Lumix 14mm f2.5 pancake lens and AF-100

G

Gary Senda

Well-known member
This pancake fast wide angle lens (the only m4/3 telatively fast wide angle lens) is not mentioned among the supported lens in the user manual and on official Panasonic website. What does this mean exactly? I'm interested in this lens but I want to be sure that it works on AF-100 before purchasing. Someone has any experience?

Regards

Gary
 
Greydad said:
except it probably looks a bit funny
Click to expand...

No problem for this: I have the 20mm pancake also. But perhaps 'not supported' could mean that chromatic and geometric aberrations are not corrected by the camera as in the supported micro four thirds lenses
 
I have both the Lumix 14mm (28mm) and the 20mm. (40mm). They are very good lenses. that fill a nice gap for me. Plus they are pretty fast and sharp to boot. And yes they look ridiculous on the AF-100. Oh well. I use one of them on practically every shoot I go out on.
 
Erik Naso said:
I have both the Lumix 14mm (28mm) and the 20mm. (40mm). They are very good lenses. that fill a nice gap for me. Plus they are pretty fast and sharp to boot. And yes they look ridiculous on the AF-100. Oh well. I use one of them on practically every shoot I go out on.
Click to expand...
I tried the 20mm Af100 combo on a semi-ENG shoot and got burned. I erroneously thought it was autofocus. Is the 14mm autofocus capable on the AF100?
I'm in the market for a GH2 and the Olympus 12mm f2. Someone said it was nigh telepathic with its autofocus and face recognition features - but on a GH2 obviously.
 
dtzfilms said:
I tried the 20mm Af100 combo on a semi-ENG shoot and got burned. I erroneously thought it was autofocus. Is the 14mm autofocus capable on the AF100?
I'm in the market for a GH2 and the Olympus 12mm f2. Someone said it was nigh telepathic with its autofocus and face recognition features - but on a GH2 obviously.
Click to expand...
I don't believe it has continues auto focus like a camcorder does. I never use auto focus. It scares me.
 
Erik Naso said:
I don't believe it has continues auto focus like a camcorder does. I never use auto focus. It scares me.
Click to expand...
Cheers mate. Then that probably solves my conundrum. I was thinking GH2 Olympus 12mm f2 for Glidecam HD1000 use. There's a chap in here
who used the combination with great success. So the real question I should be asking is whether the 14mm is also fully autofocus on the GH2. If it
is, I'll lose half a stop and 2mm but can save $440 if I opt for the lumix @ $361 over the Oly 12mm f2.0 @ $799.
 
Erik, I just watched some of your work on vimeo. Bryce Canyon clip is beautiful, man. Good job!
Say all those SDSU graphics, you do those as well? I've never ventured into that arena. How are those
done? I'm guessing photoshop and motion or something similar? I'd like to get into that. Adds some
punch to the video.
 
Any motion graphics software like After Effects or even Premiere can animate that into video today. And you could generate the graphics in the image/vector software of you preference, I personally use Fireworks.
 
Pietro Impagliazzo said:
Any motion graphics software like After Effects or even Premiere can animate that into video today. And you could generate the graphics in the image/vector software of you preference, I personally use Fireworks.
Click to expand...
Cheers, I use Final Cut Pro, so I guess I'd be looking for a program that works on a Mac and with FCP. I was seriously hoping Motion would be good. Fireworks? I"ll google that.
 
dtzfilms said:
Erik, I just watched some of your work on vimeo. Bryce Canyon clip is beautiful, man. Good job!
Say all those SDSU graphics, you do those as well? I've never ventured into that arena. How are those
done? I'm guessing photoshop and motion or something similar? I'd like to get into that. Adds some
punch to the video.
Click to expand...
Wow thanks for the complement! I wish I could shoot places like Bryce Canyon more often.
As for graphics the SDSU banner came from them. I made the basic lower third bar and titles in Final Cut and added keyframes to animate them on screen. Its pretty easy in FCP and I hear Premiere is even better. FCP requires a lot of rendering. Motion graphics are still a challenge for me but I enjoy doing them. Motion and After Effects are the better tool but require a different way of thinking that this old video editor sometimes has a hard time with. Lynda.com has really good lessons on motion graphic software. Thats where I get schooled.
 
So you're saying that can be done in Motion? I just don't know how, is that what it is?
Because I do have FCP 6 with Motion in there.
From my understanding, you have to create documents in Photoshop or Illustrator then import it into Final cut.
Yes?
 
If your creating a logo then yes Photoshop or Illustrator would be the software to use. I don't know anything about Fireworks but I think web designers use it. I have seen a tutorial with Photoshop CS5 that showed basic animation of titles. Surprised me because I didn't think that was possible.
Then take the graphics elements into Motion or After Effects and animate them. Create text and shapes and a whole lot more. Basic animation is possible inside of FCP with keyframes but like I said you have to render a bunch.
You already have Motion so crack it open and mess with it. You can find free tutorials on youtube to get you started.
 
I find Motion very hard to learn.
Look at this reel for instance - how was this done? What program did it or what programs can.
I'm just trying to figure if I need to take some motion classes or if I need new software.
I've barely tapped into the functions of FS Motion - I think but tutorials are so boring.
Not my work - just something I wish I could do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjyv5tB6Jbw
 
Hell I wish I could do that as well! Thats heavy compositing and 3D to boot. It's take a real good graphic design background to achieve that stuff. Only guessing but After Effects and or cinema 4D could have been the software.
 
I just realized how stupid I am! I opened up Motion again and saw almost a hundred templates. I thought all these things were created from scratch!
 
dtzfilms said:
I just realized how stupid I am! I opened up Motion again and saw almost a hundred templates. I thought all these things were created from scratch!
Click to expand...

They sure can be created from scratch and need to be for best effect, but if you wanna investigate how it's done, study the presets.

After Effects I think is the most used Motion Graphics tool today and there are tons of sites out there with tutorials. I'm not a full time motion graphics artist, so I can't say none other than Videocopilot. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top