Lenses

[jonpais]

5 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

How about this Boys and Girls. Top 35 m4/3 lenses. Great help I think, sort of a all in one article. Saves looking all over heck. And with a Amazon link to help figure out the cost.

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/top-35-best-lenses-for-micro-four-thirds-cameras-2017-30039

Some of their descriptions kill me!

re: the Leica Nocticron - It may cost a fair few pennies, but it will be money well spent, especially as the price isn't obnoxious in any way. ($1,397.00 USD) ?

re: the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO -  Image quality is excellent, the lens handles well and it's not badly priced either. ($1,499.00 USD) ?

 

 

[webrunner5]

36 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Some of their descriptions kill me!

re: the Leica Nocticron - It may cost a fair few pennies, but it will be money well spent, especially as the price isn't obnoxious in any way. ($1,397.00 USD) ?

re: the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO -  Image quality is excellent, the lens handles well and it's not badly priced either. ($1,499.00 USD) ?

 

 

Yes, I noticed that. Well maybe they they are, well they Are making a heck of a lot more money than we are to say those statements...

But my daughter lives in California, and heck if you don't make 75 to 100 grand a year, or more, you are considered nearly below the Poverty level there LoL. So they could Afford those lenses.

Where I live in Ohio a Ford Focus, or a Honda Civic is common, when I go to California a BMW, or a Audi is the common car there. So go figure.

Good thing Leica doesn't make video cameras. Imagine what a 5x Cine zoom lens would cost from them on a s35 PL mount! Make a Cooke lens look like a bargain.

[jonpais]

12 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yes, I noticed that. Well maybe they they are, well they Are making a heck of a lot more money than we are to say those statements...

But my daughter lives in California, and heck if you don't make 75 to 100 grand a year, or more, you are considered nearly below the Poverty level there LoL. So they could Afford those lenses.

Where I live in Ohio a Ford Focus, or a Honda Civic is common, when I go to California a BMW, or a Audi is the common car there. So go figure.

And really, the difference between some of these premium lenses and their less expensive counterparts is like comparing an Audi to a Honda Civic. Nevertheless, I've seen vloggers who've just posted their first clips with lenses as good as the Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 or the DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4 that look no better than those shot with a kit zoom, so some viewers may be fooled into believing it's just a matter of aperture fastness and nothing else. Which may be one reason why I've posted so many videos shot with the Leicas. Then there's build quality - it wasn't until I'd actually held a Voigtlander Nokton in my own hands that I realized what a pleasure it is to handle glass made the old world way. And for many, I imagine the Leica 12-60mm may be the first MFT lens they own that doesn't feel cheap. Yet, I believe it was F Stoppers, when unboxing their GH5s and assorted lenses, that they remarked how plastic-y the G Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 felt, as if it were made of tin - the first time in the four years since purchasing mine that a reviewer corraborated my own impressions. Panasonic somehow manages the magic trick of making camera bodies and lenses that don't necessarily inspire confidence in the same way as say, Fuji, but somehow their products just perform great and seldom fail. 

[webrunner5]

38 minutes ago, jonpais said:

And really, the difference between some of these premium lenses and their less expensive counterparts is like comparing an Audi to a Honda Civic. Nevertheless, I've seen vloggers who've just posted their first clips with lenses as good as the Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 or the DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4 that look no better than those shot with a kit zoom, so some viewers may be fooled into believing it's just a matter of aperture fastness and nothing else. Which may be one reason why I've posted so many videos shot with the Leicas. Then there's build quality - it wasn't until I'd actually held a Voigtlander Nokton in my own hands that I realized what a pleasure it is to handle glass made the old world way. And for many, I imagine the Leica 12-60mm may be the first MFT lens they own that doesn't feel cheap. Yet, I believe it was F Stoppers, when unboxing their GH5s and assorted lenses, that they remarked how plastic-y the G Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 felt, as if it were made of tin - the first time in the four years since purchasing mine that a reviewer corraborated my own impressions. Panasonic somehow manages the magic trick of making camera bodies and lenses that don't necessarily inspire confidence in the same way as say, Fuji, but somehow their products just perform great and seldom fail. 

I would argue that Panasonic makes some of the nicest Kit Lenses of any company, probably not build wise, but they are pretty cheap to buy. But a lot probably has to do with all the electronic mumbo jumbo they do to correct deficiencies in the lenses they manufacture also helps!

[Matt Kieley]

I'm thinking of going electric like Dylan and buying native E-Mount lenses for my a6300. Since I've been working for a commercial production house, I figure stabilization and AF could be very useful in commercial work, and my own narrative work, since I don't have the benefit of an AC, like ever. I'm thinking of the Sigma 19mm 2.8 DN and Sony 50mm 1.8. I like the look I've seen from these lenses. Anyone have any thoughts/advice? I'm used to using manual lenses, so I don't have any experience with this. I won't be shooting anything fast moving, just glidecam and slider shots.

