Reading mode: Light Dark

explain Panasonic 20mm vs. Sigma 19mm

Go to last post
tpani

tpani

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
391
Solutions
1
Reaction score
256
Location
FI
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.

Smaller should be cheaper.

Did Panasonic use special (expensive) glass/coatings/whatever to make something both smaller and faster, or did they come up with a particularly great optical design that Sigma could not match? (I doubt)

What's the deal?
 
For one thing, Panasonic designed the lens to be tiny, whereas Sigma designed the lens without trying to make it tiny.

Also, there's a mitigating factor here. The Sigma is basically an APS-C lens with an M43 mount attached. The image circle is APS-C sized, as the lens was designed for their DP1.
 
tpani said:
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.
Click to expand...
Fasted should be more expensive
tpani said:
Smaller should be cheaper.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily.
tpani said:
Did Panasonic use special (expensive) glass/coatings/whatever to make something both smaller and faster, or did they come up with a particularly great optical design that Sigma could not match? (I doubt)

What's the deal?
Click to expand...
Panasonic is faster. If you are OK with F2.8, buy Sigma which is F2.8 and slightly bigger. Optically Sigma is v
 
Sigma is telecentric, while P is probably SW corrected. S has aperture optimised for resolution, across 3 systems.

Therefore it is excellent *and* cheap. It also has ultrafast AF.

Am.
 
tpani said:
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.
Click to expand...
Panasonic lens has a very significant distortion that is corrected with software. Sigma corrects distortion optically. The bulk of the lens is also occupied by the focusing and aperture motors, which have nothing to do with speed of the lens.
tpani said:
Smaller should be cheaper.
Click to expand...
No, size does not have bearing on the price. Price is determined by marketing as much as by manufacturing costs.

Vlad
 
Last edited:
Vlad S said:
tpani said:
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.
Click to expand...
Panasonic lens has a very significant distortion that is corrected with software. Sigma corrects distortion optically. The bulk of the lens is also occupied by the focusing and aperture motors, which have nothing to do with speed of the lens.
Vlad S said:
Smaller should be cheaper.
Click to expand...
No, size does not have bearing on the price. Price is determined by marketing as much as by manufacturing costs.
Click to expand...
And manufacturing costs are not necessarily positively related to size either. Many cars are more expensive to make than buses, for instance.
 
tpani said:
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.

Smaller should be cheaper.

Did Panasonic use special (expensive) glass/coatings/whatever to make something both smaller and faster, or did they come up with a particularly great optical design that Sigma could not match? (I doubt)

What's the deal?
Click to expand...
I bought the Sigma 19, 30 and 60 at prices that left me wondering. Three lenses bought together and delivered for less than any (as far as I know) half decent Panasonic lens. They are excellent lenses and I can recommend them to anyone. Focus fast, very good imaging and their outer body acts as one big focus ring in MF situations. Have not noticed their theoretical lack of speed as a couple of extra notches of ISO on the latest 4/3 sensor is not dertrimental.

Size is relative. They are still compact lenses. I use them on the tiny GM1 where they are well balanced. I never saw the GM1 as a pocket camera and what the lenses lose on size the GM1 makes up on the other side of the balance scale. Anyone with a larger M4/3 body should be even less concerned as they have already opted for a larger form factor. Why opt for the physically smallest lens when you prefer a larger body to wrap your hand around and one that has all the "mod-cons" of an evf and tilt lcd?

More basically: Sigma does make the DP camera but cameras are a sideline for them - they live or die by making lenses that sell. Panasonic on the othe hand use their camera bodies as loss-leaders and make their profits selling lenses. Unburdened by the need to recover profits from lens sales Sigma can probably sell lenses closer to their true worth.

In the case of Sigma their "Art series" lenses might be "cheaper" but their quality is high.
 
Tom Caldwell said:
Tom Caldwell wrote:

I bought the Sigma 19, 30 and 60 at prices that left me wondering. Three lenses bought together and delivered for less than any (as far as I know) half decent Panasonic lens.
Click to expand...
How? Each of those lenses retail for $199-239. There are many good Panasonic lenses that you can get for $639. And if we're talking used, the Panasonic 14mm can be had for $150ish on eBay all day, and I consider that lens more than half decent, so I don't know how you managed to get three Sigma Art lenses for less than $150 combined.
 
Vlad S said:
tpani said:
Just happened to see some sample images taken with the Sigma. Seemed very good.

But, I don't understand these lenses. Can somebody please explain?

Sigma is 1. cheaper 2. slower and 3. bigger (twice as?) than the Panasonic.

Faster should be bigger.
Click to expand...
Panasonic lens has a very significant distortion that is corrected with software. Sigma corrects distortion optically. The bulk of the lens is also occupied by the focusing and aperture motors, which have nothing to do with speed of the lens.
Vlad S said:
Smaller should be cheaper.
Click to expand...
No, size does not have bearing on the price. Price is determined by marketing as much as by manufacturing costs.

Vlad
Click to expand...
Panasonic lens has a very significant distortion that is corrected with software. Sigma corrects distortion optically. The bulk of the lens is also occupied by the focusing and aperture motors, which have nothing to do with speed of the lens.

