noone

Nope. Looks like we're getting a new flagship in 2022, which is cool.

I can not believe that Ebay "thinks" my ancient Canon 24 1.4 L FD is worth more than my Canon 17mm tilt shift?
This photo with the TS (with a lowly 12mp "non photo" camera) got a highly commended at the Mono awards 2020 (Australian B&W photo competition that attracts thousands of entries) and highly commended means it got past the second short list but not the final thirty.
IF live music ever starts up again, I look forward to getting back to using the TS for both video and photos of full bands from next to the stage.
 
 

I'll call your having to use a RAW convertor bereft of distortion correction and raise you just putting it on an LS300.
You'll then have 10.56mm of wide angle goodness.
Obviously you lose the whole compact thing but I've never knowingly let practicalities be the enemy of pedantry 😉
 

This IS a good point. However, if you turn off the corrections on the Olympus 12mm, you could also do the same with the Panasonic 14mm with the wide-angle adapter. Both would show crazy distortions though (above 5%, horrendous for primes).
There's also a point to be made that people might be confusing: focal length is not field of view. For photography, the Olympus 8mm fisheye is the widest and brightest lens for M43, perhaps for all systems. Also, the field of view is much wider than other 8mm or 7.5mm lenses. You can use it for photography, no problem. For video, it's ok on a tripod or hand-held, but if you walk with it, the horizon bounces around. This lens doesn't count in that it's more than 300g.
Finally, you can always get wider results with these cameras: GH2, GH5s, and BMPCC 4k. Those cameras have wider sensors than all the typical M43 sensors when shooting video.

Well, it's not my challenge, so I'm not the official adjudicator, but pretty sure that fame and glory is the reward...

Turns out the Oly 12 f2 IS wider than 12mm (if you can find a RAW convertor that does not correct for distortion).
What do i win?
https://www.lenstip.com/310.6-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED_Distortion.html

Yes but some M43 lenses are actually wider than marked and it is AFTER the distortion correction is applied that they become that focal length.
I do not know if the 12 f2 is one of those (maybe not since it is a bit older).     There is a chance it MIGHT be something like 11mm or 11.5 (You can not out pedant a pedant!).
 

Wouldn't the Oly 12mm f2 qualify IF you shoot RAW and turn off corrections?
It has been many years since I had it.

Yes but some M43 lenses are actually wider than marked and it is AFTER the distortion correction is applied that they become that focal length.
I do not know if the 12 f2 is one of those (maybe not since it is a bit older).     There is a chance it MIGHT be something like 11mm or 11.5 (You can not out pedant a pedant!).
 

Wouldn't the Oly 12mm f2 qualify IF you shoot RAW and turn off corrections?
It has been many years since I had it.

Yes but some M43 lenses are actually wider than marked and it is AFTER the distortion correction is applied that they become that focal length.
I do not know if the 12 f2 is one of those (maybe not since it is a bit older).     There is a chance it MIGHT be something like 11mm or 11.5 (You can not out pedant a pedant!).
 

Technically the question was "wider than 12mm".  It sounds pedantic, but for me 12mm isn't wide enough for landscapes and architecture, and it's also not wide enough for comfortable vlogging either as you have to hold your arm out basically straight to get a neutral composition.

Contax-Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f2.8 on Sigma FP
Shot about 25 mins apart on a very changeable weather wander!

I just got a Helios 44M-6 for $20 (Australian) with a camera.
I am shocked at how much i like it given it is almost throw away and especially because it focuses to infinity (I was led to believe if I used a flange adapter I would have a reduced range or I could use a non flange adapter but only wide open unless the pin is taped down).
I can use my cheap Neewer m42 to E mount flange adapter with infinity and able to stop down.
I will probably not use it for video but I can highly recommend it (mine is almost like new).

