Panasonic 45mm f/2.8 Leica DG micro 4/3
- Thread starter strannik
- Start date
Too expensive compare to nikon/canon alternative. I had it for a short while but sold it away. I think the reason i bought it in the first place its because i thought using a panasonic lens has its advantages such as auto focus and stabilizer. However, after using it for a while. i realized hat its auto focus is terrible in AF100. The same can be said about the 20mm 1.7, too slow whether in auto or push focus. even slower than using in GH1/2. And for that reason i rather buy cheaper nikon/canon alternative. And I am learning to manual focus even in run and gun shoot! how much a 50mm 1.8 cost?
Bern Caughey
Veteran
The 45mm is sharp & the OIS is decent.
Like some (all?) Lumix lenses, the faster you rotate the focusing ring the more radically the focus changes, so snapping focus isn't practical. Most users would prefer a linear response.
Best,
Bern
I have used this lens on Panasonic GF2 still camera and must say that it is one of the best lenses I own. It is worthy its Leica branding. Not only it focuses at ridiculously short distance 0.5ft (15cm), but it is very sharp. Other advantages include (a) true 1:1 magnification, (b) effective O.I.S., (c) reasonably bright at f/2.8, (d) quiet operation, (e) a/f and barrel correction works on all Panasonic m4/3 products, (f) native m4/3 mount, common 46mm filter threading, and included hood, (g) no change in physical dimensions during focus, and (h) excellent ergonomics (e.g., light weight, compact size, quality construction). Among disadvantages are fly-by-wire focus ring and absense of the apeture ring. It is great for macro and regular work, produces decent and not overwhelming bokeh, and has decent color rendition while being very sharp. I cannot comment on the AF100 performance (this lens is certified compatible with the AF100), but imagine that the advantages outweigh a few qualms. Hope this helps.
We've been using it as our standard portrait lens for the AF100 and we like it. It is nice and sharp, light, reasonably fast and works natively with the camera.
The autofocus is slow but at least push-auto can be helpful. It has optical image stabilisation, which we don't use much as we tripod mount but at least it is there if you want it, and the iris control works through the control wheel which is helpful for us as we've standardised on that for all our lenses for the AF100. The macro capability allows some really creative shots.
It is what it is- a stills lens. A cine prime it is not, but it weighs a small fraction and costs a small fraction of the equivalent CP.2 (which would not have even the limited AF of the Lumix lenses and no OIS but would have the great advantage of proper mechanical focussing etc).
I have nice fast Canon primes, but the absence of aperture control was a compromise too far for me. I need to be shooting now so can't wait for Birger.
Since I don't own and have absolutely no intention of buying any Nikon cameras, I decided buying anything in Nikon mount was too perverse for me so have stuck to native mount lenses as I already had a little GF1 stills camera as my "take up the mountains" camera.
My AF100 lens kit to date is:
14 mm Lumix f/2.5 - works well, fiddly to focus just because it is so small
20 mm Lumix f/1.7 - lovely sharpness, bit fiddly to focus
25 mm Voigtlander f/0.95 - cracking lens, I ought to get it declicked
45 mm Lumix f/2.8 - nice sharp lens which we are using a lot as portait/CU lens and macro for inserts and cutaways
45-200 mm Lumix f/4.0-5.6 - just acquired as we will need longer focal lengths for forthcoming location shoot and I didn't want to spend a fortune on a lens I will not use very much- at least now we can get the shot, more or less.
12-60 mm Olympus f/2.8-4.0 - just acquired for days when swapping primes is a headache, covers all our usual focal lengths. Have observed the electronic aperture shift effect others have reported, but just don't care as we'll use it as a variable prime.
Total cost was about 3200 UK pounds. About the same as a single CP.2 but covers focal range from nice wide to decent telephoto, f/2.8 or faster for our most used focal lengths for great depth of field control. If we need it, we do have a lens in the kit with macro capability, good OIS, shoot-in-the-dark f/0.95 capability, one-lens run and gun variable prime (sadly without AF, but shrug).
Provides good bang for the buck and provide most of the capability we need, as opposed to the capability we dream of (anyone want to buy me a full set of Cooke primes for Xmas?) Compromises? Sure, especially on the focus mechanism, lack of fast AF capability and speed. But for our narrative film making we're really enjoying using the camera with these in the lens bag - a real step up from the HVX200 and the Canon dSLRs we have been using.
Cheers, Hywel
The autofocus is slow but at least push-auto can be helpful. It has optical image stabilisation, which we don't use much as we tripod mount but at least it is there if you want it, and the iris control works through the control wheel which is helpful for us as we've standardised on that for all our lenses for the AF100. The macro capability allows some really creative shots.
