New DXOmark and other lens reviews

Share

DxO is heavily testing our m43 lenses and the Leica really looks like a stellar performer:
Panasonic-Leica 25mm f/1.4 review at DxOmark (Click here): “Our measurements of the Panasonic-Leica lens confirm that micro 4/3 lenses are quality optics, with results at least as good as those for entry-level APS-Cs.
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm f/2.8 review at DxOmark (Click here).

More lens reviews/news:
Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 Review at Admiringlight (Click here) and Damian (Click here).
Crazy test – Pansonic 20mm f/1.7 vs. Olympus 14-35mm f/2 (Dpreview).
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6 MEGA OIS Lens Firmware Update (ePhotozine).

Shop search links for the mentioned lenses:
Panasonic-Leica 25mm at Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay.
Olympus 45mm Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay Panasonic 20mm Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay (out of Stock in ALL US stores).
The superb Olympus 14-35mm f/2.0 on eBay (Click here)

Share
  • http://www.43rumors.com/members/dontom/ DonTom

    I don’t really like the idea of reducing something to a number, but it is useful when comparing apples with apples.

    So my 45/1.8 is a 17, wonder what the 14/2.5 & 20/1.7 will get? I love this little set of primes, they make for a really cool lens set that is so easy to cart around.

    I don’t really need to know their score though, because they will stay with me anyway….

    • Bob B.

      I agree….
      The 3 tiny little lenses you mention are just so small and so decent in quality that they just beg to be taken with you anywhere you go for some very respectable photography. This is THE beauty of MFT!!!!!…And the camera body/sensor offerings to complement these lenses (Panasonic or Olympus) is getting better and better every day, too.

      • http://www.43rumors.com/members/jules/ jules

        They actually do put a little bit of text around their numbers, just like dpreview puts more text around their % vertict.

        I mean, yes the 2.8/17 is not expensive, unobtrusive, small, fast focusing, lightweight and unintimidating. That does not warrant higher numbers when those strictly measure optic performances.
        If it is not “near stellar” , well its not. It is up to you to take everything in consideration in the end.

        • Bob B.

          I have to think that optical performance should be the number one criteria (therefore weigh more heavily in the overall assessment of a comparative lens test). After all if a lens is compact and focuses fast but it is not a very sharp lens…I cannot get excited about it. ..I also will say…that DxO numbers are rather suspect or erratic when scoring certain lenses? So, for me ….DxO rating is information I can consider…but it is certainly not the final word on any lens.

          • http://www.43rumors.com/members/jules/ jules

            Dang! I meant to answer DonTom!

            In any event, we have more points we agree on than the other way around.

    • http://www.nordstromproduktion.se Mr Hipsta

      Reducing things to numbers, well that’s what DxO do. And as you say, apples should e compared to apples; I think their figures can be useful when comparing different m43 lenses to each other, on the same camera. Other comparisons are not always (never?) relevant.

    • James

      I agree, I have a similar set; the Oly 12 and 45mm and the Panny 20mm. A great set of lenses, I only yearn for a bit extra width on the 12. the 25 would have to be pretty great compared to the 20 to get me to put up with the additional bulk

      • DonTom

        Fully agree James, I thought about the 25/1.4 for all of five minutes!
        Actually, I don’t have the 14/2.5 yet, have been using one belonging too a friend. Conclusion? For me, it’s wide enough, fast enough and cheap enough to add to my kit.
        I’ll be getting the E-M5 in June, with the 12-50, but I can see that lens being left at home if I am not expecting rain. Happy to own it so that I have one WP lens, and it resembles a macro as well.

  • luxsumi

    i wonder how the classic 43 summilux would score, as i suppose it’s even better than the small brother optically

  • kesztió

    It would be much more fair to compare the Oly 17/2.8 – and not the currently brightest (an one of the best) MFT AF lens – to Nikkor 10/2.8.

    Though I should admit that MFT lens scores are consistently higher than Nikkor 1 lens ones, not speaking about that there are no really high quality Nikkor 1 lenses yet.

