LUMIX 20mm 1.7 crop factor quick question

[Adventsam]

Yes, it's equal to a 40mm lens on a full body frame. Focal Lengths are always constant regardless of sensor size, so you always take the crop factor into consideration.

No its 1.8x 20mm, =36mm and the 24mm=44mm aprox.

14mm f2.5 is 25mm so same as native 24mm lens on full frame. You may want to grab the baisc 14-42 kit lense, gives you a 25mm f3.5 with OIS.

 

[Lucas Adamson]

No its 1.8x 20mm, =36mm and the 24mm=44mm aprox.

14mm f2.5 is 25mm so same as native 24mm lens on full frame. You may want to grab the baisc 14-42 kit lense, gives you a 25mm f3.5 with OIS.

If we're going by the crop factor as it relates to the width of the frame, not diagonal, this is completely true, due to the oversized GH1/2 m43 sensor. I go by the 1.85x crop factor personally. On the AF100 it is more like 2x crop factor.

 

[BrandonT]

... I also use my 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8 a fair amount and just add distance ...

Are you talking about FD? If so, do you use both the 1.4 and 1.8 for different looks? If so, can you tell me in what cases you prefer the 1.8 over the 1.4. I have the 1.8 and am trying to decide if it's worth it to buy the 1.4. Thanks!

 

[Adventsam]

If we're going by the crop factor as it relates to the width of the frame, not diagonal, this is completely true, due to the oversized GH1/2 m43 sensor. I go by the 1.85x crop factor personally. On the AF100 it is more like 2x crop factor.

Lucas, that is interesting? do you actually see the slight change in fov from a GH2 to an AF100, I wondered about this but thought it would be the same! If its not it tells us that maybe the GH2 and AF100 are not the same sensor at all, mybe people knew this already I havent checked.

 

[joe1946]

No its 1.8x 20mm, =36mm and the 24mm=44mm aprox.

14mm f2.5 is 25mm so same as native 24mm lens on full frame. You may want to grab the baisc 14-42 kit lense, gives you a 25mm f3.5 with OIS.

The 14-45mm is much sharper @14mm F3.5 than the 14-42mm @14mm F3.5.

The 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 gives decidedly mixed results in our studio tests. It's not terribly sharp at maximum aperture at any focal length, but stop down to F8 and things improve dramatically. Geometric distortion and lateral chromatic aberration are automatically corrected in software (as usual for Micro Four Thirds), giving excellent results in these areas. The wide-open softness means the 14-42mm suffers when compared to either the older Lumix G 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS or Olympus's equivalent M ZD 14-42mm F3.5-5.6, and while it's a match for either once stopped down to more commonly-used apertures, overall it's a slightly disappointing replacement for what was one of the best kit lenses on the market.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCG2/page13.asp

The Lumix 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS does extremely well in our studio tests. Panasonic has integrated software correction of distortion and lateral chromatic aberration into the system design, and this pays off with near-perfect results for these aspects of our tests; the lens is also unusually sharp for its class. Compared to the Micro Four Thirds Olympus M. Zuiko Digital 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ED, the Panasonic does better in almost every regard; it even out-performs the best of the kit zooms for conventional DSLRs, the Olympus Zuiko Digital F3.5-5.6 ED.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicGF1/page19.asp

 

[Barry_Green]

do you actually see the slight change in fov from a GH2 to an AF100

Yes.

If its not it tells us that maybe the GH2 and AF100 are not the same sensor at all, mybe people knew this already I havent checked.

They're not the same sensor. They have different physical sizes, different pixel counts, different sharpness performance, different aliasing performance, and the AF100 has much faster readout times for much much less skew than the GH2.