GH2 Best 50mm for GH2?

C

cuervo.taylor

Active member
Hi guys, If i'm planning buying the GH2 with the 14-140mm lens, would it be useless to buy a 50mm lens?

In case I want a 50mm lens for the gh2 what lens do you recommend, if adapter is needed what is the name of the adapter?

(sorry I'm a really noob and trying to learn)
 
No lens is useless, it depends what you need, I just bought a 50mm to see how it does.

You should post this question in the Hardware/Lenses section and search before you post tho;

Thread on 50mm equivalent lenses: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?283812-50mm-Equivilant-lenses

Thread with tonnes of lens info: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?283002-Suggested-Canon-FD-and-Nikon-G-lenses-for-GH2

When you see a lens you might want to buy, just do a search for the adapter on ebay or the internet in general to see if one exists - most of them do.

Also, I assume you have been here? http://www.personal-view.com/faqs/
 
I'd vote for the Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 lens. You can find it on eBay for around $80, and the FD to m4/3 adapters are around $20.

Even though the field of view is the same as the 14-140 zoom set to 50mm, it's much, MUCH better in low light, provides very nice shallow depth of field, and is smaller as well. Definitely worth the $100 or so, in my opinion.
 
Best 50mm lens? Hm... a Leica Noctilux-M 50/0.95. Use a Panasonic MA2M adapter. Should only set you back about $7500.

If your budget it more realistic (say, $500 or less), here are some options:
1. Olympus 45/1.8 - ~$400 (for m43 - no adapter needed). Small, great quality, great auto functionality
2. Leica Summicron-R 50/2 - easy to find for <$500 used; add ~$40 Leica R->m43 adapter from Fotodiox
4. Zeiss ZF 50/1.4 - can sometimes find for around $500 used; Nikon F->m43 adapter from Fotodiox
3. Nikon AI-S 50/1.2 - not as common, can find around $500; similar Nkon F->m43 adapter from Fotodiox

If your budget is lower:
Literally any fast 50 for any mount type with an appropriate Fotodiox adapter. Spend maybe $100 total.
 
mcbob said:
Best 50mm lens? Hm....
If your budget is lower:
Literally any fast 50 for any mount type with an appropriate Fotodiox adapter. Spend maybe $100 total.
Click to expand...

Ha, I think the budget might well be on the lower end! (like mine). Thats a nice list of higher end lenses for the future tho.
 
My favorites at the lower end of the price spectrum near that focal length would be the Rokkor 58mm f/1.4 (MD mount) and Canon 55mm f/1.2 (FD mount). Both give very nice lowlight performance, are reasonably priced and have very smooth bokeh. I have a lot of experience with the Rokkor but only had a brief opportunity to shoot some comparison material with the FD vs. the Rokkor.

The two lenses were a lot more similar than I expected. You should be able to pick either one up for somewhere in the $100-200 range (with the FD being the more expensive of the two) and an adapter is usually $20-50.

Note that these are NOT super sharp or clinical lenses and that you will definitely get coma shooting wide open, but it can also be a very desirable effect depending on what you are shooting.

Here is an example of a shot that works a lot better with a fast lens like the ones discussed, vs. the kit lens. Here it was shot at ISO 1250 on a GH1 (which means it would be a higher ISO number on the GH2) at 1/50 shutter with an aperture of f/1.4 on the Rokkor 58mm 1.4.

_1320005.jpg

That is Gaby Moreno's bassist, Leslie. The stock lens is f/4.0 at the fast end and f/5.8 at the long so, making the shot a lot harder to get. And here is a table of a few different ways to shoot that same scene at different shutter speeds to give you a sense of how that plays out.

S 1/50


f1.4 1,250 ISO
f2.0 2,500 ISO
f2.8 5,000 ISO
f4.0 10,000 ISO
f5.6 20,000 ISO
f8.0 40,000 ISO




s 1/25


f1.4 640 ISO
f2.0 1,250 ISO
f2.8 2,500 ISO
f4.0 5,000 ISO
f5.6 10,000 ISO
f8.0 20,000 ISO


s 1/13


f1.4 320 ISO
f2.0 640 ISO
f2.8 1250 ISO
f4.0 2,500 ISO
f5.6 5,000 ISO
f8.0 10,000 ISO

And here is another shot from the same night - Canon 50D with a Canon EOS 70-200m f/2.8 L. F/2.8, shutter 1/30, 200mm, ISO 1250. Note that (at the same ISO indication) DXOMark says that there is somewhere around a third stop difference between the GH1 and GH2 and a third stop between the GH2 and the 50D (with the GH2 being in the center and the most accurate of the three).

16GB102_0279.jpg

Both images are untreated JPEGs straight out of camera (except for lossless rotation on the GH1 shot).
 
Last edited:
If you are in fact looking for a "normal" lens like Drew mentioned, then the two most frequently requested are the Voigtlander Nokton 25mm 0.95 and the Panasonic-Leica 25mm 1.4. The two lenses each have a very different character and people tend to really love one or the other. There are plenty of comparisons out there and I would urge you to make up your own mind.

Personally, I am a huge fan of the Nokton and frequently rent it. It is likely to be the next lens I buy and tends to sell for anywhere from $900 to $1,300. I've seen the Panasonic-Leica for a lot less lately.
 
Here's a way of considering the "upper end" lenses...

Like many, I entered the GH2 world as my first interchangeable lens camera and (due to its ability to use just about anything) promptly went insane buying cheap lenses.

Now I'm sitting here looking at my 50's... JUST my prime 50's. In being "thrifty," I have spent probably $600 on about 6 different legacy primes looking for "the one." I've rarely used a single one of them since buying a used Summicron-R. I also haven't bought another one since, as I have no illusions I'll find something significantly better. Spending a lot more in the beginning would have saved me money.

Of course if you're not a financial dolt like me, you may be just fine getting a nice Nikon 50/1.4 or 1.8 and never need another 50mm for any other camera system, as it can adapt to anything (short of a Leica R body, which most sane people don't buy).
 
@mcbob There are some very nice Nikons out there - but there are so very many versions of the 50 1.4 and 1.8 that it really pays to spend the time you mentioned and make sure you get the one that best matches what you are looking for. :)

EDIT: And of course, if you want truly amazing coma performance, there is there expensive 58mm 1.2 Noct.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/58.htm

That is the Nikon lens I most want to try, but then I shoot a LOT at night and in dark places without flash.
 
Wow many thanks guys for all the useful info. And true my bad I SHOULD HAVE SPECIFIED what I'm needing. For example I want some not so expensive lens (hopefully under $1000), with good Shallow DOF (sorry I'm a newb not familiarized with the concepts). Also decent low light would be desirable because I have heard the GH2 doesn't have very good low light performance. Good sharpness would be cool too :P
 
@cuervo.taylor Most of the lenses already mentioned fit all the criteria you specified, but many of them emphasize the quality of the bokeh (the look of the out-of-focus areas) over general sharpness.

The main exceptions would be the Panasonic and Panasonic-Leica lenses mentioned. The 20mm 1.7 is under $400 and the 25mm 1.4 is under $900 and both are fully native to the GH2 while most of the rest of these are adapted. The 25mm 1.4 will give you shallower DOF.

Nokton is also sharp, but it does not emphasize sharpness to the same extent and the colors tend to be warmer looking (while the Panasonic colors might be described as cooler or more neutral depending on who you talk to).

Here are some examples of shooting with the 20mm f1.7 (both the intro and the interview). Please excuse the horrible sound - the shotgun mic had malfunctioned earlier that day and I had to the internal mic. :)


And here is a wide angle shot with the same lens.

2011-10-04-GP-Brightest-Only-Set-04.jpg

You can see the above picture at somewhat higher resolution here.
http://perlichtman.com/pasdenapulse/wordpress/photo-gallery/
 
Here are a few links to help you get a sense for bokeh and sharpness with some of the 20mm and 25mm lenses discussed. My advice is to pay attention to the pictures much more so than the commentary. I agree with the images as being representative of the difference between the lenses (and in several cases they mirror personal experience).

However, some of the comments made in the threads demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the lenses or are inspired by such a specific preference that a wider audience may not share them.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/...95-25mm-micro-43-lens-review-by-david-babsky/

http://e-p1.net/lens-sample-photo-a...amples-nokton-25mm-vs-dslr-magic-vs-lensbaby/

And more specifically, here is a sharpness comparison between the 25mm Panasonic (DG) and 25mm Nokton discussed earlier.

http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?...=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=364836

http://daisukiphoto.com/content/review-panasonic-leica-dg-summilux-25mm-f14-lens
 
Last edited:
Wow Per Lichtman, many many thanks for your useful insight. Great advice, and loved the pics taken with the 25mm. I have read some stuff about bokeh in the internet, its like the thing when appears "focus features" in the films, really beautiful.

