Lack of up to date pancakes in M43?

The Fuji XA has no viewfinder and is still not smaller than a GM 1 without viewfinder, or the GM5 or GX85 which do have viewfinders.

Andrew Butterfield wrote:

I think the Oly 17 1.8 is a bit underrated. It's a beautiful little lens physically (a totally different animal to the relatively cheap looking 45 and 25), and although not in the same league as the pro line lenses for IQ perhaps, still very good indeed, focuses quickly, has nice bokeh and is sharp corner to corner. I'm surprised how often I look at an old photo that I really like and find in the EXIF that I took it with the 17 f1.8. Perhaps the reason they haven't updated it is that they can't make it significantly better than it already is.

Well, the "problem" is that it is not sharp corner to corner when the centre is in focus because of the field curvature. One of the reasons why it has a good Bokeh.

Does this matter to you? It depends on why you bought the lens.

For landscapes, there are better lenses but the17 f1.8 was designed for street photography where the field curvature works well.

Check out the link where Roger measures and discusses this.

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

The 45 f1.8 is similar in this regard.

This is one of the reasons why a lot of people prefer the PL15mm f1.7

Allan

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

alwinvrm wrote:

Thanks, the Pana GM5 + 15mm or 20mm is the outfit I was looking for, ticks all the boxes. Pitty I already bought an Olympus E-M10 m2 . I should have done better research and been more patiently reading this forum post.

Don't feel bad. The E-M10II is excellent with really good IBIS, electronic shutter, 4 custom modes on mode dial, nice OLED EVF, etc. I have 4 Olympus and 1 Panasonic bodies (1 more Panasonic arriving today) and overall my favorite is the E-M10II, I guess.  When I want I can quickly put the ECG-3 grip on too!

alwinvrm wrote:

Thanks, the Pana GM5 + 15mm or 20mm is the outfit I was looking for, ticks all the boxes. Pitty I already bought an Olympus E-M10 m2 . I should have done better research and been more patiently reading this forum post.

I wrote the following about modular m4/3, E-M10II specifically, in February 2016:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57203605

The Pleasures of m4/3

For me the pleasures of using m4/3 runs in 3 directions depending on what kind of photography I am doing:

1. Bodies and lenses with similar capabilities to my previous DSLR gear are smaller and lighter. When I travel the decrease is really appreciated! (The GX7 can do this too.) For example, when I travel I take the following:

• Olympus E-M10II + ECG-3 grip
• Olympus E-M10 + ECG-1 grip (I wish both cameras used the same grip because then I would only carry one)
• 4 batteries and charger (both bodies use same batteries)
• Olympus 14-150mm f4-5.6 II
• Olympus 9-18mm f4-5.6
• Olympus 25mm f1.8
• Olympus 9mm f8 fisheye

2. Then at other times I really love the small, excellent, prime lenses. (The GX7 can do this too.) I take off the ECG-3 grip and mount one of my small lenses (and sometimes carry one or two more in a pocket):

• Panasonic 14mm f2.5 pancake
• Panasonic 20mm f1.7 pancake
• Olympus 25mm f1.8
• Olympus 45mm f1.8

3. Then at yet other times I take the grip off and mount the Olympus 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 EZ pancake to turn it into a better LX100 of the same size:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57047115

Some people prefer the bigger cameras such as the E-M1, GH4, GX8, and G7 which are always big and are not modular with a removable grip. Maybe they also are usually using the larger f2.8 zooms, 300mm f4, and 100-400mm f4-6.3 which make the most sense on those larger bodies.

The great thing is that there is something for almost everyone!

A point that may have been missed

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57244058

I think that probably some people missed one of my points and that is because I didn't state it explicitly. When I wrote the OP I decided to instead make one of the points by way of example. The point made by example is that, at least for me, my choice of m4/3 gear using the same body fills 3 roles that otherwise would likely involve 3 different cameras.

The modularity of the E-M10II (and E-M10, E-M5II, and E-M5) which have add-on grips which one can optionally use along with the plethora of lens choices of many focal lengths, apertures, and sizes allows me to use just an E-M10II and depending on whether I use the add-on grip or not and depending on which lens I mount it can be a completely different sort of camera, but retain the same great sensor, the wonderful IBIS, the excellent EVF, same battery, and I don't have to get accustomed to a different interface, menu, etc. Before m4/3 I would more likely have 2 or 3 different cameras to fill the spots that just my E-M10II currently fills. These days when I travel I take the E-M10II and E-M10 (backup). Same batteries for both.

The only other camera I take with me when I travel is a very small camera. For the last few years I have used the 1/1.7" sensor Canon S95, but I may update to a Sony RX100 or Canon G9X one of these days. All 3 cameras are almost the same size, but the RX100 and G9X have 1" sensors.

Also, my PEN-F is great and I use it sometimes when traveling too.

Olympus definitely did - even their new 12-45 f4 is ridiculously big for what it is.

Panasonic seems better at making small lenses. Just look at their 12-60 and compare to the old Olympus 12-60.

Ruairi wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Ruairi wrote:

Give the 20mm f1.7 a try. It's the slowest of a very fast bunch, it works for me and could work for you too. Not sure how it compares to the slower focussing Fuji primes,

The Fuji slower focusing primes on the latest Fuji bodies focus faster than the 20mm F1.7 on any m43rds body (at least the XF1.4 and other F1.4 primes they have).

Does it? Did someone test that?

Well, my experience on an X-E3.

But I am ok with the 20mm F1.7 focusing speed myself personally for the most part, except that on all Olympus bodies I have tried (EM5 MKII, PenF, EPL9, OMD EM5.3) you have to half-press shutter first, wait for it to lock focus and then finish the shutter press unless you want to risk 30%-75% of shots' focus.

Sounds like you have 'release priority' active.

No, I don't.

If you turn that off (menu C1), the camera will confirm focus before making an exposure.

No, it does not with that Panasonic lens. Sometimes it does, and very often it won't. This is a documented issue with that lens. It doesn't happen on Panasonic cameras.

more so when they released the EM5.3.

magnesus3 wrote:

Olympus definitely did - even their new 12-45 f4 is ridiculously big for what it is.

Panasonic seems better at making small lenses. Just look at their 12-60 and compare to the old Olympus 12-60.

yet to be determined.  If the12-45 is sharp like the 12-40... count me in.  If not noticeably better than the lumix 12-60f3.5-5.6, which is 45g lighter, than I agree.  The lumix is available as a kit add-on for $100.  While it doesn't have the smoothest zoom (I find this a handicap using video) it is also wx resistant... though perhaps not to the same standard.

Sranang Boi wrote:

For video you need the PL12-60mm f2.8/4.0. I just bought one for the same reason that you point out what's wrong with it's cheaper stablemate.

Yes, I have both.  The kit lens has a trace of 'stiction' in the zoom, which results in slightly jerky/jagged video zooming.  Not an issue for stills!

HRC2016 wrote:

The pancakes exist to display and take advantage of the m43 small size.

If you can't get good images with a lenses you have it's not a problem with the lens.

It’s for pocketabity. But the positioning of M43 has changed and pocketability no longer the difference in a phone-centric world. So they are making bigger m43 bodies and the selling point is image quality vs phone not the size.