I bought a Micro4/3 Pancake yesterday and tried it briefly this morning on my Olympus EP-1. I don't think I will be taking it off any time soon.
I went to a local olde worlde high street taking photos of pubs and cottages. The results look superb across all apertures.
Continuous focus mode also worked properly although I am sure I read in a Panasonic spec. sheet that it should not.
Ian
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
Second impression (still without pictures) is that continuous AF only gives the illusion of working. The E-P1 shifts focus back and forth as with the Olympus lenses but doesn't lock when you fully depress the shutter. So photos taken with CAF aren't actually sharp.
All my Hign Street shots were taken with SAF and as Panasonic rightly say CAF should be avoided.
Thought I'd better correct myself.
Ian
The other weird thing is that on the GF1 at least, autorotation fails to work with this lens. I would have thought the body would know which way was 'up', rather than requiring input from the lens!
It's dead sharp, though!
William
Apparently it is the Panasonic image stabilisation module (OIS) that detects camera orientation. The Pancake has no OIS so reports no orientation. The E-P1 senses orientation "in body" so can still tag images accordingly.
That makes two reasons to put the 20mm lens on an Olympus body rather than a Panasonic one.
Well image orientation is hardly a deal breaker, and what was the second reason, I think I must have missed it?That makes two reasons to put the 20mm lens on an Olympus body rather than a Panasonic one.
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
Mega OIS in a 20mm lens would really only be of benefit to caffeine addicts surely? Plus, I actually can't stand auto image rotation, I find it totally unecessary.
I also only just realised that the picture in AP's review of the GF1 was life size, and placing my wee Rollei on top revealled there isn't much size difference at all - so it really is a compact device.
and I checked it against a medium format camera (Super Ikonta 531) that was quite a bit smaller if you include the pancake lens on the Pany.I also only just realised that the picture in AP's review of the GF1 was life size, and placing my wee Rollei on top revealled there isn't much size difference at all - so it really is a compact device.
Add the viewfinder and the Pany is way larger.
This lens is not really a pancake. The lens cell is clearly longer than it is wide. The whole assembly looks like a pancake. Why is it that old lenses leave one wondering how the hell the manufacturer squeezed a diaphragm mechanism into a lens barrel only a couple of millimetres wider than the front element of the lens while these mft manufacturers need so much space for the none optical parts of the assembly?
In spite of the above it is still a very fine lens. Zou I assure you that stabilisation is worth while on a 20mm lens, not only to caffeine addicts but even users of beta blockers! It is good for low light flash-less photography.
Well spotted.This lens is not really a pancake.
I really don't know what some people want,but it seems that no matter what producers come up with there will still be an Oliver Twist response.
So if you really do need IS then you bought the wrong camera, should have got the Olympus. But you must have had your reasons to choose the GF1, perhaps you would like to share them so others trying to make the choice might have a little more info.
.
Brian BSRIPN
Beats me why anyone needs IS at all! Bring back national service I say...........then people would learn how to squeeze the trigger on a rifle and then apply it to the shutter button on a camera!
Big(Controversial!
)Will
I'm sailing like a driftwood on a windy bay.
Beats me why anyone needs IS at all! Bring back national service I say...........then people would learn how to squeeze the trigger on a rifle and then apply it to the shutter button on a camera!
Big(Controversial!
...national service, eh? What with all this chat about spending cuts, it'll be rations next!
Seriously though, I've thought for some time that image stabilisation is over-rated. Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of its' usefulness - particularly at the telephoto end of things.
However, with the 20mm I can usually hand-hold at 1/30 (as long as I've not overdosed on the morning coffee!). Subject movement comes into play at that speed though, and I often find myself bumping up to a faster shutter speed, at which point OIS is pointless.
I get most enjoyment out of my GH1 kit when either shooting the 20mm f/1.7 or one of my Canon FD adapted lenses (50mm f/1.8 and 70-210 f/4), yet despite the lack of stabilisation, I can still manage to get sharp, in focus shots - most of the time
If the shutter speed needs to be slow, there's always one of those fangled new thingumyjigs, what are they called again...? Oh yes, a tripod
We are talking about the Panasonic lens on the Panasonic thread. I thought however that I had mentioned that I was using it on an E-P2 from the opposition.Well spotted.This lens is not really a pancake.
I really don't know what some people want,but it seems that no matter what producers come up with there will still be an Oliver Twist response.
So if you really do need IS then you bought the wrong camera, should have got the Olympus. But you must have had your reasons to choose the GF1, perhaps you would like to share them so others trying to make the choice might have a little more info.
.
I have criticised the lens on the grounds of being too big. I have criticised the camera for not having the sensor closer to the rear screen. Both units work very well together but the combination could have been designed to be thinner. The problem of C-AF is irrelevant to me; I use Nikon kit for that sort of thing. The stabilisation with Oly body and Pany lens is effective; I have no criticism there at all.
Just because I criticise something does not imply that I am dissatisfied. I am very satisfied indeed with the progress made on this very immature format. I am certain that it can become even better. My criticism is not scathing or destructive.
No you haven't. Your only post in this thread read,We are talking about the Panasonic lens on the Panasonic thread. I thought however that I had mentioned that I was using it on an E-P2 from the opposition.
This lens is not really a pancake. The lens cell is clearly longer than it is wide. The whole assembly looks like a pancake. Why is it that old lenses leave one wondering how the hell the manufacturer squeezed a diaphragm mechanism into a lens barrel only a couple of millimetres wider than the front element of the lens while these mft manufacturers need so much space for the none optical parts of the assembly?
In spite of the above it is still a very fine lens. Zou I assure you that stabilisation is worth while on a 20mm lens, not only to caffeine addicts but even users of beta blockers! It is good for low light flash-less photography.
Brian BSRIPN
Sorry Brian, my mistake. I have stated that in other threads that you may not have read.
Fair enough Learning ( Sorry, don't know your name)
Re the size of the M4/3 lenses. Surely the diameter of the hole is dictated by the fact that the camera is designed to accomodate other producers lenses? A hole appropriate to the diameter of the optical unit of a M4/3 lens is going to be a bit of a tight fit for a ruddy great Nikon zoom.
Question. Does the Olly software do the clever bits re corrections with Pan lenses?
Brian BSRIPN
IS will have no effect on bad shutter control. Any wild stab at the shutter button will results in a camera movement too rapid for the IS system to compensate for. I find thet the IS on my 17-85 does take a discernible amount of time to steady the image...Beats me why anyone needs IS at all! Bring back national service I say...........then people would learn how to squeeze the trigger on a rifle and then apply it to the shutter button on a camera!
Big(Controversial!
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
The New El Sid Gallery or
The El Sid Gallery 2
It's such a nice day to be Eatin' Trifles..........
The name's John.
Sorry, don't know your name
Question. Does the Olly software do the clever bits re corrections with Pan lenses?
The correction? Its difficult to know. My normal procedure (on both my systems) is to take raws through Camera Raw to generate PSDs. However I have had a look at the large fine jpegs and compared them to my usual raws and there is no difference in things like colour fringing or vignetting. The only difference is that one can extract a bit more highlight or shadow detail from the raws. Either the camera is correcting raw as well as jpegs or this lens doesn't need it. Perhaps we need someone to make a comparison with an entry level zoom?
John
I have read that the 20mm certainly does need software to get the performance. Maybe the Olympus has the same corrections built in and that they both apply those in raw as well as Jpeg.Perhaps we need someone to make a comparison with an entry level zoom?
Brian BSRIPN
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
