PANASONIC LUMIX G II Lens, 20MM, F1.7 ASPH., MIRRORLESS Micro Four Thirds, H-H020AK (USA Black)

Product Information

For vigg as the review already suggested, stopping down will help, as for small primes of this size its more or less understandable. Its small stature makes the Panasonic Lumix G 20mm f1.7 II Asph. the perfect partner for Micro Four Thirds format cameras. Credit: Josh Waller I’m also an obsessive street photographer. http://paultreacy.com/nyc1 (for example) My current favorite workhorse camera / lens combo is my Nikon D200 with 24mm 2.8 AI prime. It’s a sweet combo yielding very sweet images.

With an adapter, the Olympus 25mm ƒ/2.8 should mount on micro-four thirds bodies. While a slower and longer lens (ƒ/2.8 vs ƒ/1.7, and 25mm vs 20mm) the lens is slightly less expensive. At ƒ/2.8, the Panasonic is easily sharper, but stopped down to ƒ/4 and beyond the two lenses are comparably sharp. The Panasonic is also more resistant to chromatic aberration and produces less distortion, though the Olympus shows less corner shading.

The out-of-focus regions in this F1.7 shot show some purple fringing in front of the subject, aka longitudinal CA (LoCA)

We tested the Panasonic 20mm ƒ/1.7 on the Olympus E-P1, as we had that camera body standardized for lab testing. In our initial handling we had the impression the lens was quite sharp, and our full range of tests bear this out. Chromatic aberrations are reasonably well controlled, increasing in strength towards the edges of the frame as the lens is stopped down. Even at their worst at f/16 CA levels are low enough to cause few issues, even in large prints, or harsh crops from the edges of the frame. Sample images in this review were edited in Adobe Camera Raw with adjustments limited to white balance and exposure parameters. Sharpening and noise reduction were left at ACR defaults. Ultimately, though it's not optically perfect, for most folks, the Panasonic Lumix G 25mm F1.7 ASPH is going to be more than good enough.

Seems to me this is the main reason pros avoid iMovie not realizing that using the entire iLife suite of programs is where the power lies. While the Panasonic 25mm F1.7 shows some longitudinal CA wide open, it becomes much less noticeable when you stop down a bit. Still, at 100%, you can certainly spot some purple and green fringing in the out-of-focus regions on the left side of this image, in the vines and stems. Any comments on how the 20 fairs AF wise on the new OM-D? I’m looking at building a MFT kit (I’m tired of waiting on sony lenses for my NEX). I’ve got the 12, 14, 20 and 45 in my sights. The 45 is a given, the rest of the equation is either the 14 and 20 for 2 smaller lenses to travel with or to combine them into just the 12mm. One of my biggest concerns is AF speed, my second being size. So if the Panasonics do well on the OM-D I’ll go that route, but if they’re not I’ll go with the larger 12mm and call it a day. Any help is greatly appreciated. Any for reference I’m using this setup to shoot my kits around the house, so it’ll be low light (3200 f/2 and 1/90th). The full frame pixels in that example will be bigger so the image will appear darker but it just needs a the values to be rescaled and you will have the same image with the same noise performance.

Although Panasonic claims the new 20mm adopts the same optical construction of its predecessor, we measured a very slight drop in optical performance I think the most prudent equivalence would be ISO, to stop using ISO numbers that are not equivalent performance in dynamic range and SNR. This would reveal the IQ advantage of larger sensors while stopping so many comparisons that don't make sense because there are not always equivalent lenses between formats, only hypothetical ones (e.g. there is no f/3.4 50mm prime this small and light for full frame--although this is more a problem for other focal lengths).

When compared with against rivals with similar focal lengths, the new lens ranks third, surprisingly, behind the original model and the Olympus M. Zuiko 17mm f1.8 although it outperforms the latter lens in overall image sharpness.

The sharpness of the Panasonic 20 mm 1.7 II in the center is very high; this was the case for both our practice shots and our measurements. The Panasonic GX7 test camera is probably the reason that we measured a higher resolution for version 2 than in our testing of version 1 (with a Panasonic GH2 camera). It seems that version 2 of the Panasonic 20 mm 1.7 is less sensitive to flare than the first version. We found it difficult to detect that difference. When testing the Panasonic 20 mm 1.7 v2 in the testing lab under extreme conditions, we occasionally encountered flare (such as in the sample shown here). In the pictures taken in practice that we made during the day and even in most night shots, we did not run into that. I’m still new to m4/3 and RF systems but I tried out an Elmarit 24mm on my EP-2 and images were not (significantly) better than the 20mm F1.7. But it may be just my poor technique. What is the close focus of the 20/1.7? And also – I am thinking of maybe owning at least one digital camera – and have been thinking about M4/3 and using my best of breed nikkors (28 2.8 AIS, 50 1.8 AIS MK3, 85 1.4 AFD) on it. Is manual focus with the EVF close enough to the ease of the split prism and ground glass (1978 one for f2.0 and faster lenses) or will I get out of focus shots with the EVF when I shoot at 1.4-2.0 – as I do with the contemporary K focus screen that came with my FM3a. Another crucial advantage to the Olympus E-P2 for us London based street shooters, is that it’ll likely attract less attention from the cops who have taken to hassling us.

Anyway, the Olympus Pen cameras are entirely magic and I’m quite certain, when handled properly, with the best glass, are capable of broadcast quality filmmaking. The Google Pixel 6 may not be the latest Google smartphone any more, but it might still be the best value One of the reasons why this m4/3 system is taking off, and also why many big DSLR shooters are selling their entire kits for a Leica M9 is all about weight and size. In the past, small cameras were, well, CRAP! They had excessive noise, bad color, and the images were flat and awful. Today we are just about at that point where we can buy a smaller camera and get big DSLR quality out of it. In the case of the Leica M9, we surpass that big DSLR quality and approach medium format. My copy suffered from severe focus shifting, meaning the sharpness actually decreased when stopping down from F1.7 to F2.8. And I was not the only one experiencing this, there is at least one YouTube video explaining the issue.