  • Balthier Bunansa

    pekka potka posted jpeg image comparison between e-m5 and e-p3

    http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/2012/3/1/e-m5-vs-e-p3-jpeg-image-quality.html

  • Fred

    I wonder if Panasonic/Olympus are funding some of this testing ? – I’m not suggesting foul play, just that Panasonic recently made some statement about producing good lenses & only a short time later we see Dxo Labs carrying out a load of tests on M43 lenses.
    In the world of PR & Marketing no stone should be left unturned…

    • Digifan

      4/3 to APS-C sensor comparisons were extensively use to show how “crappy” the 4/3 sensors are.
      Now the m43 lenses show favourably and it’s all paid by O+P?

      Come on. I think ALL testing by DxO should be taken with kilo’s of salt, since it’s got a commercial background, like them, wanting to sell their own software.

    • zf

      Actually Nikon 1 appeared in DxOmark within 2 weeks of announcement, so…..

  • bidou

    So ” at least as good as those for entry-level APS-Cs.” equal “stellar perfomer”?

    OK FANBOY.

  • jpplenissart

    About the 17mm test (bad, bad, bad…)

    “We will be testing two other choices soon, the Panasonic-LUMIX-G-20mm-F/17-ASPH and the Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F/2.5 ASPH. But of course none of these alternatives is as compact nor as light-weight as the pancake lens.”

    Lol ! Do they know anything about µ4/3 lenses ! 20mm and 14mm are clearly in the same league ! :)

  • Ru Elpser

    Pretty sure that dxo takes some money 😉

    • Rchard

      Yeah, from CaNikon. How many ZD SHG lenses have they tested, and how many ZD HG lenses?

  • Camaman

    I don’t like how the lens reaches the score of 20 and then they go on to say:

    “Our measurements of the Panasonic-Leica lens confirm that micro 4/3 lenses are quality optics, with results at least as good as those for entry-level APS-Cs.”

    Entry level!? Really? :-/

    • CDMc

      +1

      The PL is superb, better than my last favourite fast lens -Sigma 50mm f/1.4. And the other thing they don’t measure is AF – it focusses

  • micksh

    Oly 45mm from the previous post here:
    The Olympus 45mm f/1.8 got tested by the team from DxOmark: “We have here another very fine and impressive lens, and one that is fully capable of holding its own against APS-C cameras and also against certain full-frame models.

    Pana 25mm: Panasonic-Leica lens confirm that micro 4/3 lenses are quality optics, with results at least as good as those for entry-level APS-C.

    So, 45mm is close to full frame but 25mm can only compete with entry level APS-C.
    45mm got score 17 and 25mm got 20.

    These DxO guys are very inconsistent.

    • Richard

      Yes. very confusing indeed.

    • jim

      Their numbers are ok – their conclusions are bias….

      What is an entry level optic? Canon kit lens… lol that is the crappest modern lens I have seen – it never looks in good correct focus its got such poor resolution.

      M4/3 lenses are very good compaired to good APS-C Glass!

  • Richard

    “with results at least as good as those for entry-level APS-Cs”

    What does it mean or imply anything??? Can anyone decrypt this sentence?

    • Digifan

      They want to sell their software and with these comments the again dismiss the 43 sensor size. This makes, APS-C and up, users more willing to buy their software.

    • flash

      If one reads the statement carefully it is saying the Olympus lens is a “least” better then a bad APC lens. Now it could be a little better or significantly better. So the statement is say nothing.

      I would expect one of my lawyers to write something like that, meaningless gobble gook. Maybe it was written by someone who English is not their primary language. Or has been suggested above that they think their market is APC users so they did not mean to insult them. Even if the test are unbiased the publishing and editing seems to be. I think the only reason DXo is so popular is today people are looking for real simple answers even to complex questions as to what is the best camera.

  • http://blogg.hogbergphotography.com Danonino

    I happen to own the NIKON J1 and the 10mm pancake, and surprise! ITS ABSOLUTELY KNIFE SHARP WIDE OPEN across the hole frame.. Those numbers have to be wrong.

    • Digifan

      Yeah, that’s what we (m)43 users were saying about the sensor tests as well.
      Just eat it !!

    • david

      DxO’s tests are completely consistent with other systematic tests of the lens, such as photozone. It’s certainly a useable lens, but obviously more designed to be tiny than to be perfect. You also have to consider the context. We’re talking about an inexpensive lens on a small low-res sensor. The fact that it resolves about 40 lp/mm is not that bad. Compare to the 60 lp/mm reached by a price-is-no-object lens like Canon’s 85mm/1.2L on a large high-res sensor like the 5Dii, or the 65 lp/mm that the ultra-sharp 105mm micro-Nikor manages on a D3x.

