Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens review at DSLRmagazine
Side by side: The Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 and Olympus 17mm f/2.8.
Our friend Valentin Sama tested the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens at DSLRmagazine (Click here to read the google english translation).
No flare, good contrast, good color ad fast AF (on a Panasonic camera). The resolution wide open is good in the center and sufficient o the border (that’s not really exceptional for a prime lens, but hey it’s an ultracompact lens!). Distortions and Lateral CAs are well controlled. The conclusion do math the verdict from Photozone (Click here) that tested the lens a couple of months ago.
Pancakes are one of the reason why one should join Micro Four Thirds. And the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens is the smallest of all MFT lenses. Would love to see some more of them!
Click thos direct search links to find the lens price: Amazon, Adorama, B&H, J&R, eBay.
mahler
2 years ago |So, if the 2.5/14mm would not be constructed as a pancake, the optical performance could be better? I certainly would be happier with a non-pancake lens of better optical quality.
I am increasingly fed up, how the “it has to be pocketable faction” slowly but slowly spoils the system. The G3 already shows that this sad trend counteracts the usability of a camera with omitting important controls, such as AE-lock. (And to me it is beyond comprehension, how I could operate the touch screen (which has the missing “controls”), while looking through the view finder.
I hope that after my first trial of a G3 in a shop some of my fears regarding usability are proven wrong.
Sören
2 years ago |I’m with you that I don’t like touchsreens. But if I would’t care about size, I would by a D7000 instead of a µFT. Size is the biggest selling point for this system…
mahler
2 years ago |Sure size is one of the selling points. But it should not be at the expense of usability at cameras like the G3 (a camera with a build-in VF should not rely on touch screen controls, they should only be functional alternatives) and lens quality (software corrections included), at least as long there are no alternatives. A slightly larger 14mm with better image quality would not have hurt, and nobody would have complained.
Ulli
2 years ago |the 14 mm doesn’t have optical correction for distortion, since it relies on in-camera corrections, so possibly 1 or more elements less are needed for the optical formula.
Milos Janata
2 years ago |Is there a prime in the world which is not sharp at center at f/2.5?
Ulli
2 years ago |possibly yes, if 2.5 is the starting aperture…
Bob B.
2 years ago |Does anyone know how well the 14mm compares in sharpness to the Panasonic 14-45mm, or 7-14mm lenses? I know that obviously these two lenses have smaller maximum apertures….but I just was wondering if this prime is any better (i.e. sharper) than the zooms?
cowgaR
2 years ago |according to many information on the web, the 14mm pancake is made in japan and is of high quality, whereas the zoom is some “cheap-plastic-replacement” like lens lol
I’ve put it to extreme, but there was even a buying advice to get GF2 with 14mm only, as the zoom lens is of rather mediocre quality, and if you later want it, is rather cheap
regards
PS.
Two wonders of the andromeda galaxy:
1. why do we need Sony Nex 3C with Gigantic Lenses (full-frame sensor is the limit anyway)? So you can look like alien? Does “C” really stands for compact or a (sorry) “you’re cock” ?
2. why did they made Panasonic GF3 w/o the ability to have external micro? Was the only kick ass feature on GF2, great camera on gigs, apart from fixed wide-open aperture in movie mode (anyone able to fix that?) Unless GF3 will have some good microphone which I doubt heavily + is more ugly than GF2.
enough of rant
MaxElmar
2 years ago |Bob I find my 14/2.5 to be about equal to the the Olympus 14-45 II. Which is to say very good! But I use it more simply because it’s a stop faster and it handles so nicely. And I beg to differ with those who say it’s “not sharp in the middle.” I find it to be quite sharp — especially for an inexpensive, compact, wide angle lens. And good across the entire frame at f/4 and f/5.6 — well made to boot.
…I haven’t had much time with one, but the 7-14 is probably the best m43 wide. And it’s priced like one might expect the “best” to be priced. But if you need better quality than the 14/2.5 can deliver — you DO have an option. Why people get their panties bunched up over stuff like this when there are options I’ll never know. The dudes over at the Sony NEX forum WISH they could have an argument like this…
jwaij
2 years ago |Though the website isn’t loading at this moment, SLRGear has tested all three.