Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 83 of 83

Thread: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    When asked you haven't shown anything uncorrected from the 20mm lens.

    Perhaps, you do not have a G1 with the older version firmware. I will shoot some brick walls for you sometime in the near future and show you.

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Perhaps there is a breakdown in communication here. I don't think anyone is disparaging the above lenses in any way, but are more curious about the comparison with the 20 since you brought it up in the first post--in particular with 2 lenses. To do it with same subject would be the only way to really judge, it seems. You also seem to prefer the 17 to the 20--which is certainly your prerogative, but you don't say or show why (other than perhaps FOV).

  3. #53
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    All reposts for the benefit of the questioners (why not show what you have got- your own shots?):
    I only have the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the leica 21mm f2.8 elmarit. I haven't used the elmarit on the G series cameras because of reports of smeared corners. I am happy to post some shots from the 20mm lens when I get home.

    I think the entire point that Jonas and a few others are trying to make is quite simple. You've looked at the output from a number of different lenses and come to the conclusion that the 20mm is not as good as the hype or other fast lenses that you have access to. That may in fact be the case. All people have asked of you is to show what you think is good and bad on each lens.

    For instance, in this post (that I am quoting from) you show shots from lenses that you never mentioned in your original post. For those of us who aren't intimately familiar with these different lenses, it is very hard to follow and understand the pros and cons of each lens.

    Thanks,
    terry

  4. #54
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Perhaps, you do not have a G1 with the older version firmware. I will shoot some brick walls for you sometime in the near future and show you.
    The firmware version should have nothing to do with the distortion. It is the chosen RAW converter and whether or not it corrects for the distortion. I'm not sure what you are getting at? Are you saying that in the earlier firmware the 20mm lens files are different than the later firmware version?

  5. #55
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    All people have asked of you is to show what you think is good and bad on each lens.

    For instance, in this post (that I am quoting from) you show shots from lenses that you never mentioned in your original post. For those of us who aren't intimately familiar with these different lenses, it is very hard to follow and understand the pros and cons of each lens.
    Terry, Fair enough. I don't mind contentious posts- Jonas' included.

    I did indicate (somewhere here) that I feel that this lens is over corrected (for what and by how much is going to be a problem to figure out and is a major burden for me).

    My intention is not to disparage the lens either (as I have indicated).

    It is that "hype" factor you mention. Not overwhelming is my feeling based on my use.

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    The firmware version should have nothing to do with the distortion. It is the chosen RAW converter and whether or not it corrects for the distortion. I'm not sure what you are getting at? Are you saying that in the earlier firmware the 20mm lens files are different than the later firmware version?

    Yes. The G1 (V1.2) liveview shows barrel which is minimal in V1.4 (I think I mentioned it somewhere in this thread IIRC).

    This implies that better (a tad faster) focus is achieved after the barrel correction.

  7. #57
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Yes. The G1 (V1.2) liveview shows barrel which is minimal in V1.4 (I think I mentioned it somewhere in this thread IIRC).

    This implies that better (a tad faster) focus is achieved after the barrel correction.
    Please show us exactly what you mean with actual image examples from the 20/1.7. Until you do that, this thread sounds more like a personal "bitch session" with no substantiation than it does a considered comment with veracity... IOW it's starting to sound more like a DPR thread than a GetDPI thread -- and I know you don't want that!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Vivek, I find all this sad. I really thought you could back your claims. Now I see all is just about bickering and "I am smart - you are stupid!" and similar.

    There was a simple question in yellow for you, not even that one you could reply.

    I'll just bow out. My English is not good enough to keep this at a decent level.

    /Jonas

  9. #59
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    I still like saying, "swirly bokeh."

  10. #60
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by nostatic View Post
    I still like saying, "swirly bokeh."
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  11. #61
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    One of the impressive things about the Lumix 20/1.7 is that the edge/corner sharpness shapes up very nicely by f/2.8. Even at f/1.7, there is quite a bit of detail throughout the frame.

    I don't know how the various C-mount lenses do in terms of peripheral performance, but most of my older 35-50mm equivalent lenses take more stopping down to put in a good edge performance.

