1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Panasonic 15/1.7 reviewed at Lenstip

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by dhazeghi, Aug 24, 2014.

  1. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Lenstip's review of the 15/1.7 covers all the usual ground. Seems to be another good, if not great lens.
  2. blindinglight

    blindinglight Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 24, 2014
    Comparing the lens to the Pana 20mm, the edges of the 15mm are better although center sharpness is not as good. But damn, the AF seems to be one speedy gonzalez. If I don't already own the 12-40mm (which beats this Summilux at the same focal length and aperture), I'd put this in my wish list.
  3. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    That review has already been discussed some time ago IIRC (or was it another forum), including the tendency for Lenstip to test well but summarise poorly. Quote their summaries (and believe them) at your peril.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. broody

    broody Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 8, 2013
    It seems to outperform all other wide AF primes... Lenstip is really understating the value of having a lens that as sharp at the edges as at the center.

    IMO it only fails to be groundbreaking because of how ridiculously sharp the 12-40mm and 17.5mm Voigtlander look in comparison!
    • Like Like x 1
  5. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 30, 2013
    I think it was the polish language version that had been out, I hadn't seen the english version yet, though I could be mistaken.
  6. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    My mistake, it was another forum. But here are a couple of more interesting comments from that other thread, IMO:
    That is a really confusing and rambling conclusion, even in English.

    • [*=1]"It is better in center and edge resolution to nearly everything that doesn't cost three times as much or is gigantic in size and weight, but it isn't "special".
      [*=1]"Here's a long list of non-existent lenses we'd rather they had made.
      [*=1]"Oh, and we will complain about the uncorrected distortion even though we did resolution tests with the corrected files and it had excellent edge resolution with corrections applied."
    LensTip has historically been a good site to look at their data but ignore everything they write. The data and comments are so bizarrely mismatched most of the time it is almost jarring! This review just another example of that I think.

    Lenstip's highest MTF score for the Sigma 35mm/1.4 lens is 47 lp/mm on a Canon 1DsIII which is a 21MP camera. The highest MTF 50 score for the Panasonic 15mm/1.7 lens is 70 lp/mm on a 12 MP camera, EP1. If you convert these to LP/PH and account for the fact that the 35mm lens was tested on a 21MP body there is no difference in the MTF scores between the two.

    Lenstip's comments regarding how the good the Sigma lens is is relative to the 35mm lenses made by Zeiss, Canon and Nikon. Its comments about the 15mm/1.7 or the 17mm/1.8 lens is relative to the m43 pancake lenses, particularly the 20mm/1.7 lens.

    Instead of just reading Lenstip's comments you should also pay attention to the actual test results and try to normalize them across formats.

    A lens maker must wonder what do they have to do, if it is not meeting expectations to deliver the best optics in its group, fast, compact, premium build, and an extremely reasonable price.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA

    Sorry, not buying that argument. What the comment is essentially saying is that if the 15/1.7 scaled up perfectly in MTFs from 12MP to 21MP it would be comparable. But even the very best lenses don't see that kind of scaling.
  8. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    In general I've found LensTips' reviews to be quite poor, at least as far as their subjective evaluations go. They're very disapproving of digital corrections as well.
  9. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team Subscribing Member

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I agree that Lenstip reviews need a lot of reading between the lines to reach a balanced conclusion. Their review if the 17/1.8 almost buried that lens, but in truth it's not really much worse optically than the 15/1.7 (look at the charts). Maybe the Polish/English thing is part of the problem, or maybe it's because they are physicists rather than photographers (look at the sample images!). Either way, I feel their reviews are just one place to go looking for lens review data and that I should take their comments with a large pinch of Sól.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.