Also thanks for the useful links.
 
@cuervo.taylor Glad to help. But the pics I showed you above were taken with the 20mm 1.7 NOT the Nokton 25mm 0.95 (unless you are talking about the ones from the article links).
 
The one that comes the closest to the Olly 45mm is the Vivitar 55mm. Rokkor 50mm/1.4 also a steal. I still use the Panny 20mm the most, followed by the Olly 45mm.
 
Check out some legacy M42 glass if you haven't already. There are some cheap gems in that mount. I recently bought an SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 from ebay. It's regarded as one of the best 50's ever made, and was cheap enough for me to buy to find out.
 
Here is some legacy glass vs modern glass, etc.
http://album.foto.ru/photo/407621/

And some more legacy vs legacy.
http://forum.mflenses.com/f1-4-options-is-the-minolta-rokkor-x-any-good-t40543,start,15.html

And more on topic, Minolta/Rokkor 50mm vs the Pentax Takumar 50mm mentioned above.
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=44305

I personally prefer the look of the Rokkor 58mm to either, but it is all a matter of personal taste (and I look for it to give a pleasant blend as opposed to super sharp). Anyway, the combination of the tests above should give you some idea of the character of each.
 
Last edited:
*Didnt see page 2 when posting...* d'oh.
Per Lichtman said:
If you are in fact looking for a "normal" lens like Drew mentioned, then the two most frequently requested are the Voigtlander Nokton 25mm 0.95 and the Panasonic-Leica 25mm 1.4. The two lenses each have a very different character and people tend to really love one or the other. There are plenty of comparisons out there and I would urge you to make up your own mind.

Personally, I am a huge fan of the Nokton and frequently rent it. It is likely to be the next lens I buy and tends to sell for anywhere from $900 to $1,300. I've seen the Panasonic-Leica for a lot less lately.
Click to expand...

But they are both really pricey for beginners. How much do you pay to rent one? Isn't it better to get a cheaper lens you are happy with and really learn how to take skillful shots before worrying about top grade glass?

mcbob said:
Here's a way of considering the "upper end" lenses...

Like many, I entered the GH2 world as my first interchangeable lens camera and (due to its ability to use just about anything) promptly went insane buying cheap lenses.

Now I'm sitting here looking at my 50's... JUST my prime 50's. In being "thrifty," I have spent probably $600 on about 6 different legacy primes looking for "the one." I've rarely used a single one of them since buying a used Summicron-R. I also haven't bought another one since, as I have no illusions I'll find something significantly better. Spending a lot more in the beginning would have saved me money.

Of course if you're not a financial dolt like me, you may be just fine getting a nice Nikon 50/1.4 or 1.8 and never need another 50mm for any other camera system, as it can adapt to anything (short of a Leica R body, which most sane people don't buy).
Click to expand...

Same question as above applies - I still cant bring myself to spend a lot on one lens straight off the bat. Surely you need to experience a couple of the cheaper primes to know the difference when you shoot with a better one.
I wanted to go with Nikon lenses but ended up with FD mounts Vivitar 28mm f2.5 and a Canon 50mm f1.4 from eBay, which cost me about $200 inc an adapter. They're not quite as cheap in the UK mind, and the adapter was more expensive as it is sent from within the UK and will arrive in a couple of days.
 
Last edited:
Per Lichtman said:
Here is some legacy glass vs modern glass, etc.
http://album.foto.ru/photo/407621/

And some more legacy vs legacy.
http://forum.mflenses.com/f1-4-options-is-the-minolta-rokkor-x-any-good-t40543,start,15.html

And more on topic, Minolta/Rokkor 50mm vs the Pentax Takumar 50mm mentioned above.
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=44305

I personally prefer the look of the Rokkor 58mm to either, but it is all a matter of personal taste (and I look for it to give a pleasant blend as opposed to super sharp). Anyway, the combination of the tests above should give you some idea of the character of each.
Click to expand...

Those minolta seem pretty nice to my newb eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top