PDA

View Full Version : Lumix Lenses on OM-D E-M5


stryker
16th July 2012, 02:51 PM
Has anyone on here experiece of using Panasonic Lumix m4/3rds lenses on the E-M5.
I have read on other forums that there are a few issues with Lumix lenses especially the 20mm F1.7.
I have recently completed my move from Olympus 4/3rds to Micro 4/3rds and have the 20mm F1.7, 14-45 & 45-200mm Lumix lenses and I am considering buying just the OMD E-M5 body in September when I visit Suffolk and intend calling in at Wex and having a good look at the camera.

snaarman
16th July 2012, 03:11 PM
I am using the 14-45 on the E-M5, and it works fine. The AF is fast and I have not had any problems with it. It looks good and works well.

There is one aspect I am unsure of: Panasonic do in camera lens corrections (distortion and chromatic aberration) and I am not certain if the E-M5 does this as well. I use raw files (via Adobe ACR) and I can't say the output from the 14-45 looks at all distorted, so maybe some correction does happen somewhere. The jury is still out...

Pete

DekHog
16th July 2012, 03:27 PM
I use the 20mm and haven't had any problems with it, although some people report problems with locking up and having to remove/replace the battery to reset it; these seem to be in a very small minority, although the issue does undoubtedly exist...... will probably be fixed through firmware (if we ever get firmware we feel we can safely update with!).

CJJE
16th July 2012, 03:35 PM
I'm also using all my old Lumix lenses on my E-M5 without problem. The latest firmware may also cure the banding problem at high ISOs that was reported when the 20mm lumix lens is used on the E-M5, and the lock-up problems seemed to be exacerbated when the camera went into sleep mode. Perhaps because I turn mine off to conserve battery life when not actively shooting, I've never experienced this.

As Derek says there are supposed to be some issues over the software image correction when Lumix lenses are used on Olympus bodies (and vice-versa) but I can't say I've noticed any issues in practice.

Loup Garou
16th July 2012, 03:59 PM
I have the Lumix 100-300mm MFT lens and have found that it works very well with the OM-D. No issues whatsoever so far.

StephenL
16th July 2012, 04:03 PM
I've used quite a few Panasonic lenses on my E-M5 with no problems at all, including the 20mm, which I hold in high regard.

Greytop
16th July 2012, 05:09 PM
No problems to report here, I have used the 20 f/1.7 (now sold) and currently have the 25 f/1.4, 12-35 f/2.8 and 100-300 f/4-5.6 all is good.
As I understand it Olympus correct for distortion in camera (Jpegs only) but not colour fringing (which Panasonic do).

steverh
16th July 2012, 05:11 PM
The Lumix 14mm F/2.5 works fine for me.

Frank N Furter
16th July 2012, 05:21 PM
No probs here with the X14-42 and 20mm/1.7

smartwombat
16th July 2012, 06:40 PM
No problems with 7-14, 14-140, 45-200 or 100-300.

nad
16th July 2012, 07:28 PM
'allo 'allo

I've had the lock up problem a few times with the 20/1.7 and had to remove the battery.

And a starnge problem. Changing from the 20/1.7 to the ZD50/2.0+EC14 it wouldn't focus. Changing back to the mZD12-50, which works and back til to the ZD50/2.0+EC14 it suddenly works. And I've experienced it more than once.

Pete, try looking at a JPG and the corresponding ORF in Faststone. Faststone doesn't show corrections in the ORF file, but they are in the JPG. I've just checked at OM-D + 20/1.7 picture.

niels

jdal
16th July 2012, 07:41 PM
...
There is one aspect I am unsure of: Panasonic do in camera lens corrections (distortion and chromatic aberration) and I am not certain if the E-M5 does this as well. I use raw files (via Adobe ACR) and I can't say the output from the 14-45 looks at all distorted, so maybe some correction does happen somewhere. The jury is still out...

Pete

Information on this is here (http://www.flickr.com/groups/adobe_lightroom/discuss/72157624725411575/) on Flickr, sounds authentic.

To summarise, all M4/3 lenses have distortion data built in, this is processed by the M4/3 body and embedded in the RAW. The data is honoured by ACR/Lightroom.

nad
16th July 2012, 07:47 PM
UPS, I forgot one thing. The 25/1.4 rattles from time to time. I've only had it since Friday, so I don't know how serious it is. But it like if I turn the OM-D off and on it disapears. I just can't figure out what makes it start...

niels

peak4
16th July 2012, 08:52 PM
Information on this is here (http://www.flickr.com/groups/adobe_lightroom/discuss/72157624725411575/) on Flickr, sounds authentic.
To summarise, all M4/3 lenses have distortion data built in, this is processed by the M4/3 body and embedded in the RAW. The data is honoured by ACR/Lightroom.

If it's been posted by Godfrey I'll bet on it being correct. I might not agree with all his opinions, but factually he's normally spot on.

I know this is small and poor quality but it does illustrate the point if you click on it. Taken with Pen & 14-140mm@14mm and chosen to show the distortion, rather than for artistic merit. :)
From a screenshot of two adjacent thumbnails, as displayed in Faststone.
I tried using the image compare function to show the two side by side, but Faststone seemed to correct the barrel distortion in the RAW file when it displayed it, so they looked very similar. I presume the thumbnail for the .orf is generated from the jpeg embedded in the RAW file and is uncorrected.


2392

Even in the jpg, the distortion isn't fully corrected.

dko22
16th July 2012, 10:14 PM
lots of threads on the "rattlesnake" effect of the 25mm 1.4 caused by the noisy aperture blades on this lens which chatter in certain circumstances, particularly when it's too bright to get a shot wide open and the lens is trying to work out how to display the liveview image -or something along those lines. I found this was more noticeable on the GH2 than the E-M5 in fact (and a good deal worse with the Pen Mini). Basically it doesn't affect images at all and there's no reason to be alarmed.

The only Lumix lens I've seen a genuine issue with is the 7-14. In certain low light, high contrast situations, an area, sometimes quite large, of purple ghosting appears. There seems to be a minor effect with a Panny camera but far less noticeable. Only real fix when it's bad is simply to recompose the shot unless it's in an area of even colour in which case can be easily eliminated in pp. Olympus are aware of the issue but it's questionable whether anything can be done in firmware as it may have to do with the sensor to back lens element distance/angle --I'm not aware if there is a consensus on this yet. The good news is that most people will seldom see it as it does require both low light and very high contrast from a brighter source such as light coming in through a window into an otherwise dark room. Haven't seen it outdoors at all.

As for the 20mm -- I no longer have it but I suspect a lot of reports are exaggerated. With virtually any non FF sensor you will get potential banding in dark shadows at over 6400 ISO. It's a fact of life. Anyway, if nothing's moving, you probably never need 6400 with this camera and if it is, then there's always the D800....

David

UPS, I forgot one thing. The 25/1.4 rattles from time to time. I've only had it since Friday, so I don't know how serious it is. But it like if I turn the OM-D off and on it disapears. I just can't figure out what makes it start...

niels

Ian
17th July 2012, 08:56 AM
The 'rattlesnake' effect is mainly evident on Olympus bodies with Panasonic lenses fitted. Olympus bodies can sometimes rapidly switch between full aperture and the exposure aperture while focusing. I haven't fully grasped what is going on, but I think the exposure aperture is used for a faithful preview of the scene but focusing is done at full aperture. It seems that Olympus lenses have a less noisy iris mechanism than some Panasonic lenses.

Ian

Ian
17th July 2012, 09:39 AM
I am using the 14-45 on the E-M5, and it works fine. The AF is fast and I have not had any problems with it. It looks good and works well.

There is one aspect I am unsure of: Panasonic do in camera lens corrections (distortion and chromatic aberration) and I am not certain if the E-M5 does this as well. I use raw files (via Adobe ACR) and I can't say the output from the 14-45 looks at all distorted, so maybe some correction does happen somewhere. The jury is still out...

Pete

Panasonic bodies will correct for CA and distortion in JPEGs (not RAW). Olympus bodies only correct for distortion. I don't know if Panasonic bodies correct for CA in Olympus lenses - it should be easy enough to find out, though. Panasonic bodies do correct for Olympus lens distortion. All reference to 'lenses' is for Micro Four Third lenses.

As has been discussed earlier some RAW programs like ACR in Photoshop and Lightroom will automatically detect the distortion info in the file data and apply the correction (for both Olympus and Panasonic bodies and lenses). Not sure about CA correction but I doubt it as I often see CA that is easily fixed.

Sometimes I find it's useful to reintroduce barrel distortion because heads can be elongated in wide angle shots and cancelling the correction normalises things.

