. The lens itself is very sharp and it's currently the fastest zoom on the market. If you get both a speedbooster and a standard adapter it would let you cover a 35mm equivalent range of 27mm - 70mm, which is good for most narrative work. As a single lens solution it may be the most versatile option you'll find. The lens itself is $800, speedbooster & a standard adapter would add roughly another $400.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ItDonnedOnMe said:
If you're looking at lenses with an adapter I'd consider the sigma 18-35 f/1.8, in nikon mount with or without a speedbooster. The nikon mount allows the adapters to manually control the aperture. The lens itself is very sharp and it's currently the fastest zoom on the market. If you get both a speedbooster and a standard adapter it would let you cover a 35mm equivalent range of 27mm - 70mm, which is good for most narrative work. As a single lens solution it may be the most versatile option you'll find. The lens itself is $800, speedbooster & a standard adapter would add roughly another $400.
Click to expand...

Considered it, but it would weigh a lot on my camera (811g lens + 177g speedbooster) and I'm doing handheld shooting mostly so a lot of the focal range would be hard for me to handle. Also, I'd have to pay for shipping for both, combined with duties and everything. The extra cost and weight were the factors that drove me away.

In the end I decided to get a voigtlander 17.5 for most of my shooting that I found a really good deal for, with a 28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.8 that I already had. I also have a vivitar 75-205 f3.8 which I could use without a lens adapter, unlike the canon which would need an electronic adapter to control the depth of field when stopping down.

I hope that I made the right decision :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top