View Full Version : Lens Quandary E-510

4th May 2008, 07:40 PM
I know Shirley touched on this recently but I would like to broaden the question a little more.

Anne and I are almost in the market for a further lens. We enjoy taking portraits from time to time and enjoy landscape photography.
We have the twin lens kit also the 70-300 and EC-14 converter.

Remember we are still learning and would welcome your comments on the following three: 11-22, 12-60 and 14-54.

Regards. Barr1e

David M
4th May 2008, 08:16 PM
The 12-60 almost covers the range of the 11-22 and exceeds the range of the 14-54.

There's only a 10mm gap between the 12-60 and the 70-300 which is nothing in telephoto terms if you only want to carry 2 lenses.

4th May 2008, 08:19 PM
I know Shirley touched on this recently but I would like to broaden the question a little more.

Anne and I are almost in the market for a further lens. We enjoy taking portraits from time to time and enjoy landscape photography.
We have the twin lens kit also the 70-300 and EC-14 converter.

Remember we are still learning and would welcome your comments on the following three: 11-22, 12-60 and 14-54.

Regards. Barr1e


The 11-22 is far too wide for a portrait lens unless you want some distortion effects.

The other 2 are getting there... 50-75 (Given the x2 you have in 4/3 this means about 100-150 in old money) would be my range. Not that I do much except when forced by the family @ weddings etc anymore.

In the "old days" my 135 prime was my favorite portrait lens it allowed a reasonable close head & shoulders shot or face shot without beeing too close to the subjects nose or too far to control the subject.

From that I would go with either the 40-150 Kit lens or if you want another then the 12-60 which would also be a good lens for "family group" type shots


4th May 2008, 10:20 PM
Perhaps it's worth thinking about the pro lenses you mention in terms of better quality and/or faster maximum aperture rather than focal length.

If so this might make a prime lens worth considering.

The 50mm macro is a good length for portraiture, is fast and offers good quality AND it expands your photography by opening up the wonderful world of close-ups.

But there's always the chance you don't need another lens would a good tripod or other accessory expand your range more?

Anyroadup, just me 2p worth.

5th May 2008, 03:05 AM
Hi Barrie

I would ask what area of photography you would like to venture into next before considering what lens you could purchase. You seem to have most bases covered with the lenses you have already except for macro shots - where the 35mm or 50mm Oly lenses would be a useful addition to your current arsenal. The 35mm is a fair bit cheaper but nonetheless is capable of superb macro shooting though you do need to get considerably closer to the subject and can get as close as a few cm away. I have also taken a few portrait shots with the 35mm - which have been pin sharp.

Other than that, a move to a higher quality lens such as the ones you describe would be a sensible option. I have both the 11-22 and the 14-54 and I find them excellent lenses, the improvement in quality and speed from the otherwise excellent kit lenses is super and am pleased with the results from both lenses. I use the 14-54 for portrait work and other 'general' type shots and have no complaints about it, and use the 11-22 for the obvious wide angle and landscape shots - and admit to finding the image quality from this lens really superb. I have also heard great things about the 12-60mm which might be a better alternate to both of these lenses - I can't say as I don't own this lens.

The next lens for me is the Bigma as I want to enjoy nature shooting through the summer and we plan on a trip to the NW USA later in the year where I am sure it will get great use. I am also returning to Skomer within a few weeks for some more Puffin shots and know it will be superb there.

Hope this helps Barrie... let us know what you decide.

5th May 2008, 03:44 AM
Of your choices, I'd go for the 12-60. I don't have one, however. I do have the 14-54 and it is a superb lens and of a nice size and weight to carry all day.

But the extra reach on both ends of the 12-60 is tempting and the reports of its quality get through to even a dense older person like me. Of course it is WAY more expensive than the 14-54.

Personally I now want the Panleica 14-150 since I've fallen in love with the recently acquired E-330. The Panleica aside from being a superb lens by all the reports I see is all quite small for what it is. And it has Pany IS so I'd have an IS E-330. Price here is $1299.00US. Ouch.

Chrs, Stv

5th May 2008, 08:14 AM
Its quite a problem Barrie, i have thought about this on similar terms. The 14-54 is a really good lens but the extra length of the 60mm could be just enough to keep from changing to the 10-150. The 35 macro is a good portrait lens and pin sharp, also it weighs next to nothing.

5th May 2008, 08:44 AM
I am going to go for the 12-60mm next.

At present I have the two 'kit' lenses which are, and will remain, my basic travelling lenses as their performance is adequate and they are so light.

My 50-200 has lead me to appreciate the performance of the higher spec lenses.

The 12-60 scores on image quality, macro performance, decently wide angle and almost adequate aperture for portrait work (always fighting excess DoF here on the kit lens). It also has the benefit of the new focus drive so will be more suitable for future a body upgrade.

5th May 2008, 08:59 AM
Hi Barrie,
All the pro lenses are fantastic quality and you wouldn't be disappointed with any of them. Of the lenses you ask about I would go for the 12-60mm. It gives you the longest focal length, covering the classic portrait focal lengths and at the wide end is almost as wide as the 11-22mm. If you decide to go for a macro while the 35mm is a great quality lens, the 50mm is a more practical focal length for macro, has a wider aperture and is one of the best quality lenses available.

Ian C.

5th May 2008, 09:35 AM
Barrie any of those three lenses would do you fine as a landcape or general use lens with the occasionel portrait.

And here comes the but..But as a serious portrait lens the extended dof of the 4/.3's which just like the focal lengh is 2x is a disadvantage for some portraits where a fairly close background need to be out of focus.

On all three lenses at the long end ( best for head and shoulder portraits) working at maximum aperture you have the equivalent DOF of F8 on full frame.

Personely I use the 11-22mm for serious landscapes and the 50mm Macro for portraits as minimum dof is must for me for portraits and i cannot afford the wide fixed aperture in the serious pro range.

As a example this head and shoulder shot of my granddaughter Maddy has minimal dof as you can see even the hair farest away on the left is going out of focus as well as the chair she is sitting on. :)

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/Maddy.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/5135)

Model E-1
Date/time original 08/03/2008 00:00:00
Shutter speed value 1/125 s
Aperture value f/2.2
ISO speed ratings ISO 400
Exposure bias value 0.00 eV
Metering mode Pattern
Focal length 50 mm

5th May 2008, 04:44 PM
Gosh -

Thanks so much we are overwhelmed by the responses. All clear and concise - which has made up our minds.

The 12-60 it is - now for the funds. Who's coming to the London meet? LOL.:D

Regards. Barr1e

5th May 2008, 04:46 PM

I'll be there.I can bring the 14-54 and the 12-60 if you want to compare.Thats if you haven't got one by then.

5th May 2008, 09:38 PM
Thanks Andy.

I'm giving this a bump.

Plus the London Meeting.

Regards. Barr1e

6th May 2008, 08:52 PM
My wife allowed me last week to purchase the 12-60 stating that lifes too short. I must say the the performance of the lens on my E510 is stunning , the image quality compares with the HD on my TV , focusing is instant (no hunting ) and will instant focus from only 2" away - truly amazing . The lens works well with the EC14 converter . There is some shadow on flash photos resulting from the size of the lens barrel masking the built in camera flash splay / field . Certainly no buyers remorse in buying this. Bob

7th May 2008, 10:10 AM
Well I just took delivery of the 12-60mm, its quite a bit heavier than the 14-54 but is very sharp and I am sure it will be a usefull addition. I therefore now have a 14-54 for sale. Incidently, I got it from fotosense at a very good price and next day delivery!