Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

V

Vivek

Guest
Sharpness, Bokeh, etc are easily trumped by a tinier 25/1.9 Schneider Xenoplan
than this. Heck, even the slower Zuiko 25/2.8 (Olympus pen F) is not bad.

After switching from a V1.2 cam to a V1.4 cam, the very noticeable barrel distortion is minimal and the focus is a teeny weeny bit faster.

I am one of those who would appreciate small, compact, fast primes- but if this is the sort of prime lenses that Pana plans to bring out, they aren't for me.

My suggestion to those who have manual focus primes- hold on to them!
 
J

Jonas

Active member
Vivek said:
Sharpness, Bokeh, etc are easily trumped by a tinier 25/1.9 Schneider Xenoplan
than this. Heck, even the slower Zuiko 25/2.8 (Olympus pen F) is not bad.

After switching from a V1.2 cam to a V1.4 cam, the very noticeable barrel distortion is minimal and the focus is a teeny weeny bit faster.

I am one of those who would appreciate small, compact, fast primes- but if this is the sort of prime lenses that Pana plans to bring out, they aren't for me.

My suggestion to those who have manual focus primes- hold on to them!
Click to expand...
I am not sure sharpness and bokeh are easily trumped by the Xenoplan. One has to like that swirly bokeh and don't mind some bright rings with the Xenoplan (from the few samples I recall).

What I am sure about is that a manual lens has its pros and cons. I would say one use the tool that fits the situation. So the Panny G20/1.7 is for me, sometimes. Heck, even for most of the time, I admit. Now I wouldn't mind having that Zenoplan lens, but I don't know if they are easy to find.
 
JBurnett

JBurnett

Well-known member
Hmmm. Well, I don't have any C-mount lenses to compare.

Yesterday, I took about 40 shots with the 20mm at f/2.0. I was very impressed with the results. While the kit lens is good at this focal length as well, It won't do f/2.0 at 20mm (not to mention 1.7). The Olympus 17mm that I have pales in comparison to the 20mm in every regard.

While I routinely use manual focus lenses, I very much appreciate AF, too. The only shot where I was out of focus a bit yesterday was a "hurried" shot with a legacy lens (no opportunity for focus assist). Given the angle and the direction of the "action", I may well have been able to better the focus with AF -- even one as slow as the 20.

So, will I venture into the world of C-mount or other wide options? Nothings impossible, but I think the Panasonic 20 will serve me well.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Jonas said:
I am not sure sharpness and bokeh are easily trumped by the Xenoplan. One has to like that swirly bokeh and don't mind some bright rings with the Xenoplan (from the few samples I recall).
Click to expand...
I am afraid, I do not have a clue about what you are talking about Jonas.
 
A

Audii-Dudii

Active member
Vivek said:
Sharpness, Bokeh, etc are easily trumped by a tinier 25/1.9 Schneider Xenoplan
than this. Heck, even the slower Zuiko 25/2.8 (Olympus pen F) is not bad.
Click to expand...
For me, the 20mm lens is already a bit too long for handheld street photography (I guess I like to get closer than most to my subjects) so even if there is a 25mm lens that outperforms it in every respect, this means nothing to me. Obviously, YMMV...
 
V

Vivek

Guest
JBurnett said:
The Olympus 17mm that I have pales in comparison to the 20mm in every regard.
Click to expand...
Contrary to your experience, John, I have become more appreciative of the Oly-D 17/2.8, especially after having bought the Pana 20/1.7.

Two thumbs up from me for the Oly-D 17/2.8. Super lens!
 
A

andrewteee

New member
I was originally excited about the 20mm/1.7, but lately I've returned to the 17mm/2.8 because the 35mm focal length works better for me. For a fast lens I'd prefer a 50mm focal length.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Brian, I just put that (Xenoplan) name as one example. It covers APS-C completely (and some) at infinity.
(Samples have been posted here by me and others)

There are many other fast options for 25mm FL. Granted none are 20mm but the Oly-D 17/2.8 covers the wide (and even ultrawide if one would venture to add a Ricoh GW-1 0.75X converter).

One has to keep in mind that none of the manual focus lenses get corrected for distortions, aberrations or light fall off- unlike the m4/3rds AF lenses.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Audii-Dudii said:
For me, the 20mm lens is already a bit too long for handheld street photography (I guess I like to get closer than most to my subjects) so even if there is a 25mm lens that outperforms it in every respect, this means nothing to me. Obviously, YMMV...
Click to expand...
12.75mm f/2.8 is my standard lens now for street.;)
 
M

monza

Active member
I really like the Xenoplan, it has very nice bokeh. But it is 25mm, not 20mm, and it's definitely slower at autofocusing. :) A bit of a challenge ergonomically but well worth it.
 
JBurnett

JBurnett

Well-known member
Vivek said:
Contrary to your experience, John, I have become more appreciative of the Oly-D 17/2.8, especially after having bought the Pana 20/1.7.

Two thumbs up from me for the Oly-D 17/2.8. Super lens!
Click to expand...
I always take lens tests with a grain of salt, but my two lenses (17 & 20) seem to parallel some of the tests I've read, with the 20mm ahead. OTOH, I seem to have lucked out with a 45-200 that performs better than most of the tests.

Back in my "Canon" days, I remember reading many, many tests and opinions about each and every lens. About the only thing one could trust was a general consensus of opinion from a large number of photographers (like 200+) and the hope that you wouldn't get a "marginal" copy (i.e. within spec, but not great). I think the "duds" are more rare than people think, but they do exist. I got two among the many I acquired -- they didn't perform near so well as what the consensus was.
 
D

ddk

Guest
Vivek said:
Contrary to your experience, John, I have become more appreciative of the Oly-D 17/2.8, especially after having bought the Pana 20/1.7.

Two thumbs up from me for the Oly-D 17/2.8. Super lens!
Click to expand...
Thanks for this Vivek, after reading dpr's review I was about to dump my Oly 17/2.8 for the Panny 20mm. Truth be told I'm underwhelmed with all my m4/3 lenses, its all the other glass that keeps surprising me.
 
Brian Mosley

Brian Mosley

New member
Contrary to my experience too Vivek. The 17mm f2.8 has much more distortion and CA, and is nowhere near as sharp as the 20mm f1.7 I have.

Cheers

Brian
 
JMaher

JMaher

New member
I had both the 17 and the 20. The key word here is "had". The 17 went off to the great world of EBay. It's a really nice lens but no where near as good (in my personal opinion) as the 20. The 20 is sharper and has the indefinable quality of producing an almost 3D look to some of my photos.

Jim
 
S

s.agar

Member
I have tried a lot of MF lenses on the GF1. These include Nikkor 50/1.2, Leica 35/2, Leica 35/1.4, Leica 50/2 etc. The problem is that 2X multiplier makes these useless for my purposes. Also an uncorrected 50/1.2 and Leica 35/2 did not perform as expected (by me).

So, when it comes to street photos at night, the only lens suitable is the 20/1.7. With firmware correction by Panasonic, this is a very fine lens. Again the problem is the 2X multiplier. But I need the F1.7. Therefore, 20/1.7 is my lens.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
V1.2 firmware shows noticeable barrel from the Pana 20/1.7 while V1.4 shows minimal barrel distortions.

Here is a hand-held shot from earlier today (G1 V1.4, ISO400, 1/15s, f/2 ~0.5m):



this one from yesterday (G1 V1.2, ISO100, 1/100s, f/1.7, ~0.3m):

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top