P12-32 vs 12-45 Pro - any experiences ?

[damianmkv]

I have an e-m1.2 which is my "travel" system. Before this body, I had a 10.2 which is why I bought the P12-32 ( small form ).

Now that I have the 1.2, the 12-32 is a bit too light and lacks the extra reach that i need / want at times so i started looking at the pro lenses. I had the 12-40 a few years ago but i think it will be a bit too big and lead to me also changing my small travel bag. Also, i have a few primes for low light..

Has anyone changed from the 12-32 to the 12-45 and is it a worthwhile change ? Is there any noticeable change in IQ ?

Thanks

[pdk42]

The 12-32 isn't a bad lens optically, but I never liked the cheap feel to it, and 32mm at the long end is a bit limiting. If you're concerned about the 12-40 being too big, take a look at the new 12-45 f4. More reach, excellent IQ, and notably smaller.

[damianmkv]

It’s exactly that 32mm that I feel is restrictive. I am trying not to overburden my little kit bag by staying small-ish

58mm filters are a bonus too as I think that’s the same as the 40-150R ?

[drmarkf]

I've just got a 12-45 to replace my 12-35 f2.8 Panasonic, and I’ve had a 12-32 for ages, which I’m keeping (mainly to use on my GM5 for extreme compactness, plus it’s a really good general m4/3 backup for travel since it weighs nothing slipped in the bag, and it performs well in the IR spectrum, so it fulfils several of my purposes).

Yes, the 12-32 is a good performer, but it’s not quite as good as the 12-35 or the 12-45 at full aperture, plus I had begun to find the 32 and 35 limits a bit restricting. I’ve already noticed how much better in that regard the 12-45 is, plus when I want to have the option for more subject isolation or more convenience in low light I’ve always carried a fast prime anyway.

Damian might consider the Panny 12-35 f2.8 as another option - it also takes 58mm filters and is weather sealed, plus I believe the mki and ii only differ in focusing for video, and there are a lot of good value mki models available second hand.

The 12-45 feels great on the M5iii and I’m looking forward to trying the impending 40-150 f4, which ought to make a formidable travel and light hiking 2-lens combination.

[damianmkv]

Thanks for the reply. I had a 12-35 f2.8 years ago before going to the 12-40 f2.8 - I know it would be a better perfomer than the 12-32 but for the extra 3mm of reach, i don't feel i would benefit much..

Someone asked me if I'd considered the Panny Lumix 12-60 f3.5-5.6 which i hadn't. It gives much more range but at the cost of a bit of speed.... and its pretty cheap too. Similar size to the 12-45 i believe..

Is it worth a punt ?

[090657]

Am an owner and fan of the Pan Leica 12-60. I part exchanged my 12-40 Pro for it because of the extra range. Great all rounder and great build quality.

[Dave in Wales]

I've had both, my advice...........If you can manage it, both physically and financially, then get the 12-100.

It's the only standard zoom worth considering IMVHO.

The 12-45 Pro is a great lens, but the 12-100 is the dogs wotzits.

But it's a big bugger, that's why I swopped it for the 12-45.

[damianmkv]

Thanks Dave. Its beyond my finances at the moment and the size also put me off, even though i know its a great lens

[pdk42]

If compactness and range are the drivers, while still delivering excellent IQ, then the 12-45 f4 looks hard to beat. Let’s look at the alternatives:

- 12-32, 14-42EZ etc - in my view they are all compromised to some degree in IQ. I recently sold on my 14-42EZ because of decentering at 42mm.

- Panasonic 14-45. An excellent, if old, lens. Cheap and good IQ. Only 14mm at the wide end though. The 14-42 mk ii is a good option too.

- 12-40 f2.8. Fantastic lens. But maybe a bit big

- 12-100 f4. Fantastic, but if c9mpact is what you want, forget it.

- Panasonic 12-35 f2.8. Great lens, but not all that compact and limited to 35mm at long end

- Panasonic 12-60 f3.5-5.6. Seems a decent lens IQ wise, but not that compact. Great range

- Panasonic Leica 12-60 f2.8-4. Seems excellent. But bigger than the 12-40

So I think that leaves the 12-45 as the best option….

