>>3490568>Why wouldn't you just get one that had the most range on it to cover all bases?these kinds of lenses are called superzooms and they're usually worse quality optically than regular zooms or primes since they are trying to make such a large range of focal lengths all workable in one lens. speaking from my experience, which is directly relevant to you since i have an m5, the 18-150 is the worst lens i own in terms of image quality. it's not unusably bad, but i do find myself somewhat hesitant to actually put it on my camera. i've got the 18-55 ef-m lens also and while it obviously doesn't reach as far, it still seems like it's a bit nicer in image quality in the focal range it covers. i'd probably recommend to avoid it unless you foresee a lot of situations where you're going to need that whole range and not want to be switching lenses.
as for the other ef-m lenses, i will second all recommendations for the 22mm. great little lens in terms of image quality, plenty fast at f2, and when it's on your camera with a lens cap it's still easily compact enough to throw in a jacket pocket or purse or what have you. as for the other primes, the 28 is the macro lens and the 32 is the more high end prime in the lineup (faster aperture of f1.4, better optics, but also larger).
i'll also put in a recommendation for the 11-22 if you're feeling like you wanna go wider than 18mm. used to have a sigma 10-20 but i switched to this and i'm really enjoying the boost in image quality + huge reduction in size/weight.
one final note though: if you are thinking of going for the superzoom, just be aware that 3 of the 5 lenses that have been announced as the next ef-m lenses (coming probably this year or next) are superzooms. there's an 18-130mm, 18-200mm, and a 15-130mm. so if it won't kill you to wait a bit, you might wanna see how those stack up against the current 18-150
