GH2 Thread: Meet Olympus Micro Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0 and 45mm f/1.8

Played with the 12mm on the GH2 yesterday for a short while, shooting video. Will have it for an hour today. So now I'm pissed. This beauty has reignited my lens lust after I had worked so hard to control it. Really nice lens.
 
Working a something with clips from the 12mm. Won't know till I'm done but will post if I'm happy with it. About a week? If not I'll throw some clips together of just the 12mm.
 
How was the focus ring? Similar to the 20mm? I'm very interested in this lens, but also the 14. Thoughts?
 
peripatew said:
How was the focus ring? Similar to the 20mm? I'm very interested in this lens, but also the 14. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

No, the focus ring functions and feels like a manual ring - perhaps it is but I don't know. It has distance markers and if memory serves it does have stops at either end. Can't help you with the 14.
 
The examples I saw on dpreview looked a bit soft compared to the Panasonic 20mm. How is the sharpness in your experience so far?
 
I'm also wondering about the focusing and ring. Is it fly by wire? Going from auto to manual, how does the lens know what distance it should be on the ring?
 
DrDave said:
The examples I saw on dpreview looked a bit soft compared to the Panasonic 20mm. How is the sharpness in your experience so far?
Click to expand...

I didn't take any pictures, only video. I feel it is nicely sharp without being "videoy". But remember, I don't like the 20mm. I find it too sharp. Guess you'll have to wait until I post some clips.
 
sxm said:
I'm also wondering about the focusing and ring. Is it fly by wire? Going from auto to manual, how does the lens know what distance it should be on the ring?
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's fly by wire or not. All I know is that it has a distance scale and one would assume if they went to the trouble of adding that, they would make it accurate. As I said before, it really feels like a manual focus lens when in that mode.
 
Really interested in this lens, finding a fast "true" wide is incredibly difficult. At $700 though, I feel it is a little overpriced. Unfortunately, Panasonic and Olympus consider there cameras to be in the consumer division, but I wish the prices would reflect that. These would FLY off the shelf if they were closer to the $500 price point. I originally got the 20mm f1.7 because it was only $399. Oh well, it will probably come down in price in 6 months...
 
rambooc1 said:
Which WA adapter have you tried DrDave? I'm looking into doing this.
Click to expand...
I have two that I really like, the Raynox .66 and the Olympus .8 (Model B-28)
The Raynox is smaller, lighter, the Olympus is a monster hunk of glass. The .66 gives you a 13.2 mm. The .8 gives you a 16mm. The both look great to me, but I normally have a wideangle tacked on to my video camera. It just seems strange to put it on a camera, but it works very similarly. Some people say you pull more light in, I don't see a real difference, but you can squeeze way more on a frame.
I have also tacked these onto my 14-45mm. Here, the .8 yields a razor sharp 11.2, and the .66 yields a very wide 9.24. I do use various adapter rings, cheap from eBay.
 
I think my reasoning went as follows: I have a pretty large collection of lenses, and the Panny 20mm is probably the sharpest along with the 90mm Vivitar and a few old Leicas. But at 20mm, the Panny can reach back in super wide land. I figure, hey, they probably can't build a lens that sharp at 14mm, or, if they do, it will be truly expensive. And, of course, for video, a wide angle is de riguer for a camcorder. Getting the 11.2 out of the 14-45 was just icing on the cake. Of course, you do lose a teensy bit of resolution with the wide angle, but you are starting out so sharp.
 
Wides I've used with the 20mm include a Canon WD58 0.7x, Raynox 0.66x, and a no-name Chinese 0.5x. Raynox had way too much ghosting, aberrations, and other icky stuff... the Canon is wonderfully sharp (for a WA), but a little less radical and very heavy - I can hear the 20's motors struggling whenever I focus. The Chinese lens has some corner smudgery, but is very small and light and the quality is passable for some things. Works FAR better when stopped down, so daylight landscapes are its strength.

I've also rigged my 16x9 EXII 0.6x WA from my HVX in front of the 0.5x Chinese - effectively a 0.3x WA combo, or about 12mm EFL... but that's really only good for messing about. I might fiddle with an inexpensive 0.3x fisheye sometime just to see what happens.
 
In my research for buying an Olympus B-28, I've found posts that state the
WCON-08E and B-28 are the same lenses, but one with step ring and one without.

You can find an Olympus B-28 cheap($50), the WCON-08E B-28 not so much($165)

$115 for a step ring anyone?

both should have a 55mm rear thread

Is this accurate info?




On the other hand: I just picked up one of these(used,like new) and started testing with the 14-45 (step ring coming for 20mm)

Kodak Schneider-Kreuznach Xenar 0.7x Wide Angle Lens (55mm)
http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-Schneider-Kreuznach-Xenar-0-7x-Angle/dp/B000205J36

Looks similar in size to the B-28, and while large, the shape fits comfortably in my hand.

It seems far too soft though, maybe just not a match for the gh1 and 14-45, but will wait for judgement until tested with the 20mm
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top