It is what it is- a stills lens. A cine prime it is not, but it weighs a small fraction and costs a small fraction of the equivalent CP.2 (which would not have even the limited AF of the Lumix lenses and no OIS but would have the great advantage of proper mechanical focussing etc).
I have nice fast Canon primes, but the absence of aperture control was a compromise too far for me. I need to be shooting now so can't wait for Birger.
Since I don't own and have absolutely no intention of buying any Nikon cameras, I decided buying anything in Nikon mount was too perverse for me so have stuck to native mount lenses as I already had a little GF1 stills camera as my "take up the mountains" camera.
My AF100 lens kit to date is:
14 mm Lumix f/2.5 - works well, fiddly to focus just because it is so small
20 mm Lumix f/1.7 - lovely sharpness, bit fiddly to focus
25 mm Voigtlander f/0.95 - cracking lens, I ought to get it declicked
45 mm Lumix f/2.8 - nice sharp lens which we are using a lot as portait/CU lens and macro for inserts and cutaways
45-200 mm Lumix f/4.0-5.6 - just acquired as we will need longer focal lengths for forthcoming location shoot and I didn't want to spend a fortune on a lens I will not use very much- at least now we can get the shot, more or less.
12-60 mm Olympus f/2.8-4.0 - just acquired for days when swapping primes is a headache, covers all our usual focal lengths. Have observed the electronic aperture shift effect others have reported, but just don't care as we'll use it as a variable prime.
Total cost was about 3200 UK pounds. About the same as a single CP.2 but covers focal range from nice wide to decent telephoto, f/2.8 or faster for our most used focal lengths for great depth of field control. If we need it, we do have a lens in the kit with macro capability, good OIS, shoot-in-the-dark f/0.95 capability, one-lens run and gun variable prime (sadly without AF, but shrug).
Provides good bang for the buck and provide most of the capability we need, as opposed to the capability we dream of (anyone want to buy me a full set of Cooke primes for Xmas?) Compromises? Sure, especially on the focus mechanism, lack of fast AF capability and speed. But for our narrative film making we're really enjoying using the camera with these in the lens bag - a real step up from the HVX200 and the Canon dSLRs we have been using.
Cheers, Hywel
Last edited:
I own both lenses. Subjectively, the 45mm Leica DG focus ring is 15-20% lighter and much smoother than the 14-140mm Lumix G. It is also rubberized as opposed to plastic grip on the 14-140 Lumix G. Regarding the O.I.S. performance, I found it very effective for close-ups. The O.I.S. helps significantly in hand-held situations. It feels around a full stop advantage. If you shoot under well-lit conditions, at a distance, and having solid support (e.g., tripod), then the O.I.S. may be less useful. Filming while moving may require to turn the O.I.S. off, which is easy with a side switch. Hope this helps.
Regarding auto-focus with the 45mm Leica DG, I found that setting the Focus side switch to Limit greatly helps with the auto-focus performance. This feature limits the focus distance from [0.5ft (15cm) -> infinity] down to [1.64ft (50cm) -> infinity], hence a much improved auto-focus speed. This is a macro lens after all, but the Focus switch does help a lot.
EDIT: I think that this lens has a balanced compromise of a/f speed, focus precision, and motor noise. In a lens designed with such a long and granular focusing range, the motor shall move optical groups somewhat slowly and at much longer distance for greater precision. Also take into consideration the lens' miniature dimensions, superlight weight, the O.I.S., and you begin to appreciate the package. Trust me, I looked around, but could not find anything comparable under $800. This lens is often compared to the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm f/2 Macro, which is 37% less expensive, but lacks many features (e.g., O.I.S., true 1:1, a/f, fixed dimensions, focus limiter, weight, motor noise, native mount) and does not match in optical performance IMHO (e.g., noticeable chromatic aberrations).
EDIT: I think that this lens has a balanced compromise of a/f speed, focus precision, and motor noise. In a lens designed with such a long and granular focusing range, the motor shall move optical groups somewhat slowly and at much longer distance for greater precision. Also take into consideration the lens' miniature dimensions, superlight weight, the O.I.S., and you begin to appreciate the package. Trust me, I looked around, but could not find anything comparable under $800. This lens is often compared to the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm f/2 Macro, which is 37% less expensive, but lacks many features (e.g., O.I.S., true 1:1, a/f, fixed dimensions, focus limiter, weight, motor noise, native mount) and does not match in optical performance IMHO (e.g., noticeable chromatic aberrations).
Last edited: