PDA

View Full Version : 9-18 or 11-22 or 12-60


michaelavis
28th November 2008, 02:22 PM
Don't groan :rolleyes: I'm not that experienced generally and zip with wide angle shooting but I do want to get into it! For example, I'm having some building work done on my house and want to keep a photo-blog of its progress and can't get the whole thing framed (it's not that I have a big house, more that I have a small garden). I'd like to be able to take a picture from the same place each day but can't really.

I love my 14-54mm, the results, the way it feels, the way it balances with my E-3 in heft and robustness (weatherproof too) and I therefore know the 11-22mm would give the same kind of pleasure.

The thing is, the 9-18mm obviously has 2mm more at the wide end which I would imagine is quite a lot and creates usefully more distance between it and the 14-54mm. Its also smaller/lighter which for an occasional lens is a great asset.

But then there's the mighty 12-60mm, only 1mm less than the 11-22mm and makes a good economical case for itself when compared to a 2 lens solution if I sold my beloved 14-54mm.

So, I would imagine a few on this forum have real-world experience of all three or certainly two out of three and would have a view on the pros and cons, good and not so good etc?

As usual, thanks for any advise. :)

StephenL
28th November 2008, 02:39 PM
My first thought would be to get the 12-60, which is a superb lens, a class above the 14-54 (and I'm not knocking that lens) and see if it's wide enough. If not, supplement it with the 9-18 which, whilst not splash resistant, is excellent optically and very light.
On paper the 11-22 seems redundant - although it's the only lens out of those mentioned which I have no experience of. But together with the 14-54 (if you DO keep that lens, which I suspect in the long run you won't), it's a good pair.

Graham_of_Rainham
28th November 2008, 02:50 PM
Hi,

You really do need to know if you want to go as wide as 9mm

12mm, 24 in 35mm terms is a very good wide angle that you can use without too much consentration on "distortions". I use a 7-14 and compared it to the 9-18 and found it to be much more "User Friendly"

So if you really want that extra wide angle and are going to use it, then go for it, other wise the 12-60 will do virtually everything you want. You will notice that it gets darker quicker than the 14-54, but that's a small factor...

Whatever you do have fun and let us know (Show us) how you get on...

*chr

Steve Lane
28th November 2008, 04:17 PM
Although I have no experience of using them, I tend to agree with Graham - unless you need the extra degrees the 9-18 provides, the 12-60 would be the way to go.

I do have, use and love the 11-22 however. For me, it is as close to perfect as possible. It is wide enough for architecture and landscapes and the 22mm end provides a very usable 'normal' perspective.

Cheers, Steve.

Makonde
29th November 2008, 11:09 AM
At the 12mm end there is some barreling and some distortion with the 12-60mm. This matters only if the subject is rectilinear - like buildings. Otherwise it's a fantastic lens and was my first choice for building a 'lens strategy' The barreling, by the way, disappears very quickly as you increase focal length.

For me, it follows that the 11-22, by all reports a good lens with little distortion, is nevertheless not a sufficient increase in angle. The 7-14 is a whopper, expensive, and doesn't take a filter. So for me, with the 12-60, the logical choice is the highly-acclaimed 9-18. On my list for next year. And....cheaper!

I am aiming at: 9-18, 12-60, 50-200 (the speed is important over the 70-300 for me) and 35mm macro. I've 'invested in' the last three.

michaelavis
29th November 2008, 11:22 AM
At the 12mm end there is some barreling and some distortion with the 12-60mm. This matters only if the subject is rectilinear - like buildings. Otherwise it's a fantastic lens and was my first choice for building a 'lens strategy' The barreling, by the way, disappears very quickly as you increase focal length.

For me, it follows that the 11-22, by all reports a good lens with little distortion, is nevertheless not a sufficient increase in angle. The 7-14 is a whopper, expensive, and doesn't take a filter. So for me, with the 12-60, the logical choice is the highly-acclaimed 9-18. On my list for next year. And....cheaper!

I am aiming at: 9-18, 12-60, 50-200 (the speed is important over the 70-300 for me) and 35mm macro. I've 'invested in' the last three.

I've come to the same plan as you - my 14-54 and 18-180 are for sale to fund a 12-60 with the 9-18 being the target after that. Thanks all for your thoughts, it always helps.

geirsan
15th February 2009, 12:30 AM
If we forget about the 9-18, how much extra room/space/advantage will you get if you pick the 11-22 before the 12-60? In numbers 11 - 12 is a small thing, but when it comes to focal length sometimes the difference can be bigger than one thinks. Those of you who have used both the 11-22 and the 12-60 how much extra does the 11-22 give at the wide angle lens? My choice is either to keep my 14-54 and get the 11-22 or to sell the 14-54 and get the 12-60.
BTW, does anyone know the Hong Kong price for the 12-60 at the moment? I'm heading there in a month's time.

Archphoto
15th February 2009, 01:10 AM
I have the 7-14mm, the 11-22mm and the 14-42.
When I bought the 11-22 the 9-18 was not for sale yet and the 7-14 I got by the end of 2008.

You have the 14-54.

The diference between the 11 and the 14 is relatively small, I would go for the 9-18 together with the 14-54.

If you send me a PM I can make and send you a series of shots made at 7, 9, 11, 12 and 14mm from the same point.
Please include your email adres.

Yours,
Peter

OlyPaul
15th February 2009, 08:40 AM
Opticly the 11-22 is better, but of course has a shorter range, and the 12-60 is more versatile, so it really comes down to what is more important to you.:)

yorky
15th February 2009, 10:26 AM
The 12-60 is a very good lens but, if yu were thinking of continuous coverage the ideal would probably be the 9.18 which is an excellent lens, couple it with the 14-54 and you cover a great deal and both lenses are relativly light. the 12- 60 is quite heavy.

Kiwi Paul
21st February 2009, 11:35 AM
I have the 9-18, 12-60 and 50-200SWD. The 12-60 is a excellent walkabout lens although fairly big, the 9-18 is an excellent landscape lens and is smaller and lighter than the 12-60.
I don't find the difference between the 12-60 and 9-18 to be as much as I thought it would be at the wide end, the 9-18 came for free with my E3 but knowing what I know now I wouldn't buy one if I already owned the 12-60 but I would buy one if I already owned the 14-54.

Personally if I were you I'd keep the 14-54 and get the 9-18 and the 50-200, that gives you a great selection of quality lenses, that compliment each other very well.

aul