Panasonic 12-32mm vs Small Primes

SunsetBk wrote:

kaphinga wrote:

I am going through the same quandary. I have the 12-40, and even though it's a gorgeous lens, it does get heavy by the end of the day. And I agree that the 12-32 would be a lot less "in-your-face" than the 12-40. At the moment, my 17mm f1.8 is my preferred lens for street shooting, but sometimes a small zoom would be convenient.

Does anyone have any experience getting the Panny 12-32 from (the mostly Asian sources on) Ebay? How can they sell them for almost half the price of local sources? Are they grey market versions? It's a lot cheaper on Ebay than on B&H.

Panasonic 12-32 is an amazing lens. Just get it. Its tiny, its sharp, it focuses quickly. Its smaller than the Olympus 17mm 1.8. I also have the Olympus 12-40 but honestly the 12-32 gets more use. The only downside is build quality. The lettering rubs off easily and you have to be careful when he barrel is extended. Also I would say the lens lacks micro contrast. But you are talking about a pancake 24-70 zoom that produces great results. Its a game changer and at sub $200 a must have. Asian retailers split the GM1/5 kits and resell the parts at a small profit. GM series is cheaper there. Only downside is there is practically no warranty.

I just ordered it  -- $160 on Ebay from Japan, including shipping.

pixelTwister wrote:

How does Panasonic 12-32mm lens compare to primes in 14-17mm range in terms of sharpness?

I have read a lot of quite negative reviews about Panasonic 14mm and Olympus 17mm (Panasonic 15mm seems to be better). I myself have Olympus 17mm and not happy with resolution, especially in the corners (maybe I have a bad copy?)

Quality control seems to have gone to sleep at the Olympus factory when they were producing the 17mm f/1.8 and it seems from user comments, a lot of poor copies escaped from the factory. Since 35mm was always my favorite focal length, the 17mm f/1.8, a silver one, was one of the first lenses I bought for my E-M10 along with the 12mm f/2.0. The image quality was terrible and I returned it. Several months later I bought another 17mm, a black one this time, from a different retailer and it has proved to be excellent. I also recently acquired the 15mm f/1.7 after I got my GM5. Of the three, I feel, the 12mm is the best overall.

Since I shoot mainly street photography I value small and light lens. I use f/4 frequently so don’t need bright lens either (and can keep my 17mm for night shooting).

I prefer either the 12mm f/2.0 or the 17mm f/1.8 for street or event shooting. Because of the snapshot feature, I can use zone focusing which is a lot faster than autofocus. If I put the distance scale at 3 meters and at f4 on the 12mm, everything from 1.34 meters to infinity will be in focus. The 17mm has a smaller DOF, but still very acceptable. If it's a sunny day, I usually stop down to f/5.6 or even f/6.3 which provides even more DOF. I also use the 5 foot mark on the distance scale with similar results. Zone focusing makes shooting from the hip and 12mm usually means you won't miss your target. Using the 15mm for street is much more difficult to use with zone focusing. I've been using mine for landscape, which is a new interest for me.

I don't like zooms and the 12-32mm that came with my GM5 is on the shelf. One problem is that if you are set to shot at any moment, the lens is extended to about three times it's stored length. The minute you point it in someone's direction, it's almost like putting a sign on you chest that says hey, look at me, I'm a photographer and I'm taking your picture. You either wind up with a lot of canned poses or a lot of mean looks.

I am a zoom shooter and prefer the convenience of not constantly changing lenses. The 12-32 excels as a walk-around lens. That being said, my Sigma 60 rocks as a portrait lens and my Bower 7.5 has its uses. To each his own.

bs1946 wrote:

I don't like zooms and the 12-32mm that came with my GM5 is on the shelf. One problem is that if you are set to shot at any moment, the lens is extended to about three times it's stored length. The minute you point it in someone's direction, it's almost like putting a sign on you chest that says hey, look at me, I'm a photographer and I'm taking your picture. You either wind up with a lot of canned poses or a lot of mean looks.

Seriously? the 12-32mm extended is still smaller than most m4/3's primes, pancakes apart.

-- hide signature --

Bill S.
"If you’re a pixel peeper that lives and dies by looking at your images at 100%, you’re living in an archaic age that doesn’t really exist anymore." Chris Gampat

pixelTwister wrote:

How does Panasonic 12-32mm lens compare to primes in 14-17mm range in terms of sharpness?

I have read a lot of quite negative reviews about Panasonic 14mm and Olympus 17mm (Panasonic 15mm seems to be better). I myself have Olympus 17mm and not happy with resolution, especially in the corners (maybe I have a bad copy?)

Since I shoot mainly street photography I value small and light lens. I use f/4 frequently so don’t need bright lens either (and can keep my 17mm for night shooting).

I sold my 14mm F2.5 pancake after getting the 12-32mm zoom - it replaces many primes in that range. I find my copy of the 12-32mm sharp from wide open at all focal lengths. I kept the 20mm pancake mainly for its speed and wide open bokeh.

papillon_65 wrote:

bs1946 wrote:

I don't like zooms and the 12-32mm that came with my GM5 is on the shelf. One problem is that if you are set to shot at any moment, the lens is extended to about three times it's stored length. The minute you point it in someone's direction, it's almost like putting a sign on you chest that says hey, look at me, I'm a photographer and I'm taking your picture. You either wind up with a lot of canned poses or a lot of mean looks.

Seriously? the 12-32mm extended is still smaller than most m4/3's primes, pancakes apart.

Yes seriously. As you can see, the 12-32mm is about three times longer when extended and longer than my five primes, even if it's not much. But, it's not as much about the size, as it is that thanks to all those point and shoots with lenses that extend out, that the moment people see a camera with an extended zoom, no matter how small, they assume the camera is on and you are photographing them, even if you're not.

Tallest to Shortest, Starting on the left, 12-32mm extended, 45mm f/1.8, 12mm f/2.0, 25mm f/1.8, 15mm f/1.7 and 17mm f/1.8. The only prime I have and did not include in the photo is the Rokinon 7.5mm f/3.5 FE. It is slightly taller that the 12-32mm because of the non-removable petal hood. If the hood was removable it would be between the 25mm and 15mm.

bs1946 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

bs1946 wrote:

I don't like zooms and the 12-32mm that came with my GM5 is on the shelf. One problem is that if you are set to shot at any moment, the lens is extended to about three times it's stored length. The minute you point it in someone's direction, it's almost like putting a sign on you chest that says hey, look at me, I'm a photographer and I'm taking your picture. You either wind up with a lot of canned poses or a lot of mean looks.

Seriously? the 12-32mm extended is still smaller than most m4/3's primes, pancakes apart.

Yes seriously. As you can see, the 12-32mm is about three times longer when extended and longer than my five primes, even if it's not much. But, it's not as much about the size, as it is that thanks to all those point and shoots with lenses that extend out, that the moment people see a camera with an extended zoom, no matter how small, they assume the camera is on and you are photographing them, even if you're not.

Tallest to Shortest, Starting on the left, 12-32mm extended, 45mm f/1.8, 12mm f/2.0, 25mm f/1.8, 15mm f/1.7 and 17mm f/1.8. The only prime I have and did not include in the photo is the Rokinon 7.5mm f/3.5 FE. It is slightly taller that the 12-32mm because of the non-removable petal hood. If the hood was removable it would be between the 25mm and 15mm.

Sorry, I'm not buying that, most people wouldn't know a prime lens from a zoom if it smacked them in the eye. They don't magically ignore a prime lens which is virtually the same size and then get a dose of extreme paranoia over the 12-32mm.