The distortion of the Sigma is also corrected by software.



8d09634052af41dca7707ca0f7bbd0aa.jpg
 
Last edited:
honeyiscool said:
For one thing, Panasonic designed the lens to be tiny, whereas Sigma designed the lens without trying to make it tiny.

Also, there's a mitigating factor here. The Sigma is basically an APS-C lens with an M43 mount attached. The image circle is APS-C sized, as the lens was designed for their DP1.
Click to expand...
The image circle is APS-C sized, as the lens was designed for their DP1.

No the lens was not designed for the DP1, it was designed with Sony and M4/3 in mind.
 
Fredrik Glckner said:
Designing a good, compact, fast lens takes more effort than a larger, slower lens. That explains some of the price difference.

In my experience, the Sigma lens is not as good as the Panasonic lens. The Panasonic lens is sharper. See a comparison here.

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2013/02/sigma-19mm-f28-ex-dn.html

On the other hand, the Sigma lens focuses faster.
Click to expand...
In most cases you will not see any difference in sharpness, there really is, very little in it.
 
There's a lot of margin built into the price of these lenses, and the price is not completely connected to features. Panasonic is able to hold the price of the 20mm at 2010 levels for 4 years because they can sell every one they make, but it doesn't cost that much more than the Sigma's to build.

Look at how the whole supply chain made money on the Panasonic 14mm when it was selling on ebay for $160 shipped out of Korea/Japan last summer? That lens is hardly different from the 20mm in construction, except for a better/faster focus mechanism and a smaller f-stop, yet the seller, his supplier, and Panasonic makes money at that pirce, including a cut for Ebay and Paypal.

And by the way, two years ago, the older SIgma 19 and 30mm were being sold on sale for $199 together. Only difference was Sigma put a new barrel on the current lenses to make them look prettier.
 
honeyiscool said:
honeyiscool said:
Tom Caldwell wrote:
I bought the Sigma 19, 30 and 60 at prices that left me wondering. Three lenses bought together and delivered for less than any (as far as I know) half decent Panasonic lens.
Click to expand...
How? Each of those lenses retail for $199-239. There are many good Panasonic lenses that you can get for $639. And if we're talking used, the Panasonic 14mm can be had for $150ish on eBay all day, and I consider that lens more than half decent, so I don't know how you managed to get three Sigma Art lenses for less than $150 combined.
Click to expand...
What would you say to my having bought all 3 Sigma lenses for under $350 mint used? $95 each for the 19 and the 30mm and $158 for the 60mm. I subsequently sold the 30mm for slightly more than I bought it for, not because there was anything wrong with it, but because I have little use for that focal length in Micro 4/3, especially if it's not particularly fast aperture. So my Sigma 19 and 60mm lenses together cost me ~ $253 for the pair. My other 2 primes, the Panaleica 25mm and the Panasonic 14mm cost me $570 for the pair, also mint used.
 
Paulmorgan said:
Fredrik Glckner said:
Designing a good, compact, fast lens takes more effort than a larger, slower lens. That explains some of the price difference.

In my experience, the Sigma lens is not as good as the Panasonic lens. The Panasonic lens is sharper. See a comparison here.

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2013/02/sigma-19mm-f28-ex-dn.html

On the other hand, the Sigma lens focuses faster.
Click to expand...
In most cases you will not see any difference in sharpness, there really is, very little in it.
Click to expand...
Nothing to fault at all about the sharpness of the Sigma 19mm, and the 60mm is in the same league as the Olympus 75mm (albeit 1.3 stops slower).
 
Paulmorgan said:
The distortion of the Sigma is also corrected by software.

8d09634052af41dca7707ca0f7bbd0aa.jpg
Click to expand...
The distortion with the Sigma lens before the software correction (-1.44%) is less than half of the Panasonic lens (-3.66%). Lenstip test
 
Vlad S said:
Paulmorgan said:
The distortion of the Sigma is also corrected by software.

8d09634052af41dca7707ca0f7bbd0aa.jpg
Click to expand...
The distortion with the Sigma lens before the software correction (-1.44%) is less than half of the Panasonic lens (-3.66%). Lenstip test
Click to expand...
Yes optically the Sigma and Olympus lenses are very good in comparison to Panasonic. Enabling the lens correction in LR only makes a very small change to the file, its barely noticeable.

With some Olympus lenses you can only see what is really happening by opening the raw files in a program that does not automatically correct for distortion in the software.

The Olympus 12mm and the wide end of the 12-50mm looking very different loaded into software like raw therapy compared to LR.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Panasonic G9 and pixel vignetting; magenta cast and weird bokeh <f1.4
Replies
4
Views
1K
John Bean (UK)
J
C
Looking for a good low light walking around lens for the OM-1 II to replace the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
agott123
agott123
Rafael Rivera
Fujifilm shows MFT how it could survive- and possibly thrive
6 7 8
Replies
140
Views
1K
Miller_bike
M
Stockholmed-in-BadMusic
Panasonic Lumix S5II vs Nikon Z5II + L-mount vs Z-mount
Replies
14
Views
7K
RBIV
RBIV
bluevellet
  • User review User review
Good performance at a Bargain
Replies
1
Views
1K
DDoram
DDoram

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top