Oly 12mm f2.0 vs Pana 12-32mm f3.5-5.6

Started 6 months ago | Questions thread
OP LarsPolarBear Regular Member • Posts: 343
Re: 12/2.0 is better, though not as sharp, as the 12-32

Thanks Scott for your input.


1. Could those of you who own the Oly 12mm and the Pana 12-32mm please comment on their image quality (also in comparison). Is there a significant difference, especially when fully open (f2.0 or f3.5).

I do think that the Olympus MZ 12/2.0 produces nicer-looking images with more contrast and "punch" than the 12-32.

However, if you're a pixel-peeper then the 12-32 is probably sharper. My copy is a very, very sharp lens.

The problem with wildlife and underwater photography is, that you automatically become a pixel-peeper since one has to crop quite often substantially to get the photo one is looking for...

significantly cropped Pontos Pygmy Seahorse (about 5mm in size)

Of course, the 12/2.0 is also 1.5 stops faster.

Which helps a lot to keep the ISOs down...

I like both lenses. For your purposes, I think the 12/2.0 is the better lens but is also a much more expensive option.

The more I discuss that with the forum members here, the more I think not. The ability not to be able to use it for macro photography (yes, I know it is not build for that) reduces its use for me quite a bit, even if its picture quality might be a step higher...

hmmm... difficult... will see if I can try the 12-32 at a shop here with my underwater casing...

Again, thanks for your help!


 LarsPolarBear's gear list:LarsPolarBear's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Olympus E-PL7 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 EZ +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow