Bought a new camera

[RosscoPCole]

For a while I've been looking at upgrading from my Fuji bridge camera to something that is a bit more serious.
After a lot of thinking, reading and looking I went out and purchased one of these today:

An Olympus Pen Mini. Was looking at some sort of DSLR for a while but after seeing the size of this compared to the DSLR I realised that I was more likely to take this everywhere with me.
Now waiting for the battery to charge before I can have a play.
If anyone else has one I would be grateful for any advice or hints and tips. My first slide down the slippery slope of wallet emptying is I need a new bag/case. It will need to hold the camera, a few lenses (once I have saved up for them!) and a few accessories. Any recommendations?

[Xaero]

Nice camera. A bag is a personal choice so it's up to you really. Because the mini is so small I wouldn't rule out just carrying it in your pocket though if you wear a jacket about. Domke, Billingham and National Geographic and zkin make the best one's in my opinion. I went for a Billingham Hadley Pro for my omd, but it is much bigger than needed really. A hadley small would do the job well.

Don't forget the Olympus is a m4/3 so shared with Panasonic which have a great bunch of lenses also available. If you want something small to match the mini I'd recommend the Panasonic 20mm f1.7, it's reasonably priced too. The Panasonic-Leica 25mm f1.4 is better in every way (pretty much on my camera 80% of the time now), but it's double the length (similar to the standard 14-42mm lens you have there). I wouldn't bother with the Olympus 17mm pancake lens.

Another (personal) recommendation is ditch the neckstrap and get a hand strap instead. Less clunky and makes you think about the shot a bit more in my experience, it's ideal for smaller cameras like the mini.

[RosscoPCole]

Thanks for the advice. Those bags looks lovely but most are out my modest budget.

Xaero said:

Another (personal) recommendation is ditch the neckstrap and get a hand strap instead. Less clunky and makes you think about the shot a bit more in my experience, it's ideal for smaller cameras like the mini.

I've taken the neckstrap and put an old hand strap on until I find one that goes with the camera.

Just waiting until the funds are sufficient enough to buy a viewfinder and a 40-150mm lens. Also like the look of the wide converter.

[Iang84]

I have a GOLLA bag for a basic walkaround and I can get my A33 with a 70-300 and my 18-200 plus a spare battery, lens pen, and a couple of filters so the pen should be fine. Here the size that I use http://www.golla.com/products/#/camera/reece

[sneaky schnell]

I am about to make a similar move to a M4/3 camera as the SLR kept getting left at home.

I have also read great things about the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4.

The Olympus 45mm f1.8 (I think) is supposed to be a very nice portrait lens and should be worth a look.

[RosscoPCole]

sneaky schnell said:

I am about to make a similar move to a M4/3 camera as the SLR kept getting left at home.

I have also read great things about the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4.

The Olympus 45mm f1.8 (I think) is supposed to be a very nice portrait lens and should be worth a look.

Excuse my ignorance as I am new to lenses but what is the difference between a 14-42mm zoom lens and a 45mm portrait lens? Why is a fixed focus lens better than a zoom lens?

[tim-b]

RosscoPCole said:

Excuse my ignorance as I am new to lenses but what is the difference between a 14-42mm zoom lens and a 45mm portrait lens? Why is a fixed focus lens better than a zoom lens?

Zooms are more complicated to make, and so the optics are more compromised than fixed length (otherwise known as prime) lenses. So the primes tend to give you better image quality, and are generally faster (meaning the aperture is bigger) so you can shoot in lower light, and get that shallow 'depth of field' look as well (where only part of the image is in focus and the rest is very soft).

[RosscoPCole]

tim-b said:

Zooms are more complicated to make, and so the optics are more compromised than fixed length (otherwise known as prime) lenses. So the primes tend to give you better image quality, and are generally faster (meaning the aperture is bigger) so you can shoot in lower light, and get that shallow 'depth of field' look as well (where only part of the image is in focus and the rest is very soft).

Thank you for an explanation that makes sense and is easy to understand.

[flat-planedCrank]

RosscoPCole said:

tim-b said:

Zooms are more complicated to make, and so the optics are more compromised than fixed length (otherwise known as prime) lenses. So the primes tend to give you better image quality, and are generally faster (meaning the aperture is bigger) so you can shoot in lower light, and get that shallow 'depth of field' look as well (where only part of the image is in focus and the rest is very soft).

Thank you for an explanation that makes sense and is easy to understand.

In addition to Tim-b's answer... some more info on Wikipedia - check out the 2nd pic in particular, f1.2 lenses are like light hoovers