Quintesential M43 lenses

Sam Bennett wrote:

DailyPlanet wrote:

Robin Wong, the youtuber and Olympus ambassador, says the Olympus 17mm f/1.2 lens gives the user a feathered bokeh that is creamy. That is a convincing endorsement.

I have a Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f/1.4 II ASPH that I'd like to pair with the above lens. Does this make sense, or should I budget for both the Olympus 17mm-f/1.2 and 25mm-f/1.2? This lens combo would have to work well in video recording applications, as well.

I've never used the 25/1.4, so I can't comment on that. But to be honest, I find the 25/1.2 underwhelming - it doesn't really have the "magic" that the 17/1.2 and 45/1.2 have. Apparently it's a simpler optical design, so it makes sense that it doesn't have quite the same qualities.

I have the bookends and not all that interested in the 25 Pro because the 25/1.8 punches above its weight at that FL.

Not to mention eleventy zooms that cross 25mm reside in the gear drawer.

Cheers,

Rick

Some 1st gen Panasonic 14-42's (H-FS014042) had unusually stiff zoom rings. I had one of them. It was very noticeable if you had a 14-45. Three years later Panasonic released the 14-42 II (H-FS1442A )to replace it.

DailyPlanet wrote:

Sam Bennett wrote:

What are yours?

1. 17/1.2 - My favorite "general purpose" prime. Superb optical quality, absolutely gorgeous bokeh wide-open (where I sit with it probably 95% of the time). Wide enough to get good "context" in environmental portraits while the DoF is shallow enough to help with a bit of separation.

Robin Wong, the youtuber and Olympus ambassador, says the Olympus 17mm f/1.2 lens gives the user a feathered bokeh that is creamy. That is a convincing endorsement.

I have a Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f/1.4 II ASPH that I'd like to pair with the above lens. Does this make sense, or should I budget for both the Olympus 17mm-f/1.2 and 25mm-f/1.2? This lens combo would have to work well in video recording applications, as well.

I found the 25mm f/1.2 Pro underwhelming. You buy it because it shares filter sizes. Otherwise, go with the 25mm f/1.4 or 20mm f/1.4.

unhappymeal wrote:

DailyPlanet wrote:

Sam Bennett wrote:

What are yours?

1. 17/1.2 - My favorite "general purpose" prime. Superb optical quality, absolutely gorgeous bokeh wide-open (where I sit with it probably 95% of the time). Wide enough to get good "context" in environmental portraits while the DoF is shallow enough to help with a bit of separation.

Robin Wong, the youtuber and Olympus ambassador, says the Olympus 17mm f/1.2 lens gives the user a feathered bokeh that is creamy. That is a convincing endorsement.

I have a Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f/1.4 II ASPH that I'd like to pair with the above lens. Does this make sense, or should I budget for both the Olympus 17mm-f/1.2 and 25mm-f/1.2? This lens combo would have to work well in video recording applications, as well.

I found the 25mm f/1.2 Pro underwhelming. You buy it because it shares filter sizes. Otherwise, go with the 25mm f/1.4 or 20mm f/1.4.

I can confirm that the OM 17mm and 25mm 1.2 have beautiful  bokeh and excellent iq at 1.2 and I find myself shooting quite often a 1.2 for these reasons. 
And that, yes, they are rather heavy and bulky for primes. 
Zero experience with the PL lenses, and in the OM line the 20mm is indeed very tempting.

2ndact scene1 wrote:

I just sold a couple of lenses I wasn’t using and I am left with my “essentials”: the PL 15mm and PL 30mm macro. Joining them shortly will be the PL 35-100 f/4-5.6 which I had owned and regretfully sold. If I had to start over, those are the three I would buy.

I would like to add a wide angle lens also. So, it is interesting to see what people consider their essential wide angle.

My main uses are travel (all three lenses or maybe just the 15mm and 35-100mm), garden and flower photography (the 30mm and the 35-100mm) , group and background shots at events (15mm is perfect for that) and just general usage. The wide angle would be mainly for travel.

Hi 2ndact scene 1! I'm wanting to get into macro photography, mostly close up of insects and flowers and am wondering if you find the P30mm macro too close at times for flowers? I'm sort of thinking of getting the Oly 60mm macro for a little more distance from the front element to the subject and all the glowing reviews, plus the great photos I have seen.  I read very little about the P30mm or the PL45mm on this forum, so am wondering why you went with 30mm?

Not to nitpick, but the 30mm is not a Leica lens, so most would just call it a P30mm macro lens.

14-140 and either the 45mm f1.2, 56mm f1.4 or 75mm f1.8 as a dedicated portrait lens. Is all you need.

I get there are a number of great Lenses.
But, for me there is 1 lens to rule them all.
One I could use for the remainder of my existence (however that might be).
Oly 14-150 f4-5.6 II
... given that, there may be a time when I will give the 12-100 a try... and see if a 'crop' still gives me better...
The size is already a 'strike' agin...
On My EM1-iii a 12-100 might be a great One-Day carry.
but when it comes to a 3 day+ trip or backpack - 14-150... on my Em5-ii...
I'm a happy guy...
Thx
Yuri

2ndact scene1 wrote:

• Promeneur wrote:

2ndact scene1 wrote:

I just sold a couple of lenses I wasn’t using and I am left with my “essentials”: the PL 15mm and PL 30mm macro. Joining them shortly will be the PL 35-100 f/4-5.6 which I had owned and regretfully sold. If I had to start over, those are the three I would buy.

I would like to add a wide angle lens also. So, it is interesting to see what people consider their essential wide angle.

My main uses are travel (all three lenses or maybe just the 15mm and 35-100mm), garden and flower photography (the 30mm and the 35-100mm) , group and background shots at events (15mm is perfect for that) and just general usage. The wide angle would be mainly for travel.

Hi 2ndact scene 1! I'm wanting to get into macro photography, mostly close up of insects and flowers and am wondering if you find the P30mm macro too close at times for flowers? I'm sort of thinking of getting the Oly 60mm macro for a little more distance from the front element to the subject and all the glowing reviews, plus the great photos I have seen. I read very little about the P30mm or the PL45mm on this forum, so am wondering why you went with 30mm?

Not to nitpick, but the 30mm is not a Leica lens, so most would just call it a P30mm macro lens.

I have been curious if PL stands for both Panasonic Lumix AND Panasonic Leica. I don’t see P being used much but it is not ambiguous and PL obviously can be.

Panasonic Lumix, I never thought of it that way. We can move on from here, it's not that important.

Anyway, I just spent the last hour taking flower pictures with the P30mm. The subject was my wife’s flower arrangement (so indoors using somewhat muted natural and artificial light). I processed in Lightroom and the keepers I ran through Topaz because there was some noise and Topaz does a pretty good job on sharpening.

That's another thing I have to figure out, the software part of this and what I will want to work with to get this right. I'll take my time on this and only want to do it once. Silkypix is great for what it does, but I'm pretty basic when I want to fix a photo and a move on kind of guy.

First of all, the image quality of the P30 is excellent in my opinion. I cannot move this articular flower arrangement, which is next to a wall, so I had to move the camera into some odd angles and I was bumping into the minimum focusing distance a little bit but I don’t consider that a problem. You mentioned having to be too close to the subject, so I was having the opposite problem, but it is fine.

I have only read good things about the P30mm and being new to macro have a concern it might get me too close to insects for their comfort. So, I think I will feel lost until I start practising.

Of course, with flowers (in contrast to bugs), 1:1 is often not required; 2:1 or 3:1 works. The bigger problem, as with all macro lenses, is shallow depth of field. I shot some images at f/8, which is diffraction territory but in most cases, they are OK if shallow DOF is part of your creative vision. Focus stacking is the solution if you want more DOF but I have not yet mastered the in camera focus stacking on Panasonic yet. I have experimented with it but need more practice.

My plan is to try photo stacking in camera with the G95 and advance from there. From what you are saying I think you already have figured out the basics and more, but perhaps someone else who reads this might find the following YouTube video useful for photo stacking if it is new to them as it is to me. This video is a beginners guide to the G95, so skip ahead to 1:10:00 for about two minutes on in camera photo stacking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3bt0zLR4zY

As to the 60mm, it is an excellent lens but I just sold mine because I don’t need two M4/3 macros and I want to get one for my Canon system. Plus, maybe more importantly, a zoom lens with a good (but not macro level) minimum focusing distance is more useful for flower and garden photography in my experience. So I traded my 60mm for a P35-100mm f/4-5.6 (with cash left over). I had good success with this lens last season and decided to go back to it. One of the better flower and garden photographers I know has been using the Oly 45-150mm f/2.8 for a long time. She gets great results (mainly because she is a great photographer but that is the tool she uses).

I have the P35 - 100mm and it is a great lens.  Perfect for travel.  You mention an interest in possibly getting a wide lens.  I practically build my travel kit around the PL8 - 18mm.  I just find so often when I get down to 12mm I want to still go wider and often shoot at 9 - 10mm now.  Just great for parks, plazas, small harbors, and inside churches.  And I find 18mm is great on the street.

Hope this helps. I am on my phone. Maybe I can post a couple of images later from my computer.

Thank you for your reply and it would be great to see your work with the P30mm!  Also, right after I replied to you this morning I saw that B&H put the two 30mm and Oly 60mm macros on sale.  I couldn't resist ordered and went into town and picked it up!  I started another macro thread.

Cheers!

