Best m4/3 lens for landscape

M

Micro-four-thirds

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,097
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, I’m hoping you can help. I am looking to buy a m4/3 lens for landscape photography and have a budget of around £250 maximum so I don’t mind used.
What would you recommend? I’ve been looking at lenses from 7mm up to 25mm and can’t decide what would be best.
I’m thinking prime lenses as I currently have a Panasonic 14-140mm which covers most things but I fancy a change specifically for landscapes and possibly Astro in the future but that’s not vital.
Many thanks.
 
For astro I'd imagine you'll want a wide aperture lens and possibly of a wider focal length too. How wide a lens you'd want is up to you but I'd imagine you'd want something 10 or 12mm or even wider? Apertures wise I suppose 1.8 could be about the minimum?

For landscape just about anything could be a possibility as it's down to taste. As you have a 14-140mm I think you should use that and decide what focal length you're happiest with. The next thing to think about is why you can't use that 14-140mm lens for landscape pictures.
 
I don't think other people can tell you what you need.

What other people will tell you is what they have or what they want. Much better, unless you just want a new toy, is to make notes of what you cannot do with the 14~140 and go from there.
 
Thank you, I guess part of me would like a new toy lol but ideally I’m thinking something more wide angle than the 14mm end currently offers too.
 
I’m off to flamborough head in October and had some fantastic shots in mind and really wanted to make the most of my time there with regards to the photography side of things.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
I’m off to flamborough head in October and had some fantastic shots in mind and really wanted to make the most of my time there with regards to the photography side of things.
Click to expand...
Flamborough has never seemed to be a wide angle sort of place to me. In fact, longer lenses seem to be more the thing there, in my experience...

Flamborough Lighthouse GM5 _1220806.JPG
 
As @woof woof and @AndrewFlannigan rightly say, landscapes can be shot with any focal length, so the best thing to do, considering you already have a decent zoom, is to check your existing photos for the focal length most used on your style of landscapes and go from there. There are a plethora of fixed-length lenses to go for. A wide aperture is rarely necessary for a landscape shot, but more so for astro or low light.
 
As much as I hate to agree with Andrew ,I have to admit this time he is right . I don’t think anywhere on that coastline warrants a ultra wide lens as you will lose to much detail
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Thank you, I guess part of me would like a new toy lol but ideally I’m thinking something more wide angle than the 14mm end currently offers too.
Click to expand...
Not commenting on your proposed upcoming trip, but if you end up wanting something wider, the Panasonic 7-14 is a lovely lens, very little distortion even without the lens correction applied (RAW)

May be a little over budget though, I paid just under £300 for one a couple of weeks ago.
 
If you want a try at Astro how about an Olympus 12mm/f2?
Some of the manual focus wide angle primes are popular too.
 
Sangoma said:
Not commenting on your proposed upcoming trip, but if you end up wanting something wider, the Panasonic 7-14 is a lovely lens, very little distortion even without the lens correction applied (RAW)

May be a little over budget though, I paid just under £300 for one a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...
Thank you, yes I was looking at that one this morning. It’s good to know it’s a great lens and comes recommended.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Thank you, yes I was looking at that one this morning. It’s good to know it’s a great lens and comes recommended.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, what camera are you using? That 7-14, whilst an excellent lens and I've owned one myself, can in certain circumstances give strong CA on Olympus bodies which is corrected on Panasonic.
 
With a budget of £250 I'd recommend the Olympus 9-18mm. Nice lightweight portable lens but with good IQ once stopped down. Not the best choice for astro though. Here's a couple of my favourite shots I took with it when I had it.


P7092340 re-edit mono 3 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

P6132016 re-edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
snerkler said:
With a budget of £250 I'd recommend the Olympus 9-18mm.
Click to expand...
I'll second that but with the proviso that it's best used on an Olympus body. It just doesn't seem the same on a Panasonic camera. :(
 
snerkler said:
With a budget of £250 I'd recommend the Olympus 9-18mm. Nice lightweight portable lens but with good IQ once stopped down. Not the best choice for astro though.
Click to expand...
Very underrated lens and really good for WA landscapes. Rarely need more than f5.6 for normal landscapes anyway.
 
I found the 9-18 the most disappointing m4/3 lens I have ever owned.
Soft at the edges, annoying wind out before use action use and very plasticky build.
Rather expensive too considering it has no weather or dust protection.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'll second that but with the proviso that it's best used on an Olympus body. It just doesn't seem the same on a Panasonic camera. :(
Click to expand...
I’ll soon find out. One arrived for me an hour ago! Quite cheap second-hand (sub £250). Tests in the back garden (so not real-world tests) are initially favourable on the G9.
 
tijuana taxi said:
I found the 9-18 the most disappointing m4/3 lens I have ever owned.
Soft at the edges, annoying wind out before use action use and very plasticky build.
Rather expensive too considering it has no weather or dust protection.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised at that, unless you got a rogue.

I have one and for the price bulk and weight I really can't fault it.
 
woof woof said:
I'm surprised at that, unless you got a rogue.

I have one and for the price bulk and weight I really can't fault
Click to expand...
Don't think it was a dud, just not that special and can't see how it warrants a rrp of
over 450 quid.
Anyway it wasn't for me unlike the 8-18 that replaced it.
 
I have no complaints and I'd probably expect the Pany to be better as it's more expensive.

The only aspects of the Oly lens I'd criticise are the ho-hum aperture range but that's reflected in the cost and weight and the collapsible mechanism which I too find annoying. Other than that I do think it's a good lens for the spec and money.
 
tijuana taxi said:
I found the 9-18 the most disappointing m4/3 lens I have ever owned.
Soft at the edges, annoying wind out before use action use and very plasticky build.
Rather expensive too considering it has no weather or dust protection.
Click to expand...
I think it depends on your expectations, which may be influenced by what you paid for it. I think I’d be disappointed with a lot of lenses if I paid the ridiculous RRP, but I paid under £300 for the 9-18mm IIRC and it performed well for me. I agree having to unlock the lens before use is irritating, I found this with the Nikon Z lenses and the Panny 12-32mmm.
 
All academic for me because my wide angle lens now is the Panasonic 9mm/1.7
I did pay the rrp for that and no regrets at all, light, smalĺ, sharp and weather proof.
 
tijuana taxi said:
All academic for me because my wide angle lens now is the Panasonic 9mm/1.7
I did pay the rrp for that and no regrets at all, light, smalĺ, sharp and weather proof.
Click to expand...
The RRP’s not too bad on that lens tbh, I’d like to try it one day (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top