What lenses to pruchase Olympus E3?

[Sturdyman]

Hello All,

I am new to this forum and new to the SLR world.  I am planning on purchasing the Olympus E3 and need suggestions on lenses.  I fish a lot and will take landscape as well as close up action shots.  Photos can be in any sort of light.  What range of lenses should I purchase?  These photos will be framed and displayed (8 by 10 and larger).  

[Sturdyman]

Perhaps I should make my question more general in nature.  I will be taking outdoor action photos as well as land scape vistas.  Regardles of the brand of camera, what combination of lenses would you recommend?   Lets make a limit of three lenses.  My thoughts are the 70-300MM ED and the 18-180mm ED lenses.  All suggestions are welcome.         

[250swb]

I would buy the 12-60mm and the 50-200mm, both superb lenses and covering a massive 24mm to 400mm equivalent range. They are also weather sealed (the 70-300mm isn't, and neither is it all that sharp beyond 200mm) making them ideal for landscape.

[DarkPenguin]

What is your budget?  If I was buying a 4/3's body I'd get the 7-14, 12-60 and 50-200.  All three are very good lenses.  A cheaper set would be the 9-18, 14-54 f2.8-35 and that 50-200.

[Sturdyman]

Thank you both for your input.  If I do this on the cheap I will just end up spending more money to get it right.  I will buy the Oly E3 body and the 12-60mm SWD to start.  After the fly fishing trip in late October I can get the 50-200mm SWD.  That will have to be it through the end of this year.  I make my last car payment next week and will have a little extra monthly to pull this off.  Three grand is all I want to spend for now.  I know I will want to squeeze in a third lens sooner or later. 

We have a few Tuna, Stripper, and Shark trips planned for the spring.  The weather or splash proof option sealed the deal for me.  Might even be able to pull off a trip to the Everglades next fall.   

Keep the suggestions coming.  I also shoot a little archery and will be in the woods taking a lot of pictures for the club.

[Sturdyman]

Yikes!!!!!!........I just looked at the 7-14mm F4 for $1799..........What applications would this lens be used for? 

[DarkPenguin]

Extreme wide angle.  That would be for the "vistas" you mentioned.  But you can do them with out it.  The 9-18 is also good.

Compare the 7-14 with the Nikon 14-whatever it is.

[Sturdyman]

Well.......I think I am absolutly giddy.......7-14mm for $1799........for that type of money I might as well get a beast of a lens........the 150mm F2.0 for $2599 should do it.

This is gonna hurt so good.......   

[DarkPenguin]

Well.......I think I am absolutly giddy.......7-14mm for $1799........for that type of money I might as well get a beast of a lens........the 150mm F2.0 for $2599 should do it.

This is gonna hurt so good.......   

Depending on what you mean by "beast" the 7-14 might be.  It is also an SHG lens like the 150mm f2 rather than HG like the 12-50 and 50-200.  BTW what kind of dollars is $ referring to?  Both of those lenses are much cheaper than the prices you're listing.  At least in American money.

Getting the 12-60 first seems like a good plan, btw.

[Sturdyman]

I definatly see the logic in getting the 7-14mm, 12-60mm, and the 50-200mm lenses.  Combined they cover a wide range from 7mm to 200mm.  On a 4:3 body the numbers are = to 14 to 400mm in the 35mm world.  These lenses all have variable F values.  How would the 14-35mm and 35-100mm lenses with the fixed F2 value fit in?.  I would assume they would be better in lower light.  Would these lenses make senes to have or would I be duplicating the capabilities of the first three with the variable F value? 

Please be patient with me I am a newbie.  I just like to have a plan before I make the first purchase.

Perhaps it would be best to omit the 7-14mm and relace it with the 14-35mm F2?

[stever]

i'm curious why you would spend significant money on the Oly rather than Canon or Nikon?

[elf]

i'm curious why you would spend significant money on the Oly rather than Canon or Nikon?

You missed the part about weather sealed  

I definatly see the logic in getting the 7-14mm, 12-60mm, and the 50-200mm lenses.  Combined they cover a wide range from 7mm to 200mm.  On a 4:3 body the numbers are = to 14 to 400mm in the 35mm world.  These lenses all have variable F values.  How would the 14-35mm and 35-100mm lenses with the fixed F2 value fit in?.  I would assume they would be better in lower light.  Would these lenses make senes to have or would I be duplicating the capabilities of the first three with the variable F value? 

I'd start with the 12-60 and the 50-200 for general purposes. They are equivalent to upper middle  (or middle upper) quality lens from Canikon. The 35-100 and 14-35 are equivalent to upper-upper-upper quality lens from Canikon and their price reflects it.  I don't think you would see much difference in 8x10s between any of these lens, so it would be pointless to buy a $3000 lens for this purpose. 

[David Mantripp]

The 7-14 / 12-60 / 50-200 combo is already pretty heavy (especially the 50-200).  The 14-35 & 35-100 are VERY heavy. I would think very carefully about those if you plan on walking any great distance with them.