I will add the 42.5/1.2 OIS Nocticron for sheer capability

as is the PL 200/2.8 with both 1.4x and 2.0x TC

the 42.5/1.7 and Olympus 45/1.8 for good quality compact

the Olympus 12-100/4.0 IS for quality and versatility if not for actual zoomed physical size (you can't have everything)

Olympus 75/1.8 long term classic that never fades

the Panasonic 25-50/1.7 (large but bearable weight and excellent performer)

is sibling 10-25/1.7 (by reputation)

the 7-14/4.0 trades one stop for a more compact size and is a very good performer

the new 9/1.7 by fact

the Olympus 12/2.0 Limited which I needed because of it black livery

The 40-150/2.8 and 15/1.7 oft mentioned (mentioned again)

The Sigma DC 18-35/1.8 in EF mount focal reduced for ridiculously fast corrected ultra wide

The DC 8-16/4.5-5.6 in EF mount focal reduced for even more well corrected ridiculously ultra wide (be sure to crop to 3:2 with that one)

The capable Panasonic 35-100/2.8 should not go unrecognised either but the 45-175/4.0-5.6 will give even more reach in a smaller package with very sharp images

7Artisans make a trio of capable MF-only f0.95 lenses at affordable prices if any of us wish to (at last) be capable of owning lenses faster than f1.2.  But there are others feeding that same urge.

I am sure to have forgotten some of them - there are a good bunch of lenses out there and one might wonder why we might even think that we are short changed and need to look elsewhere for visual thrills.  Obviously new lenses are exciting when announced but there are a lot of great lenses that can be used on M4/3 and none of them have lost any allure since they were first sold.

My 42.5/1.2 must be pushing 9 years old along with my Olympus 12/2.0 limited but neither has lost any of their initial allure.

ahaslett wrote:

Impulses wrote:

thinkinginimages wrote:

cba_melbourne wrote:

If someone robbed me of all my 20 or so lenses, I am 100% sure the first lens tat I would buy the next day is the..... cheap little 12-32.

I do like my Panasonic 12-32. My Panasonic 14-42 II would be my alternate choice. I don't even think about them being on the camera. They're solid, general purpose, lenses.

Could it be there's other people out there that like these.....kit lenses? After all the decades of kit lens bashing...

I think most of the Pana kit lenses are generally well regarded around here and viewed as well above average for kit lenses. The 12-32 was/is one of the cheapest smallest ways to get a 12mm, I don't use mine a lot but I like it.

The 12-32 is not that robust but its performance is excellent. I view it as a must-have disposable item, easy to buy used.

Andrew

Every time we updated a Panasonic body along came a 12-32 as a passenger.  Better value than just buying a body sole.  Hardly surprising that they are affordable.

Good glass and OIS as well.  The body and their extending to use function allows them to be kept in a very small space and they do come in handy.

I suspect that some of the issues of robustness come from turning their extension in the wrong direction combined with some ample force. Never remembering myself i usually test the other direction if the lens shows any sign of resistance.

I read somewhere that once upon a time the so-cheap Canon 50/1.8 was a lens in every professional Canon dslr users bag as a form of last chance backup as even if it was never used it was cheap and compact and could at a pinch be used as an emergency body cap.

I was very glad to have a copy of this lens in Milford Sound NZ when it was so wet that the outside deck might has well have been underwater.  I had intended using my 42.5/1.2 lens but discretion and my wallet decided that the 12-32 was wiser as I could afford to wipe it out even if the camera body was more of a mental challenge.

In any case short of dropping the kit in a bucket of water it could not have been any wetter.

Both the camera and lens survived after a careful slow drying and still work flawlessly today.

Weather sealed?  What weather sealed? But I do not make a habit out of getting my gear so wet.

2ndact scene1 wrote:

I just sold a couple of lenses I wasn’t using and I am left with my “essentials”: the PL 15mm and PL 30mm macro. Joining them shortly will be the PL 35-100 f/4-5.6 which I had owned and regretfully sold. If I had to start over, those are the three I would buy.

I would like to add a wide angle lens also. So, it is interesting to see what people consider their essential wide angle.

My main uses are travel (all three lenses or maybe just the 15mm and 35-100mm), garden and flower photography (the 30mm and the 35-100mm) , group and background shots at events (15mm is perfect for that) and just general usage. The wide angle would be mainly for travel.

The Panasonic 7-14/4.0 is compact and a good performer - arguably a good alternative to the Olympus 7-14/2.8 which is significantly larger and heavier for one more stop of light (also a good performer).

The recent Panasonic 9/1.7 has had a rush of praise which I can endorse - much of which includes comments about compact size which I question, but it is light and no trouble to use.

The Olympus 12/2.0 is also a good performer and been around for a while now - it is what I would call 'compact' for its specification.

An 'out of left field' surprise package is the 7Artisans MF 4/2.8 circular fisheye which is good value and puts a neat circular image into a 1:1 crop picture.

Just watch out for feet, fingers and other body parts in the image by mistake.  Generally speaking it does not reach as far as the photographer's ears. One lens type where it is sometimes wiser to frame and focus from the lcd instead of the evf.

The Panasonic 7-14/4.0 is a premium quality lens - not cheap but if build is an issue it does perform well.

It has been around for a while but age certainly has not wearied the design.