I had a Biotar years ago.    A really old one with 17 blades (I think it was) and it was sharp but very low contrast.   Of my two (from memory for the Biotar) I would say the Biotar was the one with the dreamy look and the Helios is almost like any similar lens of its era.    Just got a hood for it yesterday too, not that i had any real issues with stray light.
My Helios is one of the newest.      The coating was probably the biggest difference although the Biotar was a lot smaller 

I'm contemplating investing in a vintage lens set, maybe FDs, maybe Rokkors, maybe something else, but figured I'd take stock of what I have and see what I can see.
First I'll post the images in case they're of interest to anyone, then digest them in future posts.
Test was GH5 in 400Mbps 4K ALL-I mode, Cine-D, Daylight WB, put onto a 1080p timeline.  I tested all lenses wide open (typically around F2) and at F5.6 (all lenses were closed down some by then).  I also did a 2X punch-in for each lens, because I like to use the 2X digital zoom function to grab quick shots, which also functions as a proxy for shooting 4K (although that doesn't matter so much unless you're doing VFX).
Test setup had some depth, some glare, some sharp detail in the background, but nothing too outrageous..

Lenses..

The Helios is a spectacular lens and is only cheap because of the sheer quantity of them made.  I've read it's the most mass-produced lens on the planet.
The Helios has famously been modified by multiple groups for modern cinema use.  One such conversion is by a company called Dog Schidt Optiks, which modified the Helios to flare as much as possible, to give a very retro vibe.  Andrew wrote about it here:
https://www.eoshd.com/lens/digital-goes-back-to-the-70s-1st-impressions-of-dog-schnit-optiks-flare-factory-58-lens-and-sample-photos/
This lens is included in this huge test of 50mm lenses, which includes many of the greatest cine lenses available regardless of price:
You will note that it is very sharp wide open, and has quite pleasing characteristics.  It's worth spending a few minutes comparing it to the other great optics (timestamps in the description) to really see how good it is.  Of course, it flares like hell, as that's what this variation of the lens is designed to do.
It's also used in the Ironglass set which is a set of professionally rehoused Soviet optics:
https://ironglassadapters.com
I have two of the Helios's - the 44M and a 44-2, which are included in this lens test here:
The lens is a copy of the Carl Zeiss Biotar 58mm but has a dreamier look, which with todays high-resolution cameras, contributes a welcome antidote to the digititis that lovers of cinema recoil from.
This is an interesting article about it if you want more information..  https://www.gearfocus.com/blog/2020/05/helios-44-2-bokeh-king
Don't confuse cheap with low quality! 🙂 

Not much for me to say really.
Just an old amateur still shooter who rarely dabbles in video now.
More interested in what i can get cheap from the charity shop I work at now as a bit of fun.       A Canon FD 50 1.8 is a surprisingly sharp little lens.     Helios 44-M 6 is a fun little thing too. (along with a Tokina 28 2.8 they all cost me $40 total Australian in the last few weeks....The Helios came with a camera I donated back).
Still trying to sell my Canon FD 24 1.4 L (very frustrating because I see them selling now for sometimes over $21000 (Australian) for mint copies while lesser ones go for $6000 and up.     Mine is ratty on the outside but good on the inner but because I will not sell world wide, I will probably not get anywhere near that).   I am in no hurry to sell it though but would love to get a new AF portrait lens, a mid range zoom and a Laptop PC for it soonish
Seasons greeting to all and stay safe!

Good to hear back from you, and i kinda hate you 😉
 Do you know what i have spent on lenses....
Its important to dabble, no matter what the interest is . I cant throw myself in at the deep end either anymore, i lack the enthusiasm.  I like to chip away at the edges these days, learn one thing, cement that away, then proceed to the next. 
I dont envy you, trying to move that fd lens on. It will probably take time too find the right buyer. 