One other question that I haven't yet answered is whether or not distortion correction compromises the effective focal length of the lens. An interesting one that.

Ian

snaarman
17th July 2012, 09:54 AM
As has been discussed earlier some RAW programs like ACR in Photoshop and Lightroom will automatically detect the distortion info in the file data and apply the correction (for both Olympus and Panasonic bodies and lenses). Not sure about CA correction but I doubt it as I often see CA that is easily fixed. Ian

Yes, this ties up with my experiences. The 14-45 apparently does have some barrel distortion, but I have not seen it using the raw / ACR route. I do have to correct for CA on occasions.

FYI, If you run the PTlens plugin (which can also do distortion correction) it gets a bit confused and needs help selecting the right lens. It can then attempt to correct the image a second time (!) so care is needed.


Pete

drmarkf
17th July 2012, 01:59 PM
Yes, I find the PanLeica 25mm occasionally rattles on the E-M5, but much less often than the 20mm f1.7 did.

I use the latest version of Capture One (non-Pro) for processing raw files, and it doesn't correct the 25mm's distortion - I run them through PTLens for that (Tom used my target shots to calibrate the programme for the panleica). Capture One didn't correct for the 20mm either.

I've just ordered a 12-35 so I'm anticipating spending another afternoon with a tripod and spirit level shooting some dull calibration images of modern architectural details *zzz

Gwyver
17th July 2012, 03:11 PM
...

To summarise, all M4/3 lenses have distortion data built in, this is processed by the M4/3 body and embedded in the RAW. The data is honoured by ACR/Lightroom.

It is as John says regarding distortion correction.

However my understanding is that Panasonic bodies also apply CA correction (to Pansonic lenses) whereas Olympus bodies cannot process this aspect of Panasonic lens data.

jdal
17th July 2012, 03:20 PM
... However my understanding is that Panasonic bodies also apply CA correction (to Pansonic lenses) whereas Olympus bodies cannot process this aspect of Panasonic lens data.

I too believe that to be true, and also the converse - Panasonic bodies can't correct the CA of Olympus lenses as the data isn't there.

I wonder about 3rd party lenses?

chrism_scotland
18th July 2012, 04:56 PM
'allo 'allo

I've had the lock up problem a few times with the 20/1.7 and had to remove the battery.

And a starnge problem. Changing from the 20/1.7 to the ZD50/2.0+EC14 it wouldn't focus. Changing back to the mZD12-50, which works and back til to the ZD50/2.0+EC14 it suddenly works. And I've experienced it more than once.

Pete, try looking at a JPG and the corresponding ORF in Faststone. Faststone doesn't show corrections in the ORF file, but they are in the JPG. I've just checked at OM-D + 20/1.7 picture.

niels

I've had an issue with the camera refusing to focus with a Panasonic lens, both the 25mm and 100-300 I tried, was a bit strange, doesn't seem to ever happen with the 45mm or 9-18 Olympus lenses I have on it.

Doug H
19th July 2012, 08:40 AM
The 'rattlesnake' effect is mainly evident on Olympus bodies with Panasonic lenses fitted. Olympus bodies can sometimes rapidly switch between full aperture and the exposure aperture while focusing. I haven't fully grasped what is going on, but I think the exposure aperture is used for a faithful preview of the scene but focusing is done at full aperture. It seems that Olympus lenses have a less noisy iris mechanism than some Panasonic lenses.

Ian

Does the EVF frame rate have any bearing on this, Ian? ( I often have mine set to High).
How disconcerting/loud is it with the 25mm? I love the quieter shutter of the OM-D and the noiseless 45mm but hated the 'chattering' of my 12-60 and 50-200SWD as they focused and don't want the irritation of noise especially in a theatre (even if it was only me hearing it). I guess that this is more of an issue with the lens stopped down some way??
Now that I see this "in stock" more, the 25 is an extremely tempting lens!

Doug

drmarkf
19th July 2012, 08:23 PM
12-35 arrived yesterday morning (SRS *clap ): nice!

It handles smaller and lighter than I'd expected, and seems to focus well. No chattering so far.

Incidentally, I note there's a '24-70mm' group test in the latest AP including 2 Canons, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma and a rather tasty Zeiss T*... By those standards, and with the 50 cashback, I think the new Panny's a bit of a bargain.