Do you want a 10.5mm f2 prime?

Roderick Balle wrote:

dulynoted wrote:

No I have no interest in a 10.5mm f2 prime. I already ordered the 10.5mm f0.95 prime from voigtlander and expect it to arrive in the next week.

Just read the review of this lens on lens tip. They didn't think much of it. Curious about your thoughts on it, after you've put it through its paces?

I have the 12mm SLR Magic T1.6 as my widest m43 prime. It's a very nice lens - some flare issues, but overall I like the way it renders, and the very close focusing distance makes it very easy to use.

It was a really simple buy for me.

1. The reviewer is big into astrophotography and the lens didnt match his personal expectations so the whole review was a bit tainted.

2. Sharpest of all the noktons wide open (were I tend to use my 25mm nokton the most)

3. When compared to the only 3 other lenses with similiar specifications (though none are as extreme in design as this one) the 21mm f1.4 from leica, the 21mm f1.8 ultron from voigtlander, and the 20mm f1.8 from nikon I found that the lens performance was actually pretty par with those lenses. Bokeh was significantly better than the nikon, as well as having better mtf charts. It also handles flare better than the nikon and the leica. Distortion is better and chroma abberations are lower too (1 kind, it was slightly higher in the other). The only place were it fared particularly badly was coma but stopped down to similar f numbers it improved. Even stopped down the 10.5mm nokton follows a similar sharpness curve to the nikon 20mm but actually retains sharpness better past the diffraction limit.

The other 3 lenses despite their flaws (which to this point have been unavoidable with superwide super fast lenses) are considered very good lenses. The nokton got hit hard because wide open it didnt deliver for the astrophotographer reviewing it at lenstip and because of the stellar sharpness levels hit by the 3 other noktons. In reality when compared to the only 3 similar lenses in existence it performs on par with them even though it is the only one with an aperture larger than its focal length.

All of this combined with the shallow dof available at wide angles on m43, a similiar rendering to my 25mm nokton, and a filter thread with stepless aperture for video make this lens a no brainer for me. It even gives me a dof scale for street photography (my most common photographic pursuit).

I do plan to post my own review and image samples once I have recieved my copy of the lens and had a week or so with it.

Thank you. I have the opinion that the way an image looks or the way a lens renders an image is much more important than things like edge sharpness at f0.95. I only use 100% view to decide which picture is better focused  or to apply sharpening/other editing. Pictures are made to be viewed in full. Thats why I have no problems shooting things like windmills wide open on my "supposedly" soft 25mm nokton because the way it renders wide open is unlike any other lens (except the other m43 noktons)

federicog wrote:

Astrotripper wrote:

After a rather disappointing Nokton 10.5, which I had great hopes for, I would welcome less extreme, but more competent lens. But f/2 is a bit too slow. Make that f/1.7 with decent quality wide open, and I'm in. I wouldn't mind if it were a bit wider as well.

But I'm not seeing this happening. So I'm warming to the idea of acquiring Samyang 12/2 at some point.

I'm also considering the samyang/rokinon 12/2 also. Any ideas on how faster it would be than the panasonic 14/2.5?

The Samyang is wider by about 9 degrees, ~1/2 stop more light gathering than the Lumix, and manual focus. Overall, a slower-to-use lens with a marginal increase in maximum aperture over the Lumix.

If you want larger maximum aperture and AF on a budget, the 14mm f/2.5 is a fine lens. Get to f/2 with the Olympus 12mm f/2, a superb lens in my estimation; I've owned one for four years. The 15mm f/1.7 should be in your considerations too. That's about as fast as you get in µ4/3 with an AF wide angle.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Life is good in the woods

TN Args wrote:

James Pilcher wrote:

I might purchase an 8.5mm f/2 or f/2.8 prime, as long as it's in the premium range and not a plastic fantastic consumer lens.

The Kowa 8.5mm f/2.8 is a premium lens, available since earlier this year.

The Kowa is big, heavy, and manual focus. Although AF is not as important with such short focal lengths, it is nice to have. I would like a sister to the M.Zuiko 12mm f/2, silver color, AF/MF focus clutch, and relatively small size. That's why an 8.5mm f/2.8 (or even 3.5) interests me: overall size.

I'm in no hurry for such a lens, but it would certainly catch my eye if it were to appear on the Olympus lens roadmap.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Life is good in the woods

well, but only if its optically decent, namely not relying on soft correction. I would take it f/2.4 or even 2.8 ; at such coverage there will be loads of minute details and needing the best of optical imaging.

Hithertoo wrote:

Not really, I have the Olympus 9-18mm F/3.5-F/5.6 and the Olympus 12/2 I don't really need anything more unless its faster or wider.

I hear you. I think I could replace the 9-18mm with a 10mm ƒ/2 prime in a heartbeat, though, if Oly made one available. I have the 12-40mm ƒ/2.8, though, & not the 12mm ƒ/2.

Take care,

Frank

Hithertoo wrote:

If they made a 10mm F/2 I'd probably sell my 12mm F/2 and 9-18. I prefer primes and the 9-18 isn't really that good at what zooms are good for, which is walking around. I like the focal length but the 9-18 isn't really sharp enough for me unfortunately.

I like the 9-18mm for walking around. Had it on today as 2 of my teaching partners & I toured a printing co. When I needed to get everyone & some big machinery, wide-body printers & such, + 3 or so people in the shot, 9mm was great. When I wanted to get some closer 1 or 2 shots, the 18mm (35mm in FF) worked well, too. For walk around, IQ, to ME, is secondary to shot composition. Of course, if there was a better choice around 10mm I'd I'd jump on it. That's about my personal favorite UWA focal length. Love the old 20mm ƒ/2.8 on my D610.

Frank

Hithertoo wrote:

I really want to like the 9-18 because to me its the perfect walk around lens width ultra wide to standard 35. I should give it more of a chance. It was the lens I wanted when I bought my E-PL5, but I ended up with the 14-42 instead.

Sometimes, we just shouldn't let "the perfect" get in the way of "the possible."

Frank

No, don't need 10.5 f2.

f/4 is fine.

Small, light, affordable, sharp wide open edge to edge, no distortion and no vignetting, very good resitance to bright light.

9mm would be best, but up to 10,5 would be fine as well.