[damianmkv]

The P Lumix 12-60 is a similar size to the 12-45, no ? a gnats lighter and a few mm longer ?

[pdk42]

You're right!


P12-60 left, O12-45 right by Paul Kaye, on Flickr

[MikeOxon]

I feel that the main point about the Oly 12-45 is that it maintains a constant f-number across the range. It's at the long end that you need more aperture and most of the alternatives drop to f/5.6 at the long end. If you want more aperture at the long end, then you have to accept the cost, weight, and size of the 12-40 f/2.8.

I changed from the earlier Oly 12-50, which was only f/6.3 at the long end. The 12-45 is much nicer in use, with smooth controls, no need for a switch to get into the macro range, and excellent bokeh.

[damianmkv]

I *think* thats my dilemma and to be honest, many people's perhaps. Price verses reach / speed, especially when the Plumix and the 12-45 are so similiarly sized.

I do like the range of the 12-60 as well as the price on the used market. On the other hand, constant aperture, weather sealing ( + 7 stops ? of IBIS on the e-m1.2 ) make it tempting

[blu-by-u]

Get everything

[damianmkv]

Probably the best plan, saves decisions

[Bikie John]

... until you need to decide which one(s) to take out with you ....

[Snookerman]

I am not sure if I have a slightly soft copy, but I have found the 12-45mm sadly disappointing. I owned a 12-40, which I reluctantly decided was slightly too heavy and bulky to lug around on day trips. Comparing the results I got from the 12-40, the 12-45 is decidedly soft especially when you crop in by 30% or more. I've found that I have to use sharpening more on DXO and even then the 12-40mm is just sharper. It's not that it's OOF, but simply that it's just not as sharp as the 12-40mm - which I find irritating enough to not use it.
I also use the 14-42EZ for street photography and enjoy it - in fact I wouldn't say it was that much worse for EQ than the 12-45mm that I possess.
Luckily, I own these 3 Oly standards - 12mm, 25mm and 45mm and even though changing lenses on a day trip can be a faff, I much prefer them to the 12-45mm.
I am considering 3 options - get rid of the 12-45 and risk buying another copy, buy a panny 12-60 (either the 3.5/5.6 or even the 2.8 version), not bothering at all and just using the standards and the EZ.

Anyone else find the 12-45mm disappointing or thinks the Pany 12-60mm (either version) is worth it?

[Tram]

I am not sure if I have a slightly soft copy, but I have found the 12-45mm sadly disappointing. I owned a 12-40, which I reluctantly decided was slightly too heavy and bulky to lug around on day trips. Comparing the results I got from the 12-40, the 12-45 is decidedly soft especially when you crop in by 30% or more. I've found that I have to use sharpening more on DXO and even then the 12-40mm is just sharper. It's not that it's OOF, but simply that it's just not as sharp as the 12-40mm - which I find irritating enough to not use it.
I also use the 14-42EZ for street photography and enjoy it - in fact I wouldn't say it was that much worse for EQ than the 12-45mm that I possess.
Luckily, I own these 3 Oly standards - 12mm, 25mm and 45mm and even though changing lenses on a day trip can be a faff, I much prefer them to the 12-45mm.
I am considering 3 options - get rid of the 12-45 and risk buying another copy, buy a panny 12-60 (either the 3.5/5.6 or even the 2.8 version), not bothering at all and just using the standards and the EZ.

Anyone else find the 12-45mm disappointing or thinks the Pany 12-60mm (either version) is worth it?

I think you must have a poor sample because mine is excellent and on a par with my 12-100
Use it all the time and have no regrets about selling my 12-40, my thoughts are here.

https://www.e-group.uk.net/forum/forum/cameras-lenses-and-system-accessories/lens-focus/standard-zoom-and-mid-range/817614-olympus-12-45-mini-review

[Snookerman]

Thanks Tram.
I bought this on Ebay from Great Western Cameras in May. I have just emailed them now telling them that i have a soft copy and asking if I can exchange it. let's see what they say. Otherwise I will sell it and buy either another copy or one of the Pany 12-60s...I expect that the 2.8 is at least on a level, though it would cost me slightly more.