[KnowsNothing]

I just ordered the 25mm pana-leica f1.4, not sure if I'm having second thoughts or not but it was tough deciding between it and the sigma 30mm f1.4. I figure 25mm is the better more versatile focal length, but now that I'm looking at videos on youtube, the sigma seems to do better in lowlight/night shooting, with it seeming a tad noiser on the PL. Tough making decisions sometimes. I do prefer the rendering of the leica, and both seem to have excellent sharpness.

[Fritz Pierre]

2 hours ago, KnowsNothing said:

I just ordered the 25mm pana-leica f1.4, not sure if I'm having second thoughts or not but it was tough deciding between it and the sigma 30mm f1.4. I figure 25mm is the better more versatile focal length, but now that I'm looking at videos on youtube, the sigma seems to do better in lowlight/night shooting, with it seeming a tad noiser on the PL. Tough making decisions sometimes. I do prefer the rendering of the leica, and both seem to have excellent sharpness.

What camera are you shooting on?...few lenses by any lens maker renders the way Leica does...I have the Sigma 18-35...a lovely lens but not in the same league...the Leica is for want of a better word "painterly"...and at 1.4 in a photograph looks almost 3D...the DOF is very shallow....I would not call it the best AF lens but focusing manually with it is easy when shooting video....at f1.4 in 4K it's easy to miss focus on a lens of this quality though...sharp is less than 6" deep....wide open is edge to edge sharp...it feels like a toy lens till you look at the image!

[KnowsNothing]

2 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

What camera are you shooting on?...few lenses by any lens maker renders the way Leica does...I have the Sigma 18-35...a lovely lens but not in the same league...the Leica is for want of a better word "painterly"...and at 1.4 in a photograph looks almost 3D...the DOF is very shallow....I would not call it the best AF lens but focusing manually with it is easy when shooting video....at f1.4 in 4K it's easy to miss focus on a lens of this quality though...sharp is less than 6" deep....wide open is edge to edge sharp...it feels like a toy lens till you look at the image!

G85. Yeah the leica look is what drew me to it; a lot of online folk seem to want to sway you toward the lumix f1.7, but to me it's just not the same. For images it really does look superb, but for video I'm not sure yet, the sigma 30mm contemporary has that incredible sharpness throughout the frame.

[Fritz Pierre]

3 hours ago, KnowsNothing said:

G85. Yeah the leica look is what drew me to it; a lot of online folk seem to want to sway you toward the lumix f1.7, but to me it's just not the same. For images it really does look superb, but for video I'm not sure yet, the sigma 30mm contemporary has that incredible sharpness throughout the frame.

There be no problem with the video you produce with the Leica...the weirdness lies in getting used to manual fly-by-wire focus...when you get the lense...and it's so small and light, you'll laugh when you see the first images...Jon on this forum vlogs with another Panny/Leica prime...I forget the exact focal length and F stop and also an Olympus 75mm fast prime....these M4/3 higher end primes both with Panny/Leica and Olympus are beautiful lenses...and Jon also shoots on a G85...check his Vlog out too...

[webrunner5]

20 hours ago, Matt Kieley said:

I'm thinking of going electric like Dylan and buying native E-Mount lenses for my a6300. Since I've been working for a commercial production house, I figure stabilization and AF could be very useful in commercial work, and my own narrative work, since I don't have the benefit of an AC, like ever. I'm thinking of the Sigma 19mm 2.8 DN and Sony 50mm 1.8. I like the look I've seen from these lenses. Anyone have any thoughts/advice? I'm used to using manual lenses, so I don't have any experience with this. I won't be shooting anything fast moving, just glidecam and slider shots.

You might be giving your age away with that Dylan statement!

[Fritz Pierre]

19 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

You might be giving your age away with that Dylan statement!

Hey...I have a 20 year old daughter and she loves the Beatles more than I ever did??...you never can tell with Millenials!

[Mat Mayer]

On 2017-5-6 at 3:09 AM, webrunner5 said:

How about this Boys and Girls. Top 35 m4/3 lenses. Great help I think, sort of a all in one article. Saves looking all over heck. And with a Amazon link to help figure out the cost.

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/top-35-best-lenses-for-micro-four-thirds-cameras-2017-30039

I like how the £105 35-100 Panasonic kit lens is 8th. Above many amazing lenses I haven't had the chance to try yet. I love the 35-100 and would like to see it compared to the O75, S60 and O60 (someone is selling one of these around the corner for about £240 and it doubles as a macro lens).  Will try and dig up some comparison photos. I dont use these focal lengths as much but would if they are better optically than my 35-100, they will certainly have better bokeh.

Edit: just realised the O75 is 18th which is ridiculous as everyone seems to rate it as one of the best few M43 lenses. Only complaint is many people dont use it enough.

Edit 2: according to the Imaging Resource samples the O75 is literally off their resolution chart and the corner sharpness is ridiculously good. The S60 is very good as expected, with it being known as one of the best M43 bargains. The O60 looks surprisingly average. The 35-100 is decent except for 50mm, something went wrong as it isnt that bad and they said their copy was decentered. 

[jonpais]

18 minutes ago, Mat Mayer said:

I like how the £105 35-100 Panasonic kit lens is 8th. Above many amazing lenses I haven't had the chance to try yet. I love the 35-100 and would like to see it compared to the O75, S60 and O60 (someone is selling one of these around the corner for about £240 and it doubles as a macro lens).  Will try and dig up some comparison photos. I dont use these focal lengths as much but would if they are better optically than my 35-100, they will certainly have better bokeh.

Edit: just realised the O75 is 18th which is ridiculous as everyone seems to rate it as one of the best few M43 lenses. Only complaint is many people dont use it enough.

Their ratings are completely meaningless. You can't begin to compare a Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 (#14) to the Leica 12mm f/1.4 (#19)! And no way is the Nocticron at #1, while the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is at #18. Mixing up pancakes, kit lenses, professional telephotos, premium primes, variable aperture universal zooms and macro lenses and assigning a number is just absurd. 

[webrunner5]

Well the article states at the top that the ratings are based on "So to help you pick the best lens for you, we've listed the top 35 scoring lenses we've reviewed here."

Not sure how else they could have rated them and made everyone happy. Looks like the site based it on Their review of each lens. It is a pretty popular, legit website.

But i will admit it would not be in that order if I was doing it, but I probably have not owned over 7 or 8 of them so I would be biased as hell.

And the Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 is a turd next to the Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 for sharpness.

[Fredrik Lyhne]

22 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Their ratings are completely meaningless. You can't begin to compare a Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 (#14) to the Leica 12mm f/1.4 (#19)! And no way is the Nocticron at #1, while the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is at #18. Mixing up pancakes, kit lenses, professional telephotos, premium primes, variable aperture universal zooms and macro lenses and assigning a number is just absurd. 

It's a really strange list and if I were a newbie I'd be more confused than anything. Lot's of people rate the Nocticron as number 1, but other than it's a very random list. I think it's based on their ratings and when they give the Nocti 5/5 on value vs 4/5 on the much cheaper Oly 75mm which most people rate as almost equal in image quality with a less useful focal length. To me that equals the same value, certainly not 20% less value than Nocti.

[webrunner5]

Well I have some eyeopening moments with the list myself, but I put it up there mainly for the list of that many lens in one place, and ease to check the price of them. Like I said I never have owned that many m4/3 lenses to start with. I have owned more Olympus 4/3 lenses than anything over the years related to Oly, Panny. I guess Nikon, then Canon FF lenses most I have had. But most of them are OLD lenses like me LoL. I only have 2 m4/3 lenses for my Panasonic AF00, and will buy no more of them for it. Will be Canon EF, or other brand MF used on it.

[jonpais]

19 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well the article states at the top that the ratings are based on "So to help you pick the best lens for you, we've listed the top 35 scoring lenses we've reviewed here."

Not sure how else they could have rated them and made everyone happy. Looks like the site based it on Their review of each lens. It is a pretty popular, legit website.

But i will admit it would not be in that order if I was doing it, but I probably have not owned over 7 or 8 of them so I would be biased as hell.

And the Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 is a turd next to the Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 for sharpness.

They might have organized the list into categories: kit lenses, wide zooms, tele zooms, wide, normal and tele primes and so forth. 

[webrunner5]

Just now, jonpais said:

They might have organized the list into categories: kit lenses, wide zooms, tele zooms, wide, normal and tele primes and so forth. 

Yeah but that would not lend to anything about the popularity of them or maybe even their rating. What you are suggesting is what every other web site has. Just a big list, with no real meaning, of a lot of lenses.

[jonpais]

One of these days, I'm going to have to learn to read an MTF chart. ?

[webrunner5]

Hell I don't know how they picked the order of the list. My 14-45mm kit lens is at 34 LoL. Now it is the best kit lens ever made for a m4/3. But I would not have it at the top of the list with the Noct!

14 minutes ago, jonpais said:

One of these days, I'm going to have to learn to read an MTF chart. ?

Well it is pretty much the straighter the 2 lines and the higher those two lines are, is the better the lens is in one sentence LoL.

If the lines look like the first hill going up, and the first hill going down on a Roller Coaster, it is a total piece of shit lol.