not really, no, its kinda depressing really. I'd rather 2022 hurry up and get here. Lots of things i could do better. Of that there is no doubt. New years resolutions and all,  i shall endeavor to do more with what i have. Next year will be more about caring for family and friends, where i can help. Cant save the world, but i can probably help some people who deserve it, in my books anyway.
  I haven't seen any input from @noone for a while, i hope he's ok. I think i may have,  even seen webrunner about again. I wish the rest of this community good health and prosperity, although i'd rather you don't confuse prosperity with wealth.
I think 2022 will be a tough year, i hope for the best  however i fear for the worst. whether your vacinated or unvaxed does not bother me. Its a deeply  personal decision, and for me a religious decision. 
I worked three days leading up to xmas which left me with some spending money, sadly i couldn't get into cinema as i'm unvaxed and new "laws" took effect that pay day. Its rather ironic that i can work, ern money, yet be unable to spend it. Which incidentally  doesn't really bother me. It certainly hurts small business owners as that money stays in my pocket. So in a round about way im richer for their efforts.  
Now that i have an iphone i have been binge watching stuff on my new amazon prime account. I ummed and arrrd about getting netflix, prime, or one of the others. the deciding factor for me,  was i have read the wheel of time novels and i wanted to see the amazon prime adaptions, so far im enjoying them. It certainly beats tv in some regards, not having to endure  6 advertisements every 5 minutes is breathtakingly refreshing. 
summing up, i hope santa was good to you, happy new year and stay safe as you can.

Some nice lenses in there...
As a ~100% video shooter, and one who is aspiring to make images that look like cinema and not at all like professional spec-driven videographers, I find that I'm narrowing in more and more on lenses that are high resolution but not sharp.  I'm still trying to understand what it is and how to get it, but I'm gradually making progress.
My latest purchase is a Tokina RMC 28-70 f3.5-4.5 M42 to mate with my GX85 and m42 SB.  That will make it a 44-109mm equivalent.
I'm planning to use it as an experimental walk-around zoom, and am hoping for a softer rendition with large complex flares.  I've found that my GF3 is too soft with any lens except the 12-35/2.8, the GX85 is too sharp (even on 1080p timelines) unless it's got a lens with some softening on it, and the GH5 in 200Mbps 1080p ALL-I mode is pretty darn neutral and the files are strong enough to grade however you like them.
I also have a number of vintage 50mm lenses, and have more in transit, so am planning on a head-to-head with them too.  Currently my Helios 58mm F2 copies are the clear winners, with their soft and almost painterly rendering.  My interest in the 28-70 is getting something with a similar rendering.

Great thread.
A few thoughts from a 99% stills shooter.
Sony Clearzoom.    How much I use depends on the lens used.    With a better lens I am fine with 2x as for example my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is still better at 110mm than many old lenses of that focal length (or similar).
I use primes mostly for specific purposes, Tilt shift, macro, super telephoto, shallow DOF (including portraits) and in the case of the 55 1.8 for IQ and as a body cap.       It helps that all of those CAN be used with clearzoom.
I have never been a big fan of zooms but have always had a few including maybe a dozen or so  "kit" lenses and I have been happy with all of the kit lenses for what they are.
Some zooms I love are the old Tokina 60-120 2.8 (great as a portrait lens), my ancient EF 20-35 2.8 L (technically not great optically but i do like what it does even if hardly used).
I keep a Canon IS ii APSC kit lens as it is useful as a almost disposable lens that actually covers FF on my A7s from about 24mm and up and it is currently my only stabilized lens.
I have a few old MF variable aperture zooms and they are a mixed bunch some ok some just old but none used very often.
I work at a charity shop and handle the camera gear most of the time.....we have a few lenses in at the moment and if they do not sell will probably buy most of them.
Still have the Contax 50 1.7 and 35 2.8 I posted about ages ago in the lens forum.     Looks like they will be coming home at some point but just got an FD film camera with a 50 1.8, a 28 2.8 and a mint condition old Promura zoom in case. I would love to try the Promura but will probably pass but could get the primes for no reason.      
We also got three Pentax film cameras in last week and all had the same Sigma 28-70 macro zoom that was sold as a kit lens in Australia with Pentax (same distributor) and an old Russian Kiev camera with a Helios 58 f2 M .....This thread has me thinking i will buy one of the Pentax kit zooms and the Helios to compare them at 58mm.
 