    Here is the Lumix 20 at f/1.7:



    Full-resolution is here: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2753/...86332487_o.jpg


    Keeping in mind that the proximal region is outside the DOF, there is a lot of detail there for f/1.7. I don't think my Nikon AF 35/2 stopped down to f/4 would do as well at the edges as the Panasonic does wide open.
    Last edited by Amin; 17th November 2009 at 18:03.
    -Amin Sabet

  12. #62
    retnull
    Guest

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    I posted my comments on the Schneider Xenoplan 25/1.9 earlier in the thread. Here's some images with this lens on the G1:





    And....here's the swirly bokeh:


  13. #63
    canon5dshooter
    Guest

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Don't mean to divert the thread but which lens on the m43 bodies is the "Master of Swirl" ?

    I like the swirl. :-)

  14. #64
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    My vote for King of Swirl is the Cooke Kinic 1" f/1.5:

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpo...&postcount=105

    Swirling goes in the opposite direction south of the equator, right?

    Compared to this, the Xeno is swirl-free.

  15. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Kimberley B.C. Canada
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Amin,

    I hope you're not going Swirly :-)

    Nice shot

    Canon5Dshooter

    Great shots, love the portrait

    Best Regards

    Peter

  16. #66
    Abbazz
    Guest

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Swirling goes in the opposite direction south of the equator, right?
    I am located just 5 North of the Equator, that's why the swirls are bi-directionals on this picture :



    Cheers!

    Abbazz

  17. #67
    lewis_levin
    Guest

    Gosh..

    The first few times I came here I thought this was a pleasantly productive forum that was a change from all of the others.

    No more. We don't need, "my equipment is better than your equipment."

    Get lives, guys. Be bitter somewhere else...

    Try to enjoy photography, not rag/rage (your pick) on people needlessly.

  18. #68
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Amin

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    One of the impressive things about the Lumix 20/1.7 is that the edge/corner sharpness shapes up very nicely by f/2.8. Even at f/1.7, there is quite a bit of detail throughout the frame.
    lovely leafy path image there!


    I don't know how the various C-mount lenses do in terms of peripheral performance, but most of my older 35-50mm equivalent lenses take more stopping down to put in a good edge performance.
    I'm curious ... do you mean comparing a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera to what is produced by the 20mm on the G1?

    perhaps you'd need to look at a 35 or 40mm lens on the 35mm frame to make a similar comparison?


    Keeping in mind that the proximal region is outside the DOF, there is a lot of detail there for f/1.7. I don't think my Nikon AF 35/2 stopped down to f/4 would do as well at the edges as the Panasonic does wide open.
    are you comparing these both on the same body? (the Nikon 35mm f2 mounted on the Panasonic? If you're meaning how it looks on another camera by my reckoning you need to stop a 35mm format down 2 stops more to get the same DoF

    Eg for equal Dof
    20mm on 4/3rds @ 1.7 = 40mm on full frame @ f3.5

    or did you mean something else?

  19. #69
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    Amin
    lovely leafy path image there!
    Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    I'm curious ... do you mean comparing a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera to what is produced by the 20mm on the G1?

    perhaps you'd need to look at a 35 or 40mm lens on the 35mm frame to make a similar comparison?
    I said "35-50mm" (on full frame) since 40 is in between those two and I've only had a couple 40mm full frame lenses (CV Nokton 40/1.4 and Olympus OM 40/2), while I've had a bunch of 35s and 50s.

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    are you comparing these both on the same body? (the Nikon 35mm f2 mounted on the Panasonic? If you're meaning how it looks on another camera...
    No, I was talking about comparing a Nikon 35mm f/2 at f/4 on a Nikon D700 with the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 at f/1.7 on a Panasonic G1. By using f/4, I was rounding up and suggesting that even when stopped down for a similar depth of field, the Nikon lens didn't, as I recall, put in as good of an edge/corner performance as the Panasonic.
    -Amin Sabet

  20. #70
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Leyenaar View Post
    Amin,

    I hope you're not going Swirly :-)

    Nice shot
    Thanks Peter. I do like to get my swirl on from time to time :

    -Amin Sabet

  21. #71
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Hi

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    No, I was talking about comparing a Nikon 35mm f/2 at f/4 on a Nikon D700 with the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 at f/1.7 on a Panasonic G1. By using f/4, I was rounding up and suggesting that even when stopped down for a similar depth of field, the Nikon lens didn't, as I recall, put in as good of an edge/corner performance as the Panasonic.
    ok ... a comparison in the middle

    interesting about the edge performance stuff ... I wonder what effects issus such as from this post have

    This is not really about C and RX mount lenses and cameras. It's about lenses designed to image directly onto the sensor versus those designed to image onto sensors covered by 9.5mm of BK7 glass, and about cameras with uncovered sensors and those with sensors covered by 9.5mm of BK7 glass.
    I'm also unsure what effect it has that Nikon has a longer flange distance than other lenses and what effect this has on the image??

    I really do need to compare a 21mm on full frame vs 35mm

  22. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Kimberley B.C. Canada
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Leyenaar View Post
    Amin,

    I hope you're not going Swirly :-)

    Nice shot

    Canon5Dshooter

    Great shots, love the portrait

    Best Regards

    Peter
    I meant to say

    Retnull (not Canon5Dshooter)

    Great shots, love the portrait

    Best Regards

    Peter

  23. #73
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Pellicle, I don't think this has anything to do with flange back distance or glass between sensor and lens. My point is simply that the Lumix 20/1.7 has good performance throughout the frame, whereas many other lenses are sharp in the middle with suspect edge performance.

    The Canon 35mm primes (f/2 and f/1.4) seemed (in my experience) a bit better than the Nikon 35/2 when is comes to edge performance. Both of those Canons do very well in the periphery at f/4. However, wide open, no so great.

    I've attached the SLRGear comparisons of the Lumix 20/1.7 and Canon 35L. As you can see, they are similar with the Lumix at f/2 and Canon at f/4. However, the Panasonic puts in a very high level of performance even at f/1.7, whereas the Canon improves dramatically with stopping down a couple stops.
    -Amin Sabet

  24. #74
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    Pellicle, I don't think this has anything to do with flange back distance or glass between sensor and lens.
    maybe not ...

    I've attached the SLRGear comparisons of the Lumix 20/1.7 and Canon 35L. As you can see, they are similar with the Lumix at f/2 and Canon at f/4. However, the Panasonic puts in a very high level of performance even at f/1.7, whereas the Canon improves dramatically with stopping down a couple stops.
    but since that testing chart you posted is done on a 5D it suggests the data is over a wider area ... if I look at the central portion of the image it looks remarkably similar to the Lumix result

    the nikon lens you were mentioning before may have different responces to the EF35 L as well ... I don't know if the EF (or any of the canon line) are designed to take into account the sensor coverings on 5D (or more likely if at all the 1D series)

  25. #75
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    ... but since that testing chart you posted is done on a 5D it suggests the data is over a wider area ...
    But a similar angle of view. If you look at the central area only (the small bit that looks "remarkably similar to the Lumix result"), you are looking at a roughly 3MP 5D and you're cropping the sensor give an angle of view significantly more narrow than that of even a 70mm lens. If you look at the central area of a 5D II instead of a 5D, the "per pixel" sharpness drops and the image-level sharpness will be similar to that of a 5D (original) since the lens is not outresolving the original 5D pixel pitch at that aperture. In reality, almost no one uses a 35mm lens on a 5D and crops all their photos to 70mm (or longer) equivalent. That's just not how that lens is used as a tool, so the issue is moot.

    Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that a MFT camera and Lumix 20 will outperform a 5D and 35L. I am just pointing out that the Lumix has a high performance at all selectable apertures, whereas the 35L needs to be stopped down a couple stops before the edges look great. That is no problem since the 5D has way better (~2 stops in the case of the Mk II) high ISO performance, but I think it's nevertheless an admirable performance for the little Panasonic.

    In a more apples-to-apples comparison, the SLR Gear tool nicely demonstrates that the Panasonic lens at f/2 has equal or better sharpness throughout the frame compared to the M Zuiko 17/2.8 at f/5.6, which is its best setting:
    Last edited by Amin; 18th November 2009 at 03:41.
    -Amin Sabet

  26. #76
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    But a similar angle of view. If you look at the central area only, you are looking at a 6MP 5D.
    one of us is misunderstanding that graph

    irrespective of the density of the sensor (and I was tempted to get into that) the angle of view is central to this question because you are using that lens (the one which is measured on the 5D) on the smaller sensor and so only the central portion of the image will be seen by the sensor.

    in your earlier post you clarified you were using a 35mm focal length lens on a nikon digital camera (not 4/3) and comparing that to the results from the 20mm on the 4/3


    no?

  27. #77
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Please show us exactly what you mean with actual image examples from the 20/1.7.

    Will do later.

  28. #78
    Senior Member JBurnett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bridgewater, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    one of us is misunderstanding that graph

    irrespective of the density of the sensor (and I was tempted to get into that) the angle of view is central to this question because you are using that lens (the one which is measured on the 5D) on the smaller sensor and so only the central portion of the image will be seen by the sensor.

    in your earlier post you clarified you were using a 35mm focal length lens on a nikon digital camera (not 4/3) and comparing that to the results from the 20mm on the 4/3


    no?
    There are two different comparisons, here.

    1. Lenses giving the same FOV on different platforms (e.g. a 17 or 20mm on m-4/3, vs. a 35 or 40mm on full-frame).

    2. Lenses with the same focal length, both on the same platform (e.g. comparing the Pansonic 20mm vs. an adapted Nikon or Canon or C-mount 20mm).

    The first comparison is a "relative" one, but still useful, I think. It may be especially useful to those with experience in another format. For example, I may know that if I want good corner sharpness from my 35mm lens on full frame, that I will use f/4 or f/5.6. It is helpful to know that I can expect the same "relative" corner sharpness at f/2 with the 20mm, and f/4 on the Olympus 17mm.

    The second comparison is more practical for a given sensor format. But I think it can be dangerous to extrapolate from test data taken from two different platforms (e.g. cropping the graph from a full-frame camera test to approximate a 4/3 camera). In theory, most full-frame lenses should kick a** on m4/3, because only the sharpest portion of the lens is being used, and because the increased DOF may give an appearance of better sharpness. In practice, the results vary.

    If Vivek or someone else can provide side by side pictures taken with the Panasonic 20mm with those from another lens of the same focal length, we might better "see" differences in sharpness and bokeh. In my experience, however, two people can come to dramatically different conclusions when looking at the same image.
    Best regards,
    John.
    http://jburnett.ca

  29. #79
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbazz View Post
    I am located just 5 North of the Equator, that's why the swirls are bi-directionals on this picture :



    Cheers!

    Abbazz
    Abbazz, you are hiding stuff from the bokeh thread - this one should be definitely be there (I can't remember seeing it).

    If you take a trip north or south, could you check which way the bokeh swirls - we are doing a research project over in the thread.

    Keith





    Keith

  30. #80
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by canon5dshooter View Post
    Don't mean to divert the thread but which lens on the m43 bodies is the "Master of Swirl" ?

    I like the swirl. :-)
    You need to go to the "Photograph your Bokeh" thread. There are countless examples in there on wonky (depending how you look at it) bokehs.

    My personal favorites are the ones that deliver twin parallel lines throughout the bokeh (eg Pentax 50/1.8 screw mount)

    Keith

  31. #81
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    one of us is misunderstanding that graph
    Either that or we are misunderstanding one another. Either way, I'm gonna respectfully bow out of this dialogue. I've had a similar conversation too many times before, and it feels like I'm .

    Graphs and charts aside, I am very impressed with the Lumix 20/1.7 .
    -Amin Sabet

  32. #82
    retnull
    Guest

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Leyenaar View Post
    I meant to say

    Retnull (not Canon5Dshooter)

    Great shots, love the portrait

    Best Regards

    Peter
    Thank you Peter.

    These shots were done with the Schneider Xenoplan 25 1.9, the lens that was mentioned at the very beginning of the thread. The thread went off in a few different directions, but to bring it full circle: I don't own the Panasonic 20 1.7 yet...I think the Xenoplan is a very fine lens, but the results I've seen show the Panasonic to be better: better bokeh, better color rendition, and with the advantage of auto-focus.

    All best
    Kurt

  33. #83
    Irwell
    Guest

    Re: Pana 20/1.7- not overwhelming

    [QUOTE=woodmancy;157128]Abbazz, you are hiding stuff from the bokeh thread - this one should be definitely be there (I can't remember seeing it).

    If you take a trip north or south, could you check which way the bokeh swirls - we are doing a research project over in the thread.

    Keith

    Is that the Coriolis effect?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •