Basic set of lenses for OM's

[naxxfish]

So generally at minimum one wants a good prime lens for wide, medium and something a bit more tele - plus then maybe a zoom for the in between bits - right? This is what I've got for my Nikon F-301 body and also my Canon DSLR. But recently I've been using my OM-1n body, for which I only have a 50mm f/1.8 Zuiko lens for.

What are the lenses that'd tick those boxes? I've been looking at a 28mm f/2.8 Zuiko Auto-W for a wide, and have been after the 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko for a while now, but not sure what the best options for the other categories might be. Any recommendations?

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

100mm /2.8 and 135mm /3.5.
You don't need anything else apart the 28mm /3.5 or /2.8.
The 50mm /1.4 won't give you anything extra that you already have in the /1.8.

 

[Jeff L]

I can vouch for the 100 f2.8. I bought one a while ago and am really impressed with it.

 

[faberryman]

Could you list the lenses for you Canon and Nikon. Which of those lenses do you prefer? Which focal lengths are you missing from your lineup? The 28-48mm f4 is a gem of a lens. Tiny, it takes the place of 28/35/50 and f4 isn't an issue during the day.

 

[baachitraka]

21mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm, 135mm and 200mm

Special: 21/24mm - very seldom used. 24mm have not seen the light yet.

Best I: 28/50/100
Best II: 35/85/135

I don't own the 21/100mm ye but 135mm is a stunner. I don't worry much about f/2.0 expect for 85mm where I have no other choice.

A motor drive/winder is always handy...

 

[naxxfish]

Motor drive: meh! I quite like the quiet shutter and the feel of the manual film advance for that particular body, and the fact it's small and light! The only thing about the body which is slightly annoying is having to remember to turn on and off the light meter (and the fact the batteries are so much hassle this is kind of a big deal!). Much prefer the half-press metering I get on my Nikon F-301, but there we go.

So my Nikon lenses...
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 - my everyday general lens of choice
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 - my all time favourite lens, particularly for portraits
Tamron 70-210mm f/3.8-4 - an acceptable zoom if I need it
Tamron (22mm?) - wide angle, can't find it right now but it's an acceptable wide angle lens

And on my (APS-C) Canon
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.8 - kit lens
Canon EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6

And currently on the OM1n as mentioned I just have the Zuiko 50mm f/1.8.

I tend to want to do low light, handheld stuff often, so that's why I tend to gravitate towards primes, and why I'm looking at the f/1.4 50mm over what I've currently got - that one third of a stop (I think...?) could make a fair difference?

So what I'm thinking is:

• 28mm/35mm
• Something between 70-150mm fast-ish prime
• Zoom somewhere between 100-300mm
• Maybe something that can do macro in there somewhere.

Not likely to need anything more than 200mm realistically

 

[baachitraka]

I have a winder. Yes its bit noisy but very useful for fast moving subjects. Esp., when my daughter playing in the play ground.

100mm is cheaper than 85mm and 135mm is cheaper than 100mm.

 

[faberryman]

Since you use zooms on your digital camera, you ought to run the free program ExposurePlot on your image folder. It will give you a graphical look at the frequency you use the different focal lengths of your zooms, and it should give you some guidance on which primes you may want to consider.

 

[ciniframe]

When shooting with the 50 do you find you keep needing to back up to get more in the frame?
Then you need a wider angle lens. How wide? How far do you back up, or do you run out of room backing up?
When shooting with the 50 do you find you wish you could be closer?
Then you need a narrow angle lens. How close, a little bit or a lot. That, and your budget will inform your choice of a telephoto lens.

After 40 years with an OM system I wound up with;
24mm f2.8 Zuiko
35mm f2.8 Zuiko (this pedestrian lens has gone up in price because of those darn digital folks using them on their mirrorless cameras)
50mm f1.8 Zuiko
50mm f2.8 Sigma 1:1 macro (came up as $29 on a BIN and I took a chance, lens works fine)
85mm f2 Zuiko (these are expensive, no way around that)
135mm f3.5 Zuiko (found in pristine condition at a camera store for $15, how could I not get it)
200 f5 Zuiko (can you tell I like small size and low weight, and takes the same 49mm filter size as the rest of my Zuikos)
Yeah, I like primes.

That's all folks.

 

[Bill Burk]

I consider a set to be wide, normal, slight telephoto and long. I don't like zooms because they have smaller working apertures.

One day you might be hand-holding a shot of a deer in a grove of trees with your longest lens, and f/4 would handicap you if it was a zoom (assuming you don't have the wide-angle lens on, which is a sure bet).

I prefer f/2 or thereabout. Those Zuiko are sure expensive though. I agree in that regard that f/1.8 lens should stay.

 

[klownshed]

My main camera bag has an OM-2, 28mm f3.5, 50mm F1.8 and 135mm f3.5. I'll sometimes switch out the 135 for a Tamron 90mm f2.5 macro or, more frequently, just take the 28 and 50.

I have a 28 f2.8 and 50 1.4 but prefer the smaller, lighter slower lenses and don't miss the faster versions when out.

I also have a 35mm f2.8 which i tend to use more as the only lens I take.

Like many around here I have many more lenses, from 14 to 200mm for the OMs but it's the 28 and 50 that have become the work horses.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Another option: If you do architecture, the 35mm f/2.8 shift lens is very handy. It's much smaller than the equivalent Nikkor PC lens.

 

[MattKing]

My favorite combination is:
- 24mm f/2,8
- 35mm f/2
- 85mm f/2
I've got a few others too - 3 or 4 different 50mm lenses, a 75-150mm zoom

 

[Ap507b]

My OM1 bag has Zuiko 28mm F3.5, 50mm F1. 8 & 135mm F3.5 lenses in it .all the lenses combined came in at under £40. It all fits in a Lowepro Mini Nova bag & is unbelievably light. Thinking of adding a 200mm F4 to the kit but have doubts it is worth the extra weight & the new bag it will need.

 

[naxxfish]

My OM1 bag has Zuiko 28mm F3.5, 50mm F1. 8 & 135mm F3.5 lenses in it .all the lenses combined came in at under £40. It all fits in a Lowepro Mini Nova bag & is unbelievably light. Thinking of adding a 200mm F4 to the kit but have doubts it is worth the extra weight & the new bag it will need.

Wow, that's a steal!

I have trouble finding Zuikos of similar calibre, without major fungus or other such thing, for less than £30 each.

 

[jgoody]

Another fan of the 85mm F2....

 

[Dali]

What Ricardo said. No need to elaborate further.

 

[grahamp]

I admit I don't use my OM kit very much these days - my eyes don't like the finders on 35mm gear any more - but I mostly carried a 24mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8, and sometimes a Tamron 70-150 f3.8. Later I started using a 200mm f4 as the long lens. When cycling I would compromise on a 35-70 or 35-105 Zuiko zoom only - weight and bulk can be paramount.

I never regretted going wide to the 24mm. Beautifully rectilinear.

 

[Ap507b]

Wow, that's a steal!

I have trouble finding Zuikos of similar calibre, without major fungus or other such thing, for less than £30 each.

Just had to bide my time on ebay & wait for them to come up at a cheap price. Got these lenses maybe 2 or 3 years ago at those prices. Picked up a 70-150 Zuiko for under £10 off ebay last year though.

 

[ac12]

The the common 2-lens kit when I got into 35mm photography: 35mm + 105mm
My OM 3-lens kit is: 24mm + 50mm + 135mm
My light Nikon 2-lens kit is: 24mm + 35-105mm zoom. I prefer a normal/mid range zoom as my normal lens.

I use the 24, to give me as much coverage as possible. I've been in many situations were I could not backup any further. Had I been using a 28 or 35, I would not have the coverage to get the image. But, many people are not comfortable with a super wide, and stop at the 28.

 

[cooltouch]

24, 50, 85 or 100, 135, and 200mm. Maybe a 35mm too if you use that focal length much. Fastest you can afford. I always prefer 24mm over 28mm. I also like having an ultrawide, such as the Tamron 17mm f/3.5, for those situations where nothing else will quite do. Zooms as needed or desired. A fast 300mm if you can afford it as well, if you need this focal length. Also a good 500mm mirror, such as the Tamron 55B or 55BB (500mm f/8) can be very handy at times. And of course, always, always a good stout tripod. And a good monopod is recommended as well.

 

[nsurit]

Mine is just an opinion as is that of others. It is however an opinion by one who owns or has owned almost all the OM Zuikos other than the Big Whites. Since you have the 50mm f1.8, I would put that one on the bottom of my list for replacement. So adding two, I'd probably keep an eye out for a 24mm f2.8. On the long end I wouldn't be without my 85mm f2, however those can be a bit pricey. An alternative and one that I own is the Tamron SP 90mm f2.5. The one that takes 49mm filters (there are two versions of this lens.) So I'm saying buy two lenses and see where that takes you. Bill Barber

 

[darinwc]

I have a variety of Zuiko lenses from 21 to 300mm.
Keep your 50mm f1.8. It is excellent all around.
If you want to keep the costs down, go for the 100mm f2.8. It is a wonderful lens, I tend to reach for it over the 85mm f2.
You could go for one 90mm macros from tamron, tokina, vivitar. They are good n sharp but they are 2x the size/weight. (i really hated the earlier 49mm tamron btw. I have the 2nd gen with the 52mm filter. 52BB i think)

For wides, the 28mm f2.8 or f3.5 is fine. Though since you dont use 24mm mich on your nikon, I may suggest to try 24mm on the olympus. Force yourself to get a little closer to things and try it out.

 

[mr rusty]

OM's are my go-to shooter. Generally, 35mm f2.8, 50mm 1.8, 35-70 F4 zoom and 75-150 F4 zoom Yes, all cheapies. usually I either have the 35mm prime or the 35-70 zoom on. I virtually never find myself where I would need both fast film and wide aperture - so have never had a hankering for the expensive lenses. I've posted examples before how good I find the 35-70 F4 zoom in terms of image quality. If it has an issue it's some barrel distortion, but even that can be creative
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Dan Fromm]

I bought my first 35 mm camera, a Nikkormat FTN, in 1970. It came with a very useful brochure on photography with 35 mm SLRs that included Nikon's best advice, as of then, on which lenses to get. They recommended a kit whose focal lengths went in 2x steps. In other words, a 50 mm (or so) normal lens, a 25 (or so), a 100 or so, a 200, ...

I took Nikon's advice and have never regretted it. Ended up with 24/2.8, 55/2.8 MicroNikkor, 105/2.8 MicroNikkor (it replaced a 105/2.5) and a 200/4 MicroNikkor (replaced an earlier 200/4).