Comparing 12-40 with primes at 2.8?

Viktor

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
39
Location
Denmark
I guess when using Oly 12mm and Panaleica 25mm at 2.8, they will give you higher quality images than the 12-40 zoom wide open at those lengths. But do you recon its the same, when comparing the zoom with Oly 17mm at 2.8?
 

dhazeghi

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
4,381
Location
San Jose, CA
Real Name
Dara
I guess when using Oly 12mm and Panaleica 25mm at 2.8, they will give you higher quality images than the 12-40 zoom wide open at those lengths. But do you recon its the same, when comparing the zoom with Oly 17mm at 2.8?
Better in what respect?

I expect the 12-40/2.8 to handily beat the 17/2.8 for sharpness, and likely to beat the 12/2 as well. The 25/1.4 I expect to be sharper in the center, but comparable in the corners. But this is just speculation, based on the MTF graphs of the 12-40 and the fact that the 17/2.8 is rather weak all around, the 12/2 is good but not great, and the 25/1.4 is very sharp in the center but never quite catches up in the corners.
 

b_rubenstein

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
1,446
Location
Melbourne, FL
based on the MTF graphs of the 12-40
The MTF graphs that all of the camera companies publish are calculated and not a measurement of an actual lens. How close the graphs match actual lens performance depends on how well the physical lens matches the design and how good the mathematical lens model used for the calculation is.
 

kevinparis

Cantankerous Scotsman
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
3,912
Location
Gent, Belgium
Better in what respect?

I expect the 12-40/2.8 to handily beat the 17/2.8 for sharpness, and likely to beat the 12/2 as well. The 25/1.4 I expect to be sharper in the center, but comparable in the corners. But this is just speculation, based on the MTF graphs of the 12-40 and the fact that the 17/2.8 is rather weak all around, the 12/2 is good but not great, and the 25/1.4 is very sharp in the center but never quite catches up in the corners.
suspect he might be meaning the newer 17/1.8.... not the older 17/2.8.

k
 

dav1dz

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
926
Location
Canada
In my experience, most pre-production model reviews either have their quarks fixed by the mass production stage, or remains the same. It never gets worse.
 

tanngrisnir3

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
601
Better in what respect?

I expect the 12-40/2.8 to handily beat the 17/2.8 for sharpness, and likely to beat the 12/2 as well. The 25/1.4 I expect to be sharper in the center, but comparable in the corners. But this is just speculation, based on the MTF graphs of the 12-40 and the fact that the 17/2.8 is rather weak all around, the 12/2 is good but not great, and the 25/1.4 is very sharp in the center but never quite catches up in the corners.
The 25 in the corners? Not to my experience. Once you hit about f4, it's a razor across the frame. Same with the 12mm.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1439/cat/68
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom