Jump to content

Panasonic 12mm f1.4 announced


Inazuma
 Share

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
2 hours ago, Inazuma said:

http://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-announces-new-leica-12mm-f1-4-apsh-summilux-lens/

$1299.99

I'm sure the performance is astounding... but come on now. Do these mirrorless companies actually want people to buy their lenses?

That's a bargain! In Japan it is announced at 180,000 Yen or 1,700 USD! (http://news.panasonic.com/jp/press/data/2016/06/jn160615-1/jn160615-1.html)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Inazuma said:

http://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-announces-new-leica-12mm-f1-4-apsh-summilux-lens/

$1299.99

I'm sure the performance is astounding... but come on now. Do these mirrorless companies actually want people to buy their lenses?

Panasonic seems be highly confused with regard to pricing. They have the Leica Summilux 15mm f1.4 at $547.99, and they have the Leica Summilux 25mm f1.4 at $597.99. Both of those may be plastic built, and this one is all metal (with a metal lens hood, like the Nocticron). Though, this is now suddenly more than Double the Price. More in the range of the  Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2, that retails for $1,397.99, being similar in built and size (and I am guessing in the more Leica kind of boken). But, it doesn't add another 1/2 stop of light like the Nocticron's f1.2. So, that is where is pricing is all wrong. But, the Nocticron is not weather sealed, though it has OIS. This one is weather sealed, but doesn't seem to have OIS (I could be wrong). 

Interesting. I wish Panasonic would create an entire range of f1.2 lenses and f.95 lenses (24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 100mm FF equivalent), in collaboration with someone like Sigma or SLR Magic or Mitakon. They don't have to be weather-sealed or have OIS. Only auto-focus. And, price All of them in the $499 range. I am absolutely certain, they would be a runaway success. They would sell in the millions.


P.S.: I understand that there is a 'Super Premium' range in M4/3 as well (like the Olympus f4 300mm) that offers per pixel quality better than almost anything else out there. And, those are lenses produced in limited numbers, and that is perfectly fine. I think the Nocticron 42.5mm f1.2 is part of that super premium range. But, a lot more lenses than those are required, and more affordable lenses too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BrorSvensson said:

what a joke of a price, like really. How much harder is it to make than a regular 24mm 2.8 for full frame?

Its not a f/2.8 lens though, its a F/1.4, to get that much light gathering in a UWA lens requires a lot of glass.

15 elements don't come cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BrorSvensson said:

i mean like, you could get a full frame camera and a 24mm 2.8 for less than this lens itself and get pretty much the exact same results.

Na not really, see how the new Leica is double the bokeh size vs Oly 12mm, both at same F2, the glass is not all about spec sometimes

Leica 15mm 1.7 is metal build, only the 25mm 1.4 is plastic, just wish the 25mm can be updated with metal built and aperture ring.

 

leica 12mm vs oly.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I think Panasonic and Olympus are overly concerned with image fidelity. If they put a bit less interest in sharpness and intricate lens designs, they could give us cheaper lenses whilst still keeping large apertures. I think it's been proven that the M43 community in particular is concerned with large apertures; they only need to look at how popular speed boosters are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
13 hours ago, BrorSvensson said:

what a joke of a price, like really. How much harder is it to make than a regular 24mm 2.8 for full frame?

Much much more difficult and much more advanced, and F1.4 will give a completely different look & feel to an F2.8 on full frame, plus it's 2 stops brighter.

It's not right to go around multiplying apertures by crop factor.

An F1.4 on Micro Four Thirds is as a big a hole as an F1.4 on full frame.

If this lens is as stunning as the Leica 42.5mm F1.2, I will be buying one.

Plus... it IS a Leica you know!? It isn't a Zeiss. It's not a Panasonic. It's not a Canon. Leica designed optics cost a lot of money for a reason.

5 hours ago, BrorSvensson said:

i mean like, you could get a full frame camera and a 24mm 2.8 for less than this lens itself and get pretty much the exact same results.

No you can't dude.

First of all an image is a combination of camera and lens. Tell me about that full frame sensor camera that shoots 4K for less than $1200. It doesn't exist yet. Then add the cost of the 24mm for full frame. Forget about that mythical full frame 24mm F2.8 you seem to be in awe of... the premium, sharp, low distortion optics are the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2, the Sigma 20mm F1.4 and if you can forgive the lesser sharpness and more distortion, the Canon 24mm F1.4 - all of those push you quite far past 'affordable' when paired with even the cheapest GH4-standard full frame 4K video mirrorless body or DSLR, namely the A7S II or 1D C.

The GH5 paired with just two lenses, the Leica 42.5 F1.2 and Leica 12 F1.4 will have astounding image quality, likely bettering the A7S II or A7R II with the Batis 25 and 85 for FAR less money. Nobody complains about the Batis 25mm F2.0 price being $1200-ish and that is the nearest modern competitor to the Leica 12mm F1.4 in terms of image quality and modern build standards & AF.

All I ever hear is full frame this, full frame that, it's like people are blinded by the pure simplification of all the arguments regarding image quality down to one spec.

Not to mention the fact that if the GH5 has the GX85's in-body 5 axis IBIS, it will be stronger than a full frame camera in that respect too... And if it is Super 35mm you want, put a Speed Booster on it.

You could say that for $999 you can get an A6300 but the rolling shutter and overheating really kills it compared to what the impending GH5 will likely be capable of in terms of reliability and rolling shutter less than half of what kind of skew the A6300 produces. Then add to that $999 the cost of a 16mm F1.4 E-mount lens... oh there isn't one... ok the cost of a Speed Booster and full frame Canon 24mm F1.4L, and already you are past the $2000 point... Easily.

And that is why Bro... You don't knock this Leica 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Much much more difficult and much more advanced, and F1.4 will give a completely different look & feel to an F2.8 on full frame, plus it's 2 stops brighter.

It's not right to go around multiplying apertures by crop factor.

An F1.4 on Micro Four Thirds is as a big a hole as an F1.4 on full frame.

If this lens is as stunning as the Leica 42.5mm F1.2, I will be buying one.

Plus... it IS a Leica you know!? It isn't a Zeiss. It's not a Panasonic. It's not a Canon. Leica designed optics cost a lot of money for a reason.

yeah but its as big of an hole as an f1.4 on a 12mm lens, aka 8.5mm, which happens to be the same as 2.8 on a 24mm lens. I know i wont convince you but i've never seen anything that proves to me that something like an 25mm 1.4 on m43 does not give the same look as an 50mm 2.8 on FF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Not sure where the 8.5mm comes in.

Anyway let's take your example of 25mm F1.4 MFT versus 50mm F2.8 FF

First of all there aren't many 50s that are wide open F2.8. So are you talking about a 50mm F1.4 stopped down to F2.8?

In that case, the image will be different. It's unlikely the aperture will be perfectly round for a start, unless it has many many blades.

The bokeh will have a completely different character. No field curvature at edges on the 50 @ F2.8

The attractive vignette of an F1.4 wide open will be GONE GONE GONE. Fake it in post if you must, it won't be as nice.

Flare changes. Not as nice, more sterile.

I can always tell a fast aperture on MFT.

And so what if the depth of field is no more shallow than full frame 50mm at F2.8? That's nothing to sniff at - if, say, the forthcoming GH5 gives a LOT more than any full frame camera on the market today, but just happens to have a smaller sensor, I can take that 50mm F2.8 depth of field no problem - especially when the MFT platform has such stunning glass. So many options! 18-35mm Sigma F1.8 on Speed Booster XL! Stunning. Leica 42.5mm F1.2 Nocticron. Dreamy. SLR Magic 10mm T2.1. Cinematic as hell. The list goes on.

Aperture is about more than just depth of field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Not sure where the 8.5mm comes in.

Anyway let's take your example of 25mm F1.4 MFT versus 50mm F2.8 FF

First of all there aren't many 50s that are wide open F2.8. So are you talking about a 50mm F1.4 stopped down to F2.8?

In that case, the image will be different. It's unlikely the aperture will be perfectly round for a start, unless it has many many blades.

The bokeh will have a completely different character. No field curvature at edges on the 50 @ F2.8

The attractive vignette of an F1.4 wide open will be GONE GONE GONE. Fake it in post if you must, it won't be as nice.

Flare changes. Not as nice, more sterile.

I can always tell a fast aperture on MFT.

And so what if the depth of field is no more shallow than full frame 50mm at F2.8? That's nothing to sniff at - if, say, the forthcoming GH5 gives a LOT more than any full frame camera on the market today, but just happens to have a smaller sensor, I can take that 50mm F2.8 depth of field no problem - especially when the MFT platform has such stunning glass. So many options! 18-35mm Sigma F1.8 on Speed Booster XL! Stunning. Leica 42.5mm F1.2 Nocticron. Dreamy. SLR Magic 10mm T2.1. Cinematic as hell. The list goes on.

Aperture is about more than just depth of field.

sorry to confuse, 8.5mm aperture opening. I used to shoot gh3 with a 25mm 1.4 and just last year switched to the A7 and have been using a Nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro an am getting very similar results, what you are saying about 4k and all that is very much so true but that has nothing to do with the highly priced lens. As for a 24mm 2.8 lens that is very sharp and is very well coreccted i would like to say the olympus om one. That lens sell for around 100$, you can then ad a used 5d ii for 700$ and you are well under the 1300$ mark. Also i haven't yet seen any pics or test from the 12mm 1.4 yet so in reality its very hard to say if it worth the money.  Im not trying to start an argument, just letting my opinon out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Not sure where the 8.5mm comes in.

Anyway let's take your example of 25mm F1.4 MFT versus 50mm F2.8 FF

First of all there aren't many 50s that are wide open F2.8. So are you talking about a 50mm F1.4 stopped down to F2.8?

In that case, the image will be different. It's unlikely the aperture will be perfectly round for a start, unless it has many many blades.