Sony shooter checking in - and I love zooms. I shoot the a7sIII, a7III (though that will the the IV soon, hopefully LOL!) and the a6300 for a small/light/cheap backup or tiny walkabout cam. Though I love fast, sharp primes and I'm a shallow DOF/creamy bokeh junkie, most of my work is with the zoom trinity for its versatility, and most of that is the 24-70. I can't imaging being an all prime shooter and all the lens changes LOL! But I've always tried to keep my kit mobile in one medium size backpack - so I can carry 2 or 3 bodies with lenses and a prime or two, plus my drone in something like a Lowepro 450 size bag.
I've always worked best with the holy trinity - that's been a UWA somewhere in the 16-35 range (most recently the 12-24/4) and the standard which is the Sigma 24-70/2.8 right now. For the last year the long end of that trifecta has been the Tamron 70-180, which replaced the Sony GM and has been brilliant thanks to its size and great IQ. I use it a lot more than the GM since it's pretty much always in my bag. 
But Tamron has thrown a major wrench in the works with the new 35-150/f2-2.8 that has me seriously thinking about running a mostly 2-lens kit of the 16-35 GM/35-150 with 2-3 fast primes sprinkled in for smaller/faster stuff indoors or just for bokeh fun. The Tammy is faster than my 2.8 zoom through 60mm, but I'd lose a lot on the wide end and would need to carry a UWA - but realistically this could replace my 35/85 f/1.8's and the 24-70/70-180 with another lens on the wide end. I think LOL! There's definitely a mental barrier consolidating four lenses into one and workflow changes since I use the 24-70 on the wide end a lot. And with my first baby on the way, I want a fast prime or two for indoor low light shooting and some super bokeh shots of her little hands and feet and such. I've always been a 24/35/85 shooter, but there are just too many options to fill in primes around that 35-150 that I can decide, plus change is hard since I've had the trinity for more than a decade.
One E-mount outlier is the tiny a7c 28-60 kit lens. Its ridiculously small, really sharp and makes for a great gimbal lens or just a fun, small walkabout lens. For a $250 lens used, its amazing.
Cheers
Chris

I love my ancient 300mm 2.8 Tamron adaptall. 
Not the best 300 2.8 made but probably the lightest (and there were NO bad 300 2.8s ever).   Still over 2 kilos though!
Even so, as I get older I have to seriously think about if I am going to take this lens anywhere (usually walking and usually will have it in a backpack).
It is getting close to the time when I will have to give it away (to a relative) but maybe not for a year or three yet.     I just might have to limit it to trips to the zoo and festivals now and for video, just outdoor music festivals on a tripod.
My old Fuji superzoom will have to do when i want a long lens otherwise if not now, soon enough.
I have had a few others over the years but this old Tamron 2.8 has been with me across systems for must be going on twenty years.   I still have an old Tamron zoom to 350mm but none have been to my liking more than this old Tamron 2.8
IF I had the time and the room, this would be my first choice as a portrait lens most of the time too (though being MF, a lot of misses for every hit).
I can not afford a newer better lens but this will do me fine for now (would love a 200 f2).
I nearly got a Nikon 300 f2 many years ago, glad I didn't as that would be too heavy for me now (though might have made a tidy profit selling it).
I have had several greyhound racing pics in a national (Australian) Greyhound racing paper and Australian football pics in a regional daily from it and even though i dropped it a few feet onto a hard ground that made it very hard to remove or replace the adaptall, still works fine for me.
A couple of zoo shots from today (glad i took it instead of the Fuji superzoom).
The Kangaroo shot was also with a bit of clearzoom for more "reach".
What longer lenses are you using?

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/consumer-products/downloads/historical-products/photography/contax-yashica/en/datasheet-zeiss-planar-1750-en.pdf