[Sibbi]

Hi Zoners <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />



It's time for the next mFT lens review...



http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/721-pana45175



Your comments are welcome...



Bye Sebastian

[MartinOcando]

[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1333041004' post='17154']

Hi Zoners <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />



It's time for the next mFT lens review...



http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/721-pana45175



Your comments are welcome...



Bye Sebastian

[/quote]



Wow, thanks Sebastian. I can now hit Confirm Order on B&H cart. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Great MTF numbers BTW. Why just 3 stars then? It was the vignetting or the lateral CA ?

[Guest]

I'm curious when will the tests move to the 16mp sensors ? (I presume it was tested on the gf1 from the picture but did not actually see the test camera listed). Given that the resolution does not decrease at smaller aperture (f11 for example) I would presume that this lens is resolution limited and would perform badly with higher density sensors. Is this the case or is my presumption faulty ?

[MartinOcando]

All sample images were taken with the GH2, so I assume the test was done on the 16MP GH2 sensor. Am I right?

[Sibbi]

[quote name='Martin Ocando' timestamp='1333042635' post='17159']

All sample images were taken with the GH2, so I assume the test was done on the 16MP GH2 sensor. Am I right?

[/quote]



no - the test was done with the GF1... only the sample shots were taken with the GH2...



There will be a new mFT test camera starting with the next review - let yourself be surprised <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Regarding the 3 optical stars - it's a combination of lateral CAs, vignetting and resolution...

[MartinOcando]

[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1333043647' post='17162']



There will be a new mFT test camera starting with the next review - let yourself be surprised <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



My bet is on either GF5 or GH3. But, we'll see <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />

[Guest]

Sebastian does the flatness of the curve from f4 to f11 suggest that at the wider aperture the lens is resolution limited (i.e, a better lens would have higher resolution wide open than at f11) and therefore this lens will be more daunting (read lower '*') on cameras with higher density sensors ?





[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1333043647' post='17162']

no - the test was done with the GF1... only the sample shots were taken with the GH2...



There will be a new mFT test camera starting with the next review - let yourself be surprised <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Regarding the 3 optical stars - it's a combination of lateral CAs, vignetting and resolution...

[/quote]

[johnrangulo]

So, no drop in sharpness at 1/160 or 1/200 sec exposures (especially at 175mm, with OIS handheld or without OIS on a tripod)?

[Sylvain]

[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1333041004' post='17154']

Hi Zoners <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />



It's time for the next mFT lens review...



http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/721-pana45175



Your comments are welcome...



Bye Sebastian

[/quote]



Thanks Sebastian. Don't forget to add it in the Lens review index (non forum pages), it doesn't appear there for me.



Hmm I can't help being puzzled with their X strategy, at least marketing wise. The told us it would be video friendly but also *higher quality consumer stuff* as the price shows. (not to be mixed with high grade stuff).

Yet the 14-42, OIS issue apart, didn't really do much better than its ancestors but at least it has a design trick up its sleeve with the collapse-ability.

The 45-175 is indeed smaller than the 45-200 but I'm surprised it's not a big notch better. It's better in Vignetting & CA but it's also more expensive for slightly lower sharpness than the 45-200 that is IMHO, not a very sharp lens to start with... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Both X lenses surely innovate but shouldn't be regarded as anything else than new kit lenses IMHO.



Which makes the X designation for the upcoming High Grade a bit moot if it's not only about video?



Oh well... Still that lack of consistency in m43 land from Oly & Panasonic.

[Guest]

[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1333055289' post='17172']Oh well... Still that lack of consistency in m43 land from Oly & Panasonic.[/quote]



The last PZ lens tests for MFT were all a bit disappointing. E.g. according to these the Oly 45mm is not sharper than the old 14-45 kit lens at 45mm; the Pana 100-300 doesn´t top the 45-200 at 200mm. And now this. Somehow hard to believe.