Are you still using your 14mm f2.5?

[tkbslc]

On a tv, which are WIDELY used, the phoney photos do not look good.

Actually I was surprised how good my photos from my last trip looked on the new 55" 4K TV. I used both a 1" compact and my phone, and both look great. Kind of made me wonder what's wrong with my 27" computer monitor, as the phone pics do look noticeably worse there!

(It's probably the fact that the TV doesn't have a 50%/100% magnify button right there in the corner for me to click on every photo...)

 

[ralf-11]

I have an iPhone 6. You guys are of course welcome to degrade images as much as you want. But then... why buy an m43 or post on an m43 forum?

 

[speedy]

But then... why buy an m43 or post on an m43 forum?

As with everything in life, I find m4/3 an acceptable compromise. Size, weight, cost, ergonomics, output, etc etc. I'm very very happy with it, it's my single camera system used for everything. I'm perfectly happy in accepting that some systems are better at certain things.
Like I wrote previously, if I was printing big all the time, I would not have the slightest hesitation in jumping straight into a Fujifilm medium format system.

 

[number17]

One can check out the cell phone camera photos thread to see how the camera photos look... I don't think it's a matter how many MP, but with the given MP how sharp the image is, how well the colours render, how much noise there is etc etc.

For certain photos (close up portrait with good lighting) phone camera can do a great job, but in many other cases I find phone photos aren't print worthy.

 

[Saledolce]

The 17/2.8 lens does extend

Can't believe that!

 

[pellicle]

I have an iPhone 6.

I'm sorry you got suckered into buying a thing like that .. no wonder you don't think much of phone cameras.

I compared my AU$250 Oppo phone with my GF-1 here:
in my view ...: modern Phones as cameras

and the Oppo was a mid ranger back in 2016 ...

 

[ralf-11]

does your AU$250 Oppo phone shoot raw??

 

[pellicle]

However, since getting the 12-40mm f2.8, I have very very rarely use the 14mm ... the f2.5 prime isn't much faster than the pro zoom lens, and even with the GWC1 (which makes it ~11mm) it doesn't really offer a wider angle than the 12mm

I'd 100% agree with that. If I didn't have a compact m43 camera (say I only had a GH3 or EM1 or something SLR-alike) I'd be very tempted by the 12-40 as its now well priced enough to seriously consider.

Its just that I'm sure it's not going to keep my compact m43 compact ...

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

be the same story with an E-PL or PM series too ...

I've no doubt that the 12-40 makes slightly better images too

 

[pellicle]

does your AU$250 Oppo phone shoot raw??

yep ... I guess you didn't even read my supporting post?

 

[pellicle]

@ralf-11
another post of perhaps interest
in my view ...: as Computer Camera and Phone gradually intersect

and also (as I understand it) the iPhone 5 and 6 (but not the 6plus) share cameras, so:
in my view ...: Oppo F1 vs iPhone 5s - picture quality

if you upgrade phones you'll find that at 28mm effective focal lengths there is far less in Phone VS Cam than you'd expect. Probably only really a "big issue" in lower light with higher ISO

 

[drd1135]

I have a Fuji X70 and before that a Coolpix A. Too many nice APSC 28 mm compacts to get much use out of the 14.

 

[pellicle]

its always amuzing when someone (passive agressive) labels a post which presents facts as "sad" ... unless they're saying they're sad that their unsupportable pre-conceptions are challenged by evidence. Like I've been saying Sad should go and people should have the capacity for actual engagement if they disagree

 

[ralf-11]

Outbreak of Dunning Kruger Disease spreads to all 50 states

 

[twigboy]

That's just another of those things you gotta learn to let go.

 

[barry]

The bickering needs to stop.

I'm sorry you got suckered into buying a thing like that ..

Outbreak of Dunning Kruger Disease spreads to all 50 states

 

[Saledolce]

Panasonic 12-32mm f3.5 vs 14mm f2.5 @ 14mm (quick comparison of IQ)

There is evidence that adding the 14mm wouldn't make a big difference for me, I think I'll stick with 12-32 and eventually P20mm. The main reason to add a p14 would be to test myself with the 28mm FL, and the size of course.

 

[Rainman]

I just picked up a P14 (and PL45), and they arrived today. I never planned on getting either. I was more interested in the PL15 as I have a truly excellent copy of the 12-32 and P20, and love the rendering of the PL15 from the samples I've seen. Well... I've been playing around with the 14 and I'm blown away. I'm extremely surprised by it. I've only ever seen generally meh reviews and people suggesting that others look at something else, but SOOC they look stunning. I showed my wife just a snapshot of the kids setting up the trampoline on the lcd and she said, "wow! How did you make it look like that?". P14 looks like a keeper. It's a v1 too.

 

[MDRV6]

I just picked up a P14 (and PL45), and they arrived today. I never planned on getting either. I was more interested in the PL15 as I have a truly excellent copy of the 12-32 and P20, and love the rendering of the PL15 from the samples I've seen. Well... I've been playing around with the 14 and I'm blown away. I'm extremely surprised by it. I've only ever seen generally meh reviews and people suggesting that others look at something else, but SOOC they look stunning. I showed my wife just a snapshot of the kids setting up the trampoline on the lcd and she said, "wow! How did you make it look like that?". P14 looks like a keeper. It's a v1 too.

I started another thread about this, but do you know if your 14mm aperture blade action (especially at f22) is sluggish compared to your other lenses?

 

[Rainman]

I started another thread about this, but do you know if your 14mm aperture blade action (especially at f22) is sluggish compared to your other lenses?

I was shooting wide open, but I could take a look.

 

[PakkyT]

I've been playing around with the 14 and I'm blown away. I'm extremely surprised by it. I've only ever seen generally meh reviews and people suggesting that others look at something else, but SOOC they look stunning.

I think this lens gets a bit dismissed NOT because of its image quality, but instead because it is an f2.5 lens. Everyone generally wants a prime lens to also be much faster so you will often be suggested f1.7 and f1.8 options. Of course you generally also pay a bit more for those faster options and they are usually not anywhere as pancaked as the 14/2.8.

But for a small lens shot in good lighting, it is a very nice lens. I had it once on my E-M1 when I first got it and my son asked me if it was a "snub nosed" version.