Rethinking my lens setup

(All focal lengths in this blog post are for Micro Four Thirds, so to get equivalent Full Frame focal lengths, multiply by 2.)

My previous idea about using the 12-60, 14 and 20 was quite good, but when I have used the 12-60 or 12-32 zoom, I tend to shoot most often at 20 or 25. Sometimes I have also used 17, but much less frequently than 20 or 25. I much prefer the natural perspective of a standard lens unless I want to use exaggerated perspective or compression expressively. The first thing you learn in musical composition is not to over-use your expressive means, but save them for occasions where they actually mean something, and I think the same applies to photography.

One of my reasons to add the 12-60 to the 20 and 14 was that it is useful in bad weather. I also thought it would replace the Sigma 60 f/2.8 and Lumix G 42.5 f/1.7 for landscapes and close-up since f/4 is usually fast enough. I prefer using smaller and lighter primes to using a zoom, but if the weather is terrible, there are few weather-sealed primes in the MFT line-up except the M.Zuiko f/1.2 Pro lenses that I think are too big and heavy to make sense on MFT. Then I discovered that the mark II of the Panasonic Leica 25 mm f/1.4 is weather-sealed through one of Matti Sulanto's videos. It is not freeze-proof like the 12-60, but it is dust and splash-proof. I have owned the mark I in the past and liked it a lot. Since I gravitate towards a natural perspective and aesthetically prefer the 25 over the 20, I thought maybe I would go the other way and use the 25 in bad weather, with the exception of snow-storms and such where the 12-60 is obviously the better choice.

So this summer, I bought the Panasonic Leica 25 f/1.4 mark II. Unfortunately, I did not get it until December. I also bought the Yongnuo 17 f/1.7 and enjoyed using that a lot this summer. I have wanted to have a 35 full frame equivalent for a while and from previous experience with the Olympus M.Zuiko 17 mm f/1.8, I knew that it was not the lens I wanted. The Yongnuo has much nicer rendering, is twice as sharp and cost half the price. It is a bit larger, but not so much that it matters. As I said earlier, 17 is my third-most used focal length when shooting zooms. I can fit the Lumix 14, Yongnuo 17, Lumix 20 and Panasonic Leica 25 in my very small camera bag without any trouble. There is actually room for one more lens as well since the 14 and 20 are so miniscule. I think the last lens to complete the others would be the Lumix 42.5 f/1.7 since it is smaller, faster, stabilised and focuses closer than the Sigma 60 f/2.8. With cropping to 10 MP, the 42.5 can be a 60 as well and 10 MP is enough for the odd picture here and there even though 20 is better. I used to shoot with a 6 MP camera…

These days, I can afford to have lenses that I do not shoot constantly, even if I think there is no reason to own things unless they have a practical use or sentimental value. A set of primes at standard focal lengths definitely have practical value for me and so does the 12-60 for those cold winter-days, for close-up or for non-winter days where the weather is bad and I want another (or more than one) focal length than 25. Most days when I am going out to photograph, I will have my set of primes in the camera bag and one of them on the camera, usually the 25. Some days, I will bring my camera in a jacket pocket with the 20 mm just in case I see something worth photographing. And occasionally, I will fit the 12-60 on the camera. I don't have to be a minimalist that only owns three lenses.