One lens to rule them all?

When you settle on a system you like as a photographer, and you become even a little bit serious about the images you produce with said system, then your attention will eventually turn to the age old question: 'what lens shall I get next'?

More often than not, your camera will come with a standard 'kit' lens. A variable aperture (f/3.5 to f/5.6ish) zoom, with a medium-wide to medium-telephoto focal range. This is a great lens to get you started with. And in today's age of computer-designed optics, even the humble kit lens can give some fantastic results.

The Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ comes in two variants - a standard and a pancake style lens. It also comes in two different colours; black or silver - depending on the body style of the camera you want to match it to. It is an excellent choice for a walk-around, do it all, first lens. As is the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ if you want a lens that goes slightly wider and slightly longer in terms of focal range. But every system has similar offerings in their line-up, which they either bundle with a new camera, or sell quite cheaply.

Often the next lens to consider is something with a bit more 'reach'. A 'longer' telephoto lens that lets you get closer to the action. This is also occasionally bundled together as a complete kit with a camera purchase. Something like the Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6, or a Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6. And once again, these modern lenses are often ultra-sharp and very good optically. Check out my mini review of the Olympus 40-150mm f4/5.6 zoom here.

The only real issue with these kit lenses tends to be their slower, variable aperture - and the fact that they are not as solidly constructed as their more expensive alternatives. Both the standard 14-42mm and 40-150mm Olympus lenses are constructed entirely from plastic - even down to the lens mounts (as are the similar offerings from Canon and Nikon). They also don't feature any type of weather-sealing. But having said that, they still use optical glass lenses, and modern plastics have proven themselves sturdy and reliable enough over the years that this compromise is more than adequate for the average user. 

Still, there will come a time, once you become serious about your photography, where you will begin to yearn for a slightly higher quality of optic to place in front of your image sensor. Usually this results in 'faster' glass for shooting in lower light, or for a shallower depth of field (blurry backgrounds).

If you are on a budget, the first lens that often gets suggested as a 'step up' from the kit-lens is a fast 'standard' prime lens. A fixed-focal length lens like the nifty fifty Canon 50mm f1.8. The Canon 50mm f1.8II is also an all-plastic affair, which helps to keep the cost down. But at f1.8 it has a fairly large aperture that lets in a lot of light - perfect for low-light shooting. Being a prime lens, it is also more simple to construct than a zoom, and therefore has less distortion or other lens issues in its design.

You can, of course, spend more money to get even faster, and better constructed, lenses. Manufacturer's fortunately have lens offerings to cater for all budgets. But it also tends to get very expensive very quickly, with only a minimal jump in aperture speed or image quality. Only you can decide how much you are willing to spend, and whether the dramatic increase in value is evident in the end result (I would argue many times that it isn't). For example, would I pay over twice as much to get a 50mm f1.4 over an f1.8? No, I wouldn't. I don't see the dramatic price increase reflected in the overall image quality. You will need to decide these things for yourself.

The last time I owned and used the micro four thirds system, I ended up with the 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3EZ, Lumix 25mm f1.7, and Lumix 45-200mm f/4-5.6 as my lenses. A good spread, and almost exactly the path I've described for most general photographers listed above. 

As a 'serious' enthusiast, and someone for whom photography has also been a career, I have a 'desire' to own slightly 'better' glass. Most pro photographers will advise you to 'invest in glass, not camera bodies', and this is wise counsel. But it's also easier said than done if you're struggling to pay the bills. And yet, good glass (i.e. more expensive lenses) does make a difference to the kind of images you can create, and will hold their value far more than any camera body will. 

What I decided to do last time I used micro four thirds, was to sell all the lenses I owned to purchase just one, pro level lens. And that lens was the staple in all pro photographers bags - the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro.

The Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro is the micro four thirds equivalent of the Canon/Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 (although the Olympus extends the telephoto range out to 80mm). Every pro photographer worth their salt has a 24-70mm f2.8 'standard' fast zoom in their arsenal (unless they are prime-only shooters). There are probably more images taken every year with a 24-70mm f2.8 lens than all others combined, and I don't mean that as an exaggeration. It's the perfect swiss-army knife of lenses. Reasonably fast constant aperture of f2.8, combined with a perfect wide-angle landscape view of 24mm, up to the ideal portrait length of 70mm. With this one lens, you really can 'do it all'. 

So with that in mind, I've decided to do the same thing again. Sell all my existing lenses, for just the one, pro lens. Only this time, I'm swapping the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro out for the even better value Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G. The 12-35mm focal length on micro four thirds equates exactly to a 24-70mm full-frame lens - the ideal lens. 

The Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 pictured here is the version 1 lens, which is the one I'm getting (second hand). There is a version 2 of this lens, which sells for around $1,500.00NZ brand new, and which has slightly updated weather sealing and slightly updated image stabilisation - with the same optical configuration. Since I will use the EM-1's superior in-body stabilisation, and I don't need extra weather proofing (I think they've simply added freeze-proofing down to -10), the Mark 1 version of this lens - second hand - at one third of the price - will most definitely do me.

I will be selling my Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3EZ, Lumix 25mm f1.7, and spare Olympus E-M10 camera body to get the $$ together to buy the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8. Absolutely, totally 100% worth it. Especially since I'm hoping to be able to keep my Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 telephoto for those times when I just need a little extra reach. But if I have to sell that too, then I will. Just to get the 12-35mm f2.8. 

Because it really is one lens to rule them all. One lens to cover probably 95% of what I'm likely to photograph. And one day - maybe - I'll also manage to get the Lumix 35-100mm f/2.8 - the 35mm full-frame equivalent of a 70-200mm f2.8 lens. And then I really will have it all!?

I will definitely blog about it when I have it in my hot little hand. Can't wait! 😁