The bokeh will have a completely different character. No field curvature at edges on the 50 @ F2.8

The attractive vignette of an F1.4 wide open will be GONE GONE GONE. Fake it in post if you must, it won't be as nice.

Flare changes. Not as nice, more sterile.

I can always tell a fast aperture on MFT.

And so what if the depth of field is no more shallow than full frame 50mm at F2.8? That's nothing to sniff at - if, say, the forthcoming GH5 gives a LOT more than any full frame camera on the market today, but just happens to have a smaller sensor, I can take that 50mm F2.8 depth of field no problem - especially when the MFT platform has such stunning glass. So many options! 18-35mm Sigma F1.8 on Speed Booster XL! Stunning. Leica 42.5mm F1.2 Nocticron. Dreamy. SLR Magic 10mm T2.1. Cinematic as hell. The list goes on.

Aperture is about more than just depth of field.

Thats pure blabla. I actually Prefer my 50mm at 2.8 on FF than the 24mm pany 1.4 I had on GH3. 
Not to mention my 50mm FF costs less and that when I use it wide open all of what you say is not only incorrect anymore but the look completely blows out the 24mm. 

Come back on earth. This lens is completely overpriced and you will never achieve FF results with M43. It has its own advantages (size,..) but please dont try to go in the IQ territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

@wolf33d

Oh really? :)

2x 0.64 = 1.28

F1.4 x 0.64 = F0.86

50mm x 0.64 = 32mm

No arguing with the maths there.

That's a 50mm F1.4 full frame lens on the Speed Booster XL on top of a Micro Four Thirds sensor.

It would look like a 1D C in 4K - as near as a full frame as makes no difference in the real world... down here on earth.

If you prefer your 50mm F2.8 to the 25mm F1.4 panasonic, it's a matter of personal taste not universal facts. And that's ok, nothing wrong with having an opinion on a look.

But the Leica 42.5mm has a completely different look to any of the other Lumix lenses and I am sure this Leica 12 will be in a similar league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
1 hour ago, BrorSvensson said:

I used to shoot gh3 with a 25mm 1.4 and just last year switched to the A7 and have been using a Nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro an am getting very similar results

The original A7?... hmm. Similar results to a GH3? Not really. It has bags of aliasing, moire, pathetic codec and a soft image.

Not my cup of tea.

If you're going to use the 55mm F2.8, why not put it on an A7S for 1080p?

Quote

what you are saying about 4k and all that is very much so true but that has nothing to do with the highly priced lens.

Yes 4K has a lot to do with it.

You need better lenses for it.

Quote

As for a 24mm 2.8 lens that is very sharp and is very well coreccted i would like to say the olympus om one. That lens sell for around 100$

I have this lens.

An ok cheap lens, nothing unique or special really, aside from it being nice and compact.

However you're not comparing kit that's even in the same league.

When you say 'very sharp and well corrected'... not compared to the Batis 25mm F2 or the Leica 12mm F1.4!

This is my entire point.

It's not overpriced. It's just fucking good. The absolute cutting edge comparable with Leica's $$$ M lenses.

The Olympus OM lenses are all soft in comparison, designed for film SLRs and a long flange distance.

The Leica 12mm is designed for digital, short flange distance mirrorless like a rangefinder M lens. BIG difference.

Quote

you can then ad a used 5d ii for 700$ and you are well under the 1300$ mark.

Lovely.

But your argument seems to be that this would be as 'sharp' and as highly corrected as a GH5 + Leica 12mm F1.4, which thus makes the Leica overpriced because it isn't any 'better'.

Nope.

You have lost your own argument!

Quote

Also i haven't yet seen any pics or test from the 12mm 1.4 yet so in reality its very hard to say if it worth the money.  Im not trying to start an argument, just letting my opinon out there.

I have seen the samples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

Thats pure blabla. I actually Prefer my 50mm at 2.8 on FF than the 24mm pany 1.4 I had on GH3. 
Not to mention my 50mm FF costs less and that when I use it wide open all of what you say is not only incorrect anymore but the look completely blows out the 24mm. 

Come back on earth. This lens is completely overpriced and you will never achieve FF results with M43. It has its own advantages (size,..) but please dont try to go in the IQ territory.

IQ is one thing and characteristics is another, I prefer the the rendering from Leica 42.5mm F1.2 than Batis 85mm 1.8, Zeiss is never that sharp at 1.8 vs Leica at 1.2, and OOF on Leica is nicer, no onion rings, even though the bokeh is smaller but more pleasing. I got A7RII, A7S, FS5, GH4 and G7 so I know what I am talking.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

IQ is one thing and characteristics is another, I prefer the the rendering from Leica 42.5mm F1.2 than Batis 85mm 1.8, Zeiss is never that sharp at 1.8 vs Leica at 1.2, and OOF on Leica is nicer, no onion rings, even though the bokeh is smaller but more pleasing. I got A7RII, A7S, FS5, GH4 and G7 so I know what I am talking.

 

You must have a dud, my Batis 85 is crazy sharp wide open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...