Panasonic Pancake Pandemonium - 14mm vs 20mm vs 12-32mm

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,896
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Personally I like some vignetting and softness in the extreme corners, it's "filmic" (yeah, I know, that's not accurate but it suggests the cheapish kit primes that would come with many cameras in the film era), but to some it's anathema.
I think the idea of wanting perfect sharpness and non-vignetting throughout is that if you want soft edges, dark surroundings, etc, you can do that in post-processing; removing them when they are already there (because of the lens) is harder. But I can see the appeal of getting a particular "look" straight out-of-camera.
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
5,029
Location
Oregon USA
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
Personally I am partial to those effects which "weaken" the fidelity of the image, but I always feel guilty about using them, it seems amateurish somewhere in my psyche (even though chasing pixel perfection is often more amateurish in reality!), but when the gear I am using naturally imparts something of that look, I consider it a win, as long as it's the right occasion for the look.
 

threeOh

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
206
It is interesting to see there are now 3 of us who raised our hand to say "Hey, that O17/2.8 is in fact quite good" while the general consensus is that it is a poor lens. Could it be because there would be a lot of variability? Some are lucky to have better copies maybe.
There's different groups with different criteria. Some value sharpness and ignore, or don’t see, any other parameters. Sharpness is fairly simple as charts are frequently published and statistics exist.

Others favor a render they simply happen to like. As that can’t easily be statistically measured, we don’t hear much from those folks. But, I suspect, there are a lot of us.
 

bmhome1

just an old pro
Joined
Mar 4, 2015
Messages
227
Location
Rochester, NY
Real Name
Bruce
I use a uv filter, then the 46-37 step down ring. No vignetting.

I use a 46>37 step down with 37>46 step up and then another 46>37 step down combined for really effective lens shade and compact without any vignetting. Works with uv filter too. Same three ring combination works for 14mm f/2.5
 
Last edited:

wimg

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2016
Messages
681
Location
Netherlands
So when using the P20, do owners mount a UV filter? And what about a lens hood, slotted, no slots, step-up ring? What do you use?
Considering my experiences with lenses which were not protected by filters, I always use a UV or protection filter.

A friend of mine is a camera retailer, mom & pop brick store, and he recommends filters too, considering the returns he has received over the years of kncked cameras and lenses with and without filters over a career lasting well over 30 years. And he is a guy who wll never oversell, but really try to provide you with what you need, and only if you insist with what you want.

His experience is that filters, due to the metal ring make, the lens fronts stronger, and the glass saves most lenses from most impacts. He can normally remove a broken filter himself, no problem, and he does so for free. A knocked lens generally has to be sent back to the OEM for repairs, not so a camera lens with filter.

Because of accidents I had, and the protection a filter provided, I have ever since an accident with a lens in the Swiss Alps always equipped all of my lenses with uv or protective filters. With digital I found I had to up the level of filters, however, as I found out with a low sun in a pretty snow landscape. The internal reflections litterally killed the shot, and that was because of reflections from the sensor to the back of the filter, and reverbs of that. Since that time I only use the best, multi-coated, preferably dirt/grease resistant filters, and have never looked back :). The only lenses in my collection without filters are the ones that do not have filter threads, essentially UWA lenses with a large concave front lens, like the Oly 7-14 F/2.8 Pro, although that fortunately still has a lens hood that provides protection. And with that, I am just extremely careful not to knock it against anything :).

Lens hoods I only use when absolutely necessary. I don't like the extra bit protruding further. Most modern lenses handle bright lights at the edge of the image or in the image very well anyway, these days. Coatings have come a very, very long way since the 1950s and 1960s .... Reviews where a bright light close by is shown against a rather dark background are not really very representative, IMO :).

Kind regards, Wim
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
5,029
Location
Oregon USA
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
The 20mm is a pretty cheap lens, so I do not use a filter. I used a screw-on lens hood for a while but found that, real or imagined, it made AF slower - since the whole focus element moves, adding extra bulk to the front filter ring means the focus motor has to push that along as well!
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
123
It is interesting to see there are now 3 of us who raised our hand to say "Hey, that O17/2.8 is in fact quite good" while the general consensus is that it is a poor lens. Could it be because there would be a lot of variability? Some are lucky to have better copies maybe.

You can raise your hand and say it's good because "good" is subjective. It's not a bad lens, I had that lens and I loved it, but stopped using it and sold it after a while.
Why? I loved that lens and it's so small! And I like the 35mm field of view.
The truth is that it is optically not that good. And that is okay.
It's small, it's light, it's cheap, it's fun - these things can make it a good lens for anybody that likes photography.

If build quality, weather resistance, corner-to-corner sharpness, lack of CA, flare and ghosting resistance, are important to a photographer, they need to be prepared to spend more than the 100 bucks for the 2.8 lens and get a bigger, more expensive lens, that would better built, faster focusing, and optically superior. Those lenses are better for a lot of use cases, but not the best when it comes to traveling light and/or just having fun.
 

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
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom