John Riley reviews the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Micro Four Thirds lens, giving a 24-120mm equivalent.
| Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. in Interchangeable Lenses
Handling and Features
Performance
Verdict
Specification
The arsenal of Micro Four Thirds (MFT) lenses increases even more with the addition of Panasonic's Lumix 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical Power OIS optic, a compact and potentially very versatile 35mm-equivalent of 24-120mm. This could be the lens that is ideal for travel and other general purpose photography, so time to see if it lives up to expectations.
 |
MPB puts photo and video kit into more hands, more sustainably. Every month, visual storytellers sell more than 20,000 cameras and lenses to MPB. Choose used and get affordable access to kit that doesn’t cost the earth. Sell the kit you’re not using to MPB. Trade in for the kit you need to create. Buy used, spend less and get more. Buy. Sell. Trade. Create.
|
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. Handling and Features
We have 11 elements in 9 groups, including three aspherical and one ED (extra low dispersion) elements. The diaphragm has 7 blades. A compact and light lens, weighing only 210g, the Lumix has internal focusing so only the zoom action changes the length of the lens. The front element does not rotate, so use of polarising and graduated filters is more convenient. There is a bayonet lens hood provided, not overly large but still effective. The lens has a 58mm filter thread.
Minimum focusing distance is a usefully close 0.2m (0.66 feet) at the widest angle and 0.25m (0.82 feet) at the longest. The magnifications are 0.27x and 0.54x respectively.
It is almost becoming an expectation that lenses will be weather resistant to some degree, and the Lumix is described as splash and dust proof. With a travel lens, the ability to face all weathers is not to be underestimated. Likewise, image stabilisation is more and more universal. Panasonic offer Dual IS with the GX8 body as supplied for this review, and in any event Power OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation) via the lens only.
The focusing motor is very fast and the lens locked on every time, with no evidence of hesitation or hunting. The IS systems do not seem to cause any perceptible delay to the shooting speed.
There are few controls on the lens, just the usual rings for zooming and manual focus. The latter seems rather redundant as the AF system is so crisp in its operation.
The lens is very compact and balances well on the Lumix GX8. It is substantially manufactured in high-quality plastics, which also assists in keeping the weight down. This is definitely a lens that is a pleasure to use.
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. Performance
The behaviour of a zoom lens is complex and there are undeniably compromises that have to be made, especially with a compact lens. In this instance, performance seems to be biased towards the centre of the frame, right across the zoom range. Flare is hardly visible at all, a very commendable result.
MTF At 12mm (2nd)
How to read our charts
The blue column represents readings from the centre of the picture frame at the various apertures and the green is from the edges.The scale on the left side is an indication of actual image resolution as LW/PH and is described in detail above. The taller the column, the better the lens performance.
For this review, the lens was tested on a Panasonic Lumix GX8 using Imatest.
At 12mm, distortion measures -1.45% barrel. Barrel distortion, the bending outwards of straight lines, is to be expected in wide angle lenses and for a compact zoom this result is excellent. CA at the centre is very well controlled, less so at the edges, but still rather impressive.
CA At 12mm (2nd)
How to read our charts
Chromatic aberration is the lens' inability to focus on the sensor or film all colours of visible light at the same point. Severe chromatic aberration gives a noticeable fringing or a halo effect around sharp edges within the picture. It can be cured in software.Apochromatic lenses have special lens elements (aspheric, extra-low dispersion etc) to minimise the problem, hence they usually cost more.
For this review, the lens was tested on a Panasonic Lumix GX8 using Imatest.
Sharpness at 12mm is outstanding centrally, from open aperture through to f/5.6. It is excellent at f/8 and f/11 and still very good at f/16, falling to only fair at f/22. The edges are not quite the same high standard, very good from f/3.5 to f/8, good at f/11 and fair at f/16 and f/22.
 |
 |
| MTF At 18mm (2nd) | CA At 18mm (2nd) |
At 18mm we find +0.543% pincushion distortion, the bending inwards of straight lines, but this figure is very low and in practical terms of little significance. CA continues to be very well under control, particularly at the centre.
Central sharpness at 18mm is excellent from open aperture to f/11, very good at f/16 and fair at f/22. The edges are very good from open aperture to f/8, good at f/11 and just fair at f/16 and f/22.
 |
 |
| MTF At 25mm (2nd) | CA At 25mm (2nd) |
At 25mm we see +0.444% pincushion distortion, another impressively low figure. CA likewise is still firmly under control and will not be a problem.
25mm sees excellent central sharpness from open aperture to f/8, very good at f/11 and f/16 and dropping to fair at f/22. The edges are very good at f/4 through to f/11, but only fair at f/16 and f/22.
 |
 |
| MTF At 40mm (2nd) | CA At 40mm (2nd) |
At 40mm we have +0.0804% pincushion distortion, plus CA figures that are so low as to be very creditable for a compact zoom lens, indeed for any lens. This is a remarkable degree of correction.
40mm central sharpness is again very good from open aperture to f/11, good at f/16 and fair at f/22. The edges are not far behind off, being very good at f/5.6 to f/11, good at f/16 and fair at f/22.
 |
 |
| MTF At 60mm (2nd) | CA At 60mm (2nd) |
60mm still keeps the distortion well under control, measuring +0.0518% pincushion. CA is virtually non-existent, again as before.
60mm sharpness is very good centre and edge from f/5.6 to f/11, good at f/16 and fair at f/22. Centre and edge have become much more even as we move to the longest telephoto setting.
In summary, the lens starts off very strongly at the wider angles, slowly reducing in sharpness as we zoom. The edges never equal the centre, but become more evenly matched as we approach 60mm. At the widest angle, the central sharpness is outstanding. The low distortion and CA figures are remarkable.
The IS system seems to offer around 2-3 stops advantage, enabling the use of slower shutter speeds than would otherwise be the case. As the light fails this will mean sharper shots, something that is becoming essential for travel shooting.
The bokeh of the lens is perhaps slightly fussy, but it is not surprising with just 7 diaphragm blades. It is certainly not unpleasant and the slightly softer telephoto images will lens themselves well to giving pleasing out of focus areas. This could be where the portrait photographers will find some highly effective effects.
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. Sample Photos
Value For Money
The Panasonic Lumix 12-60mm does seem to slot into a new niche for MFT photographers. At £359, that seems a very fair price.
The nearest equivalent might be the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 Zuiko Digital ED EZ, priced at £279. However, this is not as long a telephoto, nor is the aperture as fast at the long end.
Other marques do have their own offerings, and just to put it into perspective, the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 G AF-S ED VR costs £849. All the other close alternatives that start at 24mm are not as long at the telephoto end.
So, for now at least, Panasonic seem to have the only MFT lens in its class. For more options have a look at the Top 7 Best Panasonic Lenses.
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. Verdict
The Panasonic Lumix 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph Power OIS lens is not perfect, but it has some remarkable properties and is incredibly versatile. The low levels of distortion and CA are truly impressive and overall central sharpness is of a high standard, starting off as outstanding. .
Lenses have different applications and this Lumix seems an ideal light, compact travel lens that will deliver the goods over a wide range of subject matter.
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. Pros
Very low distortion
Well controlled CA
High central sharpness
Fast and accurate AF
Compact and light
Good flare resistance
Weather resistance
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph. Cons
Edges softer
Slightly busy bokeh
First sample lens supplied was below par
| FEATURES |  |
|
| HANDLING |  |
|
| PERFORMANCE |  |
|
| VALUE FOR MONEY | |
|
| VERDICT | |
The Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 is a good quality, compact and light lens perfect for travel and general photography.
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. Specifications
| Manufacturer | Panasonic | |
| General | ||
| Lens Mounts |
| |
| Lens | ||
| Focal Length | 12mm - 60mm | |
| Angle of View | 20.44° - 84.05° | |
| Max Aperture | f/3.5 - f/5.6 | |
| Min Aperture | f/22 | |
| Filter Size | 58mm | |
| Stabilised | Yes | |
| 35mm equivalent | 24mm - 120mm | |
| Internal focusing | No Data | |
| Maximum magnification | 0.27x | |
| Focusing | ||
| Min Focus | 20cm | |
| Construction | ||
| Blades | 7 | |
| Elements | 11 | |
| Groups | 9 | |
| Box Contents | ||
| Box Contents | Lens cap, Lens rear cap, Lens hood, Lens storage bag | |
| Dimensions | ||
| Weight | 210g | |
| Height | 71mm | |
Buy Now
Sell or trade used photo and video kit with MPB
With MPB you can get a free instant quote for the kit you want to sell, including a trade-in all-in-one transaction - no need for callbacks or waiting for an email quote. Then, if you decide to sell, MPB will pick up your kit with a free insured DPD collection and you’ll get paid cash into your account within days. MPB will also keep you informed about the status of your gear at every step of the way and the whole process is carbon neutral.
We don't have the latest price however the link below will take you to the most relevant items. Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. SEARCH |
We don't have the latest price however the link below will take you to the most relevant items. Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. SEARCH |
Support this site by making a Donation, purchasing Plus Membership, or shopping with one of our affiliates: Amazon UK, Amazon US, Amazon CA, ebay UK, MPB. It doesn't cost you anything extra when you use these links, but it does support the site, helping keep ePHOTOzine free to use, thank you.
-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 11:29AM-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 11:31AM-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 12:04PM-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 2:45PM-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 6:02PMThis lens has some exceptional performance results, but falls down on fine detail at the longer end and the edges. As a compact travel lens it would, I think, serve very well.
-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 7:09PM-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 8:28PMQuote:I'm astonished to see a lens of thua quality being released by Panasonic. Something amiss here, I think.
I agree Lemmy. The test results just look odd to me.
-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 8:32PMQuote:The perceived sharpness is better than the figures would suggest because the contrast is quite high. This gives, bright, sharp looking images that will pass muster for many applications. The MTF50 figures given, and this is a measure of resolution really, not sharpness, tells us how much fine detail is present, but of course it's not the full story. I have lenses that I use that have quite low MTF50 performance, but actually look pleasantly gritty because the MTF20 results would be very high.
This lens has some exceptional performance results, but falls down on fine detail at the longer end and the edges. As a compact travel lens it would, I think, serve very well.
I don't know John, the test results just look very odd and completely at odds with the other lenses Panasonic has been releasing of late.
-
Report Error / Abuse
4 May 2016 10:56PM-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 12:00AMWhat I am baffled by is the justification of such a below par offering. To say that its poor long end performance would be useful for portrait photographers is like saying that a lens with heavy pincushion distortion would be handy for architectural photographers of medieval buildings where settlement had caused barreling of the window and door frames.
A lenses job is to provide as accurate and sharp a result as posssible. If a photographer wishes to degarde that for artistic purposes, that is for him to do, not the lens to decide.
I bow to no-one in my respect for Panasonic's optical technology. They are second to no-one. But however far backwards one bends to make this lens perfomance acceptable, it is not. I simply don't believe that this is the lens that Panasonic intended to make.
They make with their 14-140 superzoom one of the best ever lenses of its type. It is hard to believe that this comes from the same stable.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 12:32AM-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 12:38AM-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 7:36AMQuote:The way it works is that several runs are done, and when the results of all the runs are pretty much saying exactly the same we have to accept the result. History is littered with examples of scientists only finding what they expect to find and ignoring unwanted results. Of course it's always possible to get a sub-standard or even a better than average sample and lens measurements are only made with one lens. This is a weakness, but the alternative would be horrendous in terms of cost and time. As it is I opted to run each marked focal length, making for quite a lot of data to process and present.
John, thank you for taking the time to explain your testing methodology. As a chemical engineer, I understand the need for rigorous testing and to listen to what the test results are telling you. I still just can't get over the fact that the performance of this lens is so far from that of other Panasonic lenses. I also do agree with Lemmy's comments about the mismatch between the test results and the summary conclusion and 'recommended' rating at the end of the review.
I have this lens of pre-order at the moment. I'll wait until I get the call to say it's come into stock before making a decision on whether to cancel or not, and hope that there's some other reviews published over the next few days so I can compare them to this one. However, on the strength of your findings, I'll have no choice but to cancel my order as it stands, which is a real shame.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 8:53AMIt is of course a review, not a lab test as such, and there are many more things about any lens than the bald MTF results. I quoted the Pentax 18-135mm as an example, a very fine lens that I'd recommend without hesitation, but the MTF50 figures are not impressive. What it does have is that elusive "character" that can make a lens the one we reach for by choice. Many of the classic lenses from the past might well have very poor MTF results, or not, perhaps something that would be worth checking out.
