Olympus 4/3 format lens suggestions

[Stupinder]

I have an Olympus e420 with the kit 14 - 42 1:3.5-5.6 kit lens but it unfortunately has a scratch that is invisible on short ecposures but is evident on long exposures.

I'm planning just to replace the lens with the same model as it's available relatively cheaply, but before I do does anyone have any other suggestions.

I shoot mainly landscapes and abstract close up (but not macro -though this would be nice).

I have looked on the interwebs for advice but drawing a blank unless i spend a lot more cash than I have.

[tkimages]

Is that same lens as fits the micro 4/3 cameras? If so, then the new mk2 version of the 14-42 lens is supposed to be better than the mk1, and it closes down to a smaller length when not in use. I use it on my EPL2 and have had no problems with its IQ, but I have never tried the mk1 so cannot give a comparison.

[Stupinder]

Sadly the 4/3 format isn't the same as the micro 4/3, or so i understand. Shame really as there are loads to choose from in the micro 4/3 format. Hopefully i've managed to source a 14-42 and a larget lens for good money. fingers crossed.

[unclepuncle]

Depends on budget. If you want the same sort of range as the kit lens but something optically a step above the normal kit lens then the Leica Lumix 14-50mm F3.8-5.6 OIS Lens is pretty good and can be had for about £150 on ebay. They also do a faster version but thats nearer £400-500.

[Stupinder]

Chhers, Paul i'll have a look at that -could be just be in budget

[Stupinder]

I'm considering flogging some kit and may have an increased budget for a lens. I'm looking at the Olympus Zuiko 9-18 or the Sigma 10-20.
You can see the kind of snaps I take on the Random Image Thread.
Any comments on which would be the better buy, or would i be as well sticking with the Olympus 14-42 or similarly priced kit.

[BobC]

I used the Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon D300, it is a great wideangle zoom for the price. At 2 x crop factor it becomes a 20-40 lens, but at 10mm (15 for me and 20 for you) and stopped down to 5.6+ it was a fantastic lanscape lens for me, creating gorgeous renditions of sunset clouds etc. At 20 to 40, it would still make a great landscape lens and a very good walkabout lens at the 40mm setting - think city visits, indoors etc... It has a non rotating front element and takes 77mm filter, which means circular NDs are in. I have no experience of the other lenses you mention, but this one is worth a try before you make your mind up.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08...fourthirds.asp

[rockmeister]

I also have the Sigma....top lens in every way and recommended over the Nikon equivalent on many a site.

[Stupinder]

Ta chaps

[JMartin]

I'm heavily into the Olympus 4/3 system. A brilliant landscape lens is the 12mm - 60mm. A pro landscape photographer I met uses it as his standard. I love it altho' a bit pricey.

Sigma are good but they have stopped making 4/3 which is a pity. A few still to be had on a popular auction site. I don't think there is much between them - the key is the amount of glass so F2.8 (or less) is better than F3.5 or F4. Obviously more glass will effect price. The other dodge is to ramp up the ISO but realistically 800 is about the limit unless you want loads of noise.

The other option is to get an adaptor (around a fiver delivered from China from the source above) and use older Olympus lens on manual - they are as cheap as chips and there are good prime lenses to be had for very little outlay.

For non Olympus users "4/3" is different to "Micro 4/3" (both Olympus/Pansonic formats). As I understand it you can use 4/3 on the Micro 4/3 with an adaptor and retain full functionality.

[bosa]

I had an Olympus 510 and the best lens I have ever owned, the 12-60 f:2.8-4.0. Absolutely fantastic but not cheap even secondhand as Olympus put the price up a few years back. Now own Nikon gear but still miss this lens.