20mm F1.7 II just a cosmetic upgrade?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by tkbslc, Feb 9, 2015.

  1. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Is the 20mm f1.7 II just a cosmetic upgrade? I can't see any spec differences at all and the literature for the lens just talks about a "Sleek new profile", etc.
     
  2. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I think the MKII has faster AF, but my comparison is with the GF1 and GX1 bodies with the original, and GX7 with the MKII, so maybe that accounts for some or all of the difference.
     
  3. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Had both, I like the ver. II due to the metal outer barrel. I think it's a tad sturdier. Saying that, optically I don't see much difference!
     
  4. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    that would seem to be it ... there are no claims by the maker that it does anything more than "enhanced joy of ownership" due to its new black case. Any other differences observed are probably product variation (and cheaper manufacture to bring production costs down and profits up on higher retail). Soon after it was released I observed the following

    20mmf1.7lensPrices.

    Mk 1 info on Panasonic site:
    old20mmLens.

    Mk2 info on Panasonic site:
    new20mmLens.


    DXO reviewd it as being the same but focus was a little slower

    http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Pana...onic-improved-its-classic-standard-prime#5214

    its all about how it feels in your hand
     
  5. ahinesdesign

    ahinesdesign Mu-43 Veteran

    436
    Dec 6, 2011
    NC, USA
    Aaron
    I found the Mk II to have nearly identical focus speed and optical performance to the Mk I. The differences were minor enough to just be sample variation (not to mention I didn't own a Mk I and Mk II concurrently). The Mk II is supposed to have updated lens coatings, but I couldn't tell that image quality was any different.
     
  6. fransglans

    fransglans Mu-43 Top Veteran

    993
    Jun 12, 2012
    Sweden
    gus
  7. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    There is only one documented thing I have seen between the I and II (besides color and build). On version 1, the optical group recesses slightly into the housing, so if there is a step up ring or hood mounted flush, the motor can have issues long term, as it cant fully recess. The version II barrel sits flush when turned off. I got around the issue by mounting a UV filter that doesn't increase the diameter, so anything I mistakenly left mounted when I turned off the camera wouldn't cause issues. Never used a hood with it, just a polarizer.

    Everything else is just hearsay. AF speed is the same, within sample variation, for both models.
     
  8. G3user

    G3user Mu-43 Regular

    66
    Nov 26, 2013
    UK
    The new version is 13% lighter (87g compared to 100g).

    Also, I read somewhere that the second version has a marginally more recessed lens/higher surround so that flare is slightly reduced.