I'd be very interested if you bought the lens after all to see what you thought about it in use, and whether it was better or worse than the sample I had here.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 9:03AMThis is a real shame - I wanted this lens - the range is ideal for me - but now there's no way I'd buy it. The 12-32, 12-35, or 12-50 are better choices.
How can they justify 360 quid for this lemon?
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 10:58AMI see in the photo of the lens mount that it is made in China so you might have a bad sample. Zeiss abandoned efforts to make lenses in China many years ago (Google the 16-80 they made for Sony a-mount).
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 11:18AMI've always had this pointless theory as to why we don't have many of these types of lenses in the MFT catalogue.
Back in the good old four thirds days Olympus released the wonderful 14-54 f2.8-3.5, and every single person I knew who had an Olympus camera bought it and well pretty much didn't need to buy many more lenses because it was just so versatile!
I've always thought Olympus/Panasonic just didn't want to release a lens like the 14-54 again as they are worried people will just buy the one lens and wont bother buying anything else (And they make a lot of money through lens sells!).
So they crippled down the 12-50 & 12-60 to a point they are useful but not great.
Well that's my theory, and if you will excuse me I need to put my tin hat back on just in case Elvis comes down in his spaceship and try's to kidnap me again.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 12:38PMQuote:I know this is a big ask - but you might try testing the lens at the long end with IS and OIS turned off, mounted on a tripod, and several shutter speeds.
That's the way it was done. Sturdy tripod, very careful alignment, several passes, refocusing accurately for every shot, all shake reduction switched off, mirror up for applicable cameras. The field shots depend on circumstances, but are more "real world" so may or may not be tripod mounted. Sometimes the weather dictates.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 1:43PMQuote:
Quote:I know this is a big ask - but you might try testing the lens at the long end with IS and OIS turned off, mounted on a tripod, and several shutter speeds.
Thanks for the reply. In that case the only reasonable hope is that you got a bad sample but that seems unlikely. It's a real shame. I won't be buying it and next body I buy will be specifically for a good quality 24-120ish so that won't be m43.
That's the way it was done. Sturdy tripod, very careful alignment, several passes, refocusing accurately for every shot, all shake reduction switched off, mirror up for applicable cameras. The field shots depend on circumstances, but are more "real world" so may or may not be tripod mounted. Sometimes the weather dictates.
-
Report Error / Abuse
5 May 2016 2:39PMI really am torn with what to do - just cancel my order, or actually take delivery and test it for myself given how far from the mark the performance as tested is from every other Panasonic lens released recently. Funds are tight, and I just can't get myself stuck with a lemon :-(, but on paper the lens is exactly what I want.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 3:06AMI would wait. The test charts Panasonic provide on their website show better performance than this test - suggesting they might have a quality control problem at their China factory. I wonder if ePhotozine have contacted Panasonic about this.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 6:00AMWe have contacted Panasonic, and they are sending another sample lens, which we will be testing ASAP.
Thanks
Josh
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 7:00AMQuote:Hi Tom,
We have contacted Panasonic, and they are sending another sample lens, which we will be testing ASAP.
Thanks
Josh
That's excellent news Josh. I have a few days before I have to decide one way or the other about my preorder so hopefully you can get the lens and test it quickly
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 11:30AM-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 11:37AMQuote:Hi Tom,
We have contacted Panasonic, and they are sending another sample lens, which we will be testing ASAP.
Thanks
Josh
Thanks. I honestly hope the first lens turns out to be a duff example because I would love the 12-60 to be as good as Panasonic's charts suggest.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 11:50AM-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 12:10PMQuote:
Quote:Hi Tom,
We have contacted Panasonic, and they are sending another sample lens, which we will be testing ASAP.
Thanks
Josh
That's excellent news Josh. I have a few days before I have to decide one way or the other about my preorder so hopefully you can get the lens and test it quickly
Is there any reason you would much prefer this to the 14-140? I know it isn't weather-sealed and it is obviously a bit larger and loses a bit at the wide end, but it's by no means a large lens and as Lemmy says, it's an excellent performer. It's the best 'super-zoom' type lens I've ever used and the street price is only [now] very marginally more than the 12-60. Even if it was a more reasonable performer I can't see where this lens fits except as a replacement for the standard kit zoom - and the price doesn't suggest that at all.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 12:37PM-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 12:59PMLike Chris, I personally wouldn't trade the 140mm reach of the 14-140 for the extra 2mm at the wide end but it's all tradeoffs in the end. As a travel lens, the 14-140 is unmatched, I think.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 1:13PM-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 1:31PMhttp://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_g_vario_12_60mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_power_ois_photos/
It is not a Leica quality lens, but for me perfect for travel with good enough IQ.
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 1:44PMQuote:The weather sealing would only make sense on a weather sealed body, the GX8 or GH4 of course.
Like Chris, I personally wouldn't trade the 140mm reach of the 14-140 for the extra 2mm at the wide end but it's all tradeoffs in the end. As a travel lens, the 14-140 is unmatched, I think.
I'm a GX8 user
-
Report Error / Abuse
6 May 2016 5:59PMQuote:10x zooms are fantastic but generally lack strong biting contrast
Not the 14-140mm, though. That's why I always recommend it as a kit lens to friends. I normally use it wide open at all focal lengths since the sharpness and contrast are, for practical purposes the same high quality at every focal length .
Take a look at ePz's test here. I've never come across a super zoom with hardly any compromise before and like ChrisV can't see how Panansonic could make one lens so good and a simpler one so poor. In terms of IQ, at f/5.6 it matches the 35-100 f/2/8 at the same aperture.
I'm no protagonist for this or any other lens but when one is so exceptional it should be tried before being dismissed.
-
Report Error / Abuse
7 May 2016 2:40AM-
Report Error / Abuse
7 May 2016 3:11AMPLUS, I think this lenses is bit expensive right now.
-
Report Error / Abuse
7 May 2016 3:15AMQuote:Must have been a bad copy. Look at another review:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_g_vario_12_60mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_power_ois_photos/
It is not a Leica quality lens, but for me perfect for travel with good enough IQ.
There is one lens test shot of the London skyline with the Gerkin on the right - shot at 60mm 1/1300 f/5.6 that is useful. If you look at the roof tiles in the lower centre that run to the left side, you'll see how the sharpness rolls off to blur. Obviously that's MUCH better than the sample here but it's worse than the 45-150 for example.
-
Report Error / Abuse
7 May 2016 10:01AMQuote:, I know I'll be changing lenses more often than a 12-60 + 45-150.
I wasn't trying to persuade you - none of my business. One of my best ever buys was a lens that I had dismissed because if what I'd read about it but a friend lent me his and I changed my view.
I team my 14-140 up with the 7-14mm f/4 if I want to cover almost everything. For more ambitious stuff, one of the miracles of Micro Four Thirds is one bag with 2 bodies, 7-14, 12-40, 40-150 and 1.4x converter. In my Nikon days I'd hardly have been able to lift that lot let alone sling it on my back and cycle 20 miles.
-
Report Error / Abuse
8 May 2016 5:10PMQuote:Must have been a bad copy. Look at another review:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_g_vario_12_60mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_power_ois_photos/
It is not a Leica quality lens, but for me perfect for travel with good enough IQ.
Had a longer look through those images. Their sample is decentered to the upper right. 2 out of 2 samples are no good. Yikes.
-
Report Error / Abuse
9 May 2016 9:45AMQuote:Must have been a bad copy. Look at another review:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_g_vario_12_60mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_power_ois_photos/
It is not a Leica quality lens, but for me perfect for travel with good enough IQ.
Lots of people complain about Photographyblogs photos as they are usually just casual street shots around London. But that's why I like them, as I take nothing but casual street shots around London
But I would take the Photographyblog reviews stars with a pinch of salt. They wouldn't give bad marks to camera shaped turd
-
Report Error / Abuse
9 May 2016 12:50PMQuote:They wouldn't give bad marks to camera shaped turd
Without the willingness to say when something is bad, reviews have no value.
-
Report Error / Abuse
9 May 2016 10:46PM-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 12:30AMLooking forward to it. Though prepared for the worst.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 2:09AM-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 5:37AMQuote:The replacement lens has arrived, so in the morning it is first on my list of things to do. Will report back ASAP.
Thanks for the update John. I'm still hanging on with my preorder, so looking forward to hearing how it performs. Simon.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 9:29AMQuote:
Quote:The replacement lens has arrived, so in the morning it is first on my list of things to do. Will report back ASAP.
Thanks for the update John. I'm still hanging on with my preorder, so looking forward to hearing how it performs. Simon.
It's great you're willing to test another sample. Sadly, I doubt it is going to be any good. The samples on Photography Blog are very soft at the tele end and it is slightly de-centred too.Check out this one
I'm wondering if Panasonic will be doing a recall. I doubt it.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 11:14AMSorry, to go off topic for a moment:-
@ Lemmy. I've got the older version of the 14-140 but reading various reviews this appears to give a better IQ than the later, faster lens which you tested. Have you tried out both versions? Weight and size are my main reasons for changing version, but if they are the only advantages I don't think it's worth it. Any thoughts?
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 1:26PM-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 1:51PM-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 2:03PMQuote:In very brief summary, the lens was very much better and at the widest end the central sharpness was outstanding. It was stronger all round, basically still weaker at the edges, but all at a much higher level. In other words, the pattern is the same, but better.
Glad to hear the first one was just a lemon and its not really a terrible lens
Hopefully its not a sign of poor manufacturing quality, but just an unlucky one off.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 2:16PMQuote:Well, I've just uploaded all the revised technical info for the replacement lens, so hopefully it will appear soon as a revised review. In very brief summary, the lens was very much better and at the widest end the central sharpness was outstanding. It was stronger all round, basically still weaker at the edges, but all at a much higher level. In other words, the pattern is the same, but better. Let me know what you think of the revised charts when they appear?
Definitely much better results - thank you for testing another lens all over again - looks acceptable but perhaps not at the current price. Honestly though, I'm concerned about quality control so perhaps I'll see if I can find a good example after the price comes down.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 2:34PM-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 4:14PMQuote:Well, I've just uploaded all the revised technical info for the replacement lens, so hopefully it will appear soon as a revised review. In very brief summary, the lens was very much better and at the widest end the central sharpness was outstanding. It was stronger all round, basically still weaker at the edges, but all at a much higher level. In other words, the pattern is the same, but better. Let me know what you think of the revised charts when they appear?
Thanks for posting the new results John, they do indeed look much better. It is however, such a shame that Panasonic can not produce a lens with as consistently high performance across the zoom range as they did with the 14-140mm. As you've changed the way the MFT data is presented, I'm struggling a bit to make comparisons with other lenses, and I remain unsure about whether to take chance on this lens. I really wish it performed better at the long end and the edges weren't so far behind the centre at the long end. A real shame, even if this copy has performed way better than the first.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 6:13PMQuote:Lemmy. I've got the older version of the 14-140 but reading various reviews this appears to give a better IQ than the later, faster lens which you tested
Yes, I said the same thing in my review. In real world use the two lenses are very much the same in terms of IQ, though the older one does seem to come out a bit better in tests. I upgraded because I review the things but unless the bit of extra weight is a real burden or the little bit of extra speed crucial, I wouldn't personally upgrade. I thought the older one felt nicer, maybe just the extra wieght, but that's personal of course.
-
Report Error / Abuse
10 May 2016 6:33PMQuote:I said the same thing in my review
Ah, it's a while since I read your review so it slipped my mind, and I've read many lens reviews lately. The older version does feel like a substantial and quality product so I'll stick with it.
Thank you.
-
Report Error / Abuse
11 May 2016 12:34PM-
Report Error / Abuse
16 May 2016 10:24AM-
Report Error / Abuse
16 May 2016 4:06PMhttps://www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-zuiko-digital-ed-12-60mm-f-2-8-4-swd-interchangeable-lens-review-15640
-
Report Error / Abuse
4 Feb 2017 10:31PMQuote:In terms of IQ, at f/5.6 it matches the 35-100 f/2/8 at the same aperture.
My 14-140II at f5.6 produces sharpness to my 35-100/2.8 wide open. Af f5.6, the latter lens is slightly sharper.
You must be a member to leave a comment.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Join for free
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
ADVERTISEMENT