Lack of up to date pancakes in M43?

morinor wrote:

snip

Panasonic 12-32mm f/3.6-5.6 made me select a M4/3 camera in order to feel my need. I have read that Olympus 14-42mm was a mediocre lens so that was also a decisive factor to not choose the Olympus way although that E-PL9 camera checked a lot of boxes. The 12-32mm it is the main kit lens brought out on Panasonic cameras so it make sense in order to save money. I really wanted to had a similar option with a Fuji or a Canon camera.

I have the 14, 15, 20 and 12-32 lenses and have used the 17mm f1.8

I had the Olympus 14-42 and got rid of it. It was very good at 14mm but by 20mm it was soft and got worse at 42.

The 12-32, I think, is by far, the better lens so much so, that I now have two of them - one black and the other silver.

After that I looked also what other pancake choices I had. 14mm at f/2.5 doesn't seem a good option and it doesn't sound more usable than the 12-32mm.

The main reason most don't like the 14 is that it is not as good as the 20 and "only" f2.5. It is a fine little lens and is the smallest "real" lens.

However, I did a side-by-side comparison between it and the 12-32 @14 and the 15mm.

Compared to the 12-32, I could not see any difference at all @ f3.5. At f2.5, there was not much improvement due to a thinner DOF. This shows that the 12-32 is a good lens as others will testify. Big advantage of the 12-32 is that it has OIS and will work with Dual IS on a Panny body.

Compared to the 15, I could not see any difference in sharpness wide open and the 15 @ f2.5. However, there are other differences such as contrast - the 15 has more. I don't think the price difference between the 14 and 15 should be as much.

The 14 is half the length and weight of the 15. On a small body, this will make a difference.

The other options that I saw were also 15mm f/1.7 and 20mm f/1.7. Although the 15mm is a good option with the option to use the aperture ring, it is much more expensive and it is not greater regarding IQ. I have seen the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 but it is not as small as I want although it is relatively small compared with other prime lenses.

The "problem" with the 17 f1.8 is field curvature making it less desirable for landscapes. However, it is good for street photography for which it was designed. See the link where Roger talks about this.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/03/finally-some-more-m43-mtf-testing-are-the-40s-fabulous/

I don't like the aperture ring on the 15 and it doesn't lock on A meaning that it can move on you. If I had a Panny body, this would drive me nuts. On an Oly body, the ring doesn't work, so not an issue for me.

I have read that 20mm is slow and noisier,

Very over exaggerated.  On my EP5 and EM5II, the 20 focuses just fine even at night.

but I think that will be my option. I am happy that I read that with cameras with DFD (I have chosen GX80 at the end) the focus speed has been improved. AF noise still will not be fixed, but maybe I can avoid using it if I have to shoot video. It is a nice focal length with nice specifications and I really wished to had an update to address those two issues.

I am also looking on 7artisan 35mm f/1.2. Although it is not at any way a sharp lens and a MF, it is not big, it has wide aperture and can produce some different kind of photos. Its price is something also something to make the step and experiment with it.

All that from a guy that hates the idea of pancakes attached on a FF body.

The 20 is a very good lens but, yes, it should be updated with faster AF and weather sealing.

Allan