This is what a MFT lens should be

kentwosheds wrote:

Good image quality, very lightweight and compact.

Those criteria describe a lot of lenses, which is why (IMHO) there are quite a few ideal MFT lenses. The Oly 45/1.8 comes to mind - not a typical walkaround lens, although some of my most interesting slides (remember them?) are from a day I spent in San Francisco with only a Leica M3 and the compact 90mm Tele Elmarit.

I also think of the one that came on my first MFT camera - the Lumix 12-32 kit lens. Not very fast but tiny and light, and I am always pleased with its image quality. Sure, it has that plastic lens mount, but if the one on my lens breaks (and it's not economically repairable - don't know if that's possible or not) I'll just buy another copy.

And that's just 2 lenses.

mring1 wrote:

and use both. I don't find the "urban legend" elements of either lens to be definitive. The 15 isn't "legenday" and the 20 isn't "slow."

I use a GM5 + 15 when I want quick, small and lower light capacity in one package. It's the perfect museum kit. The 20 tightens the FOV in a meaningful way. The focus speed issue is easily addressed with a half press. I used it at our family Christmas dinner and it worked well. My 20 is plenty sharp wide open; no hesitation about using it that way.

The 20 and 15 represent m4/3s at it's best: small, fast, very high quality. Paired with a smaller body (GM5, GX85, E-M10) these kits are much more limited by the photographer using them than they are by their designs.

This is exactly the point. “Wider” than this, I don’t know. Quickly gets into postcard territory. What’s nice with this FOV is forces you to make just the important choices about what you want in and not in, without being too overbearing.

For me this lens was 95%good enough to make me sell if the 25mm f1.4 which is a legendary one IMO.

kentwosheds wrote:

Owned this lens for years now, and with my GX7 it’s an ideal walkabout lens.

Good image quality, very lightweight and compact.

Focus a little slow but it nails it eventually.

A must have lens.

Size is a problem. I lost mine. Unpacking after a shoot, it had gone. I was thinking about whether to replace it like for like or get an Olympus 17/1.8 (which has mixed reviews, but in the end, I decided it might suit me). Couldn't make up my mind, and in the end decided to get another 20/1.7. Just about to buy, when my wife comes in. She's doing the laundry. "I found this in your pocket". "Which pocket?" "This one". "I didn't know I had a pocket there."

Good thing she always goes through the pockets.

I've used the 20 for several years as well. I love it. Small, light and very sharp.  I've never thought of it as focusing "eventually."  When comparing, it's more like a tenth of a second vs two tenths of a second. I never notice.

In the zooms, I think the 12-40mm f/2.8 is the perfect m4/3rds lens.  No aberrations to speak of across the board (something I'd love to see from a FF zoom) and a design that sacrificed distortion to control other problems, the best choice, in my opinion on how to design a lens.

bobn2 wrote:

kentwosheds wrote:

Owned this lens for years now, and with my GX7 it’s an ideal walkabout lens.

Good image quality, very lightweight and compact.

Focus a little slow but it nails it eventually.

A must have lens.

Size is a problem. I lost mine. Unpacking after a shoot, it had gone. I was thinking about whether to replace it like for like or get an Olympus 17/1.8 (which has mixed reviews, but in the end, I decided it might suit me). Couldn't make up my mind, and in the end decided to get another 20/1.7. Just about to buy, when my wife comes in. She's doing the laundry. "I found this in your pocket". "Which pocket?" "This one". "I didn't know I had a pocket there."

Good thing she always goes through the pockets.

Lucky you I can also recommend the Panasonic 15/1.7 as another alternative in an area where small focal length changes can make a significant difference to the image.  This lens deserves plaudits in its own right.

Sranang Boi wrote:

I looked at the 20mm f1.7 but ended up keeping the 15mm f1.7 instead. Far faster in focusing, sharper, wider, bigger dynamic range. That's why I like using it after dawn.

It's a lens with a 'cult' following who cannot see the failings, slow to focus and not especially sharp.  I bought an Oly 25/1.8 and could not believe the difference the Oly was so sharp, so posted several samples from the 20mm and ask if people though they were normal.  I was reassured that they were.

I sold the 20mm and kept the 25 (I would not have done that if I thought I was selling a dud, without declaring it).

It's not the only lens which attracts unreasonably good or bad comments on this forum, based on a few vociferous contributors.

Other examples would be the Oly 40-150 (slow version) ...over-rated

Panny 45-200mm either version....under-rated

Now I will take cover!

tom

(there is no substitute for trying out a lens yourself!)

wrangler5 wrote:

I also think of the one that came on my first MFT camera - the Lumix 12-32 kit lens. Not very fast but tiny and light, and I am always pleased with its image quality. Sure, it has that plastic lens mount,......

Hmmm, mine has a metal mount.

I bought mine from another forum member who liberated it from a GM1 or GM5, so not sure why and where the plastic vs metal mounts occurred.

A nice lens to use on my Oly E-P5 when I want something light to carry. Using the body IBIS is of course better than the Mega OIS of the lens.

Regards...... Guy

tomhongkong wrote:

Sranang Boi wrote:

I looked at the 20mm f1.7 but ended up keeping the 15mm f1.7 instead. Far faster in focusing, sharper, wider, bigger dynamic range. That's why I like using it after dawn.

It's a lens with a 'cult' following who cannot see the failings, slow to focus and not especially sharp. I bought an Oly 25/1.8 and could not believe the difference the Oly was so sharp, so posted several samples from the 20mm and ask if people though they were normal. I was reassured that they were.

I sold the 20mm and kept the 25 (I would not have done that if I thought I was selling a dud, without declaring it).

It's not the only lens which attracts unreasonably good or bad comments on this forum, based on a few vociferous contributors.

Other examples would be the Oly 40-150 (slow version) ...over-rated

Panny 45-200mm either version....under-rated

Now I will take cover!

tom

(there is no substitute for trying out a lens yourself!)

The 20mm is one of to top all time sellers on M43 by units sold. That’s no “cult” - it’s a proven product that’s extremely popular with customers. And without a Leica label either.