  • Nic Walmsley

    So wish we had an idea of when the new Panasonic lenses are coming

  • http://perkylberg.smugmug.com/ Kylberg

    DXO are testing lens + camera. They also summarise results to a number. I like neither of theese ways to measure and evaluate.
    It means a lens on a smaller sensor get a lower figure and a lens on a larger sensor better. A CaNikon lense used on different FF and APS-C cameras gets a different rating depending on which camera it’s on.
    Highest rated (33) lens at DXO is the Nikon 105mm macro on a D3x. The same lens on a D7000 gives a substantially lower figure.
    Looking at the 50 highest ranked lenses they are all on FF cameras.
    Lenses on m43 cameras with a rank of f.i. 20 are possibly as good as the ranked 30 on FF cameras.
    Nikon 1 cameras have excellent lenses, the kit zoom was just tested at SLR gear with excellent results. But as the sensor on the camera is small – it gets low rating at DXO. Will always be lower than m43. m43 will always be lower than APS-C and so on.
    Conclusion: DXO mark logic stinks!

  • http://perkylberg.smugmug.com/ Kylberg

    Admin: It is not relevant to put up a m43 lens against a Nikon 1 lens against each other using DXO: This is not relevant, see my note above.

  • Markus_1980

    Their test strategy is really hard to understand in reality. I have few Zeiss lens and I’m very pleased with the outputs. However their test is totally different than what I got, even though it is the same camera boy.

  • WT21

    Looking at several lenses that I know (mostly from Canon and m43) here’s all I can conclude —

    Full Frame scores are double APS-C scores (at least in Canon), though none of the stats change significantly when you look at the lens on different bodies.

    T-stop is directly related to the aperture, and seems to drive the rating. So, a kit lens gets a T-stop of 5.1, wider aperture primes get 2.1.

    To summarize — larger aperture lenses on full frame cameras get higher scores.

    Yeah, thanks for that. Very informative. :-/

  • Camaman

    My ultimate goal for my girl and mine kit is this:
    E-P3… check currently with DZK and 17mm… check
    E-M5 body
    12mm f2
    25mm from OLY (when it comes)
    45mm 1.8
    75mm 1.8
    12-35mm Panasonic
    35-100mm Panasonic
    100-300mm Panasonic

    Maybe a 43 Bigma for those all-in-one Safari shots…

  • http://luis.impa.br/foto/new Luis Florit

    How do you translate “as good as those for entry-level APS-Cs” to “a stellar performer”???

  • http://www.43rumors.com/members/400trix/ Archer Sully

    I think its a good sign for the health of µ4/3’s that DxO is testing all of these lenses. Clearly its a result of general interest in the system, and that showing that µ4/3’s competes with APS-C helps dispel a lot myths. Now when people say “4/3’s sensors are tiny!” you can point to DxO and say: “See! the end result is the same!”

    Of course, there are people in the world who are incapable of being swayed by logic, so the arguments, or rather, trolling, will never stop, but at least µ4/3’s fans now have independent evidence that their system of choice is competitive with Canikon APS-C systems.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/42632173@N08/ Marcelo Guarini

    I got the 25 f1.4 two weeks ago and is truly a superb lens. I’m very happy with it. In general I don´t care much about these tests, comments from good photographers around the web are much more valuable for me. I’m pretty sure the tested Nikon is not as bad as the number suggest.

    • Daemonius

      They probably got bad piece but truth is that Nikon does make only one type of lens good and those are full-frame ones (and large format ofc.).

      But good lens unfortuantely are not exactly main stregth of Nikon 1 system.

      I would love to see comparsion with Samsung NX, for example 30mm f2.

  • bananacam

    superb? didn’t think it lies between Poor and Excellent 😉

  • Daemonius

    Pff entry level APS-C? 20 points is a LOT.

    http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Sony/100-mm-2.8-Macro/(camera)/371

    This is probably one of highest resolving lens on full-frames and it didnt get much more points. Plus 53lp/mm .. heck some full-frame lens would be happy with that.

    One advantage of m4/3 is pretty amazing resolving capability (which I guess will increase a bit with OM-D).

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close