Lumix Lenses on OM-D E-M5

[stryker]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

The Lumix 14mm F/2.5 works fine for me.

[Frank N Furter]

No probs here with the X14-42 and 20mm/1.7

[smartwombat]

No problems with 7-14, 14-140, 45-200 or 100-300.

[nad]

'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]

Originally Posted by snaarman

...
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 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]

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]

Originally Posted by jdal

Information on this is here 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.


Image3.jpg

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

[dko22]

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

Originally Posted by nad

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