14-54 vs 12-60 ?

[Mr. Pickles]

So after a lot of dust has settled, the old venerable 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 can be had new for about $425. The new SWD 12-60 f/2.8-4 can be had for about $900.

Is it worth it to you? If you have the 12-60, did you have a 14-54, and what say you? If you didn't have the 14-54, do you feel slighted? Do you have the 14-54 and want the 12-60 and why?

Just wondering.....

[llpoolej]

I am thinking of selling my 14-54 and 11-22 and buying the 12-60. Just because it would be better in my studio setting, which is the only time I use that focal length. I might pick up the 8mm fisheye too

[Mr. Pickles]

I see the "problem" if you have both the 14-54 and 11-22. Another post elsewhere tipped me to that little deal. I think I would certainly do that too probably. A lens swap would be saved. But the combo offers a tick better aperture across a lot of the range.

Just didn't know if the extra 2mm on the low and 6mm on the high was worth a startling $475-ish price. The SWD adds some, but .....

[llpoolej]

I am not in love with the 14-54 and though I REALLY like th 11-22, it isn't a range I use very often. So, I use the 14-54 and not terribly thrilled with it in the studio. My 35-100 has too long a focus distance sometimes and there are times I just need a hair more width than 35.

I am in no rush to do anything, but, I would probably come out ahead by selling two lenses and buying one $$ wise. Yes, the aperture difference is a factor I think about. Though, I rarely use less than 5.6 in the studio anyhow. If I want a wide open aperture, I usually pull out the 35-100 or the 50f2

[Mr. Pickles]

Nobody (Lens manufacturers) makes it easy, do they?

[llpoolej]

And the perfect ones have BIG price tags

[keepright]

I can't say I plan to upgrade, sidegrade, or whatever direction that would be... the fact is, I rarely use my 14-54 or 11-22; I'd rather have the 35-100 or 7-14, respectively. But both of the mid-tier lenses make great attachments for the E-510, which is my primary secondary camera (?), so they still live in my camera bag.

It's too bad, because they both deserve better than that.

(The E-1 is my secondary primary camera. )

[Jonathanp]

The proof is in the pudding. I can't wait to try it out!

[Mr. Pickles]

Originally Posted by Jonathanp

The proof is in the pudding. I can't wait to try it out!

Not too many lenses you can stick in the pudding and have them still work afterwards....but both of these will.

[Raist3d]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles

So after a lot of dust has settled, the old venerable 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 can be had new for about $425. The new SWD 12-60 f/2.8-4 can be had for about $900.

Is it worth it to you? If you have the 12-60, did you have a 14-54, and what say you? If you didn't have the 14-54, do you feel slighted? Do you have the 14-54 and want the 12-60 and why?

Just wondering.....

Tough question. I think the 12-60 is sharper, though the 14-54 is quite sharp. I would say if the size/weight doesn't bother you and you got the cash, go 12-60.. but quite frankly either lens is great.

- Raist

[Paul Shields]

I'm currently in this situation - have the 11-22mm, the 14-54mm the 7-14mm and the 12-60mm. Something has to give, and I'm most likely going to sell on the 11-22mm and the 14-54mm. I think the 12-60mm is an excellent lens - the SWD fixes the sometimes poor focusing speed, and it seems sharp enough. Eventually I'd just like to have the f/2 zooms across the range - 7-14mm, the 14-35mm and the 35-100mm. The 14-35mm is still an unknown right now, but once it appears I think the 12-60mm may also go to that great ebay in the sky. I've never been put off with the weight issue, though I'll keep my dinky 14-42mm and maybe also pick up the pancake just for use on the E-400.

I did a fairly crude comparison around a few of these lenses in my blog: http://photocamel.com/forum/blogs/pa...m-14-54mm.html.

[kenwae]

I've been struggling with this question too. Right now I just have the two kit lenses with the E510 and looking at the next step in lenses. It's gone between the 14-54 and the 12-60, back and forth, back and forth...I've finally decided it's the 12-60. I think that could be a very good landscape/architecture as well as outdoor portrait lens allowing for close crop head shots as well as large groups along with the flexibility of zoom and am saving up with that in mind. I'd also like the 50-200 and the Sigma 105 macro. But, right now the 12-60 is on the top of the list. Used on ebay in stated mint condition for about just a couple of hundred dollars under new...might as well go new....Found it for about $850 new at one outlet...

[lendur2]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pickles

Is it worth it to you? If you have the 12-60, did you have a 14-54, and what say you? If you didn't have the 14-54, do you feel slighted? Do you have the 14-54 and want the 12-60 and why?

Just wondering.....

Here is a contribution to your answer, but alas, I fear the actual answer is to be found all in your head (and wallet):
50 mm 4/3:s Shoot-Out (test). - FourThirdsPhoto Forum
50mm test and comparison on Olympus E-3 - Fourthirds Zuiko Digital (ZD) OM Zuiko (OMZ)

The range of the 12-60 in incredible to me. Clear down to 24mm (equivalent) and all the way up to 120mm (equivalent); with the possibility of extension clear up to 240mm using the EC-20 (2x doubler).

Various ones have stated to me or to others that the 12-60 has better bokeh than the 14-54, but that otherwise image quality through the 14-54mm range is on a par (a few have said the 12-60 is better). Then again the 14-35/2 is supposed to be even better than the other two, both in IQ and bokeh. The two 50-200s (old model, and the new SWD one) are claimed to be just alike in optical results. The 11-22 is supposed to be excellent, and will take a filter.

Enough. Browse the fora and ask questions. Sometimes you'll garner some disagreements, if not outright contradictions. Good luck and good sailing.

Leonard Durrenberger

[lendur2]

Julie, you wouldn't consider a +1, highest-quality diopter? Nor the EX-25?

And with the 14-54 and 35-100, why not invest in a 7-14 rather than a 12-60?

[lendur2]

Originally Posted by Paul Shields

\ The 14-35mm is still an unknown right now, [/url].

Four Thirds Cameras and Lenses - News

[lendur2]

Originally Posted by Paul Shields

I'd just like to have the f/2 zooms across the range - 7-14mm, the 14-35mm and the 35-100mm.[/url].

Only the 14-35 and 35-100 are f/2; the 7-14 is f/4 while the 90-250 is f/2.8

[Paul Shields]

Yes, quite right. An f/2 7-14mm would be awesome, but I'd hate to think of how big it would be