[Klaus]

[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/765_pana14423556hd"]http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/765_pana14423556hd[/url]



by Sebestian

[Rover]

ZOMG the distortion!..

[Guest]

Forget the distortion; the CA is well not friendly to non-panasonic 4/3 cameras <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[Sylvain]

Klaus, Sebastian,



thanks for the review but for once I think you're neglecting a rather important issue...

I think you should address the shutter vibration issue. Either by mentioning your sample didn't suffer from it or that it did but that you're assessing absolute peak values. The latter is, imho, useless for a review. The way I see it, you're not just building a manufacturer ranking "who can do the best lenses" but well a review to assess if a lens is worth buying for its price/performance.



see for instance :

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/pz14-42/index.htm

and dpreview and ...



Just my 2 cents,



Greetings,

S.

[Klaus]

Well, I can't really see any unusual shutter action problems with the GX-1 so far.

[Sylvain]

Perhaps you have a revised version, which could be interesting too :-)

Could you provide the serial number or part of it ?



http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/pz14-42/lens.html

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCGX1/page16.asp#lens

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/GX1/GX1A.HTM#blur



For someone hitting the nail on QC for so long, I thought it might be of interest ;-)

[Brightcolours]

A standard zoom with very small aperture. Very high distortion. Very high light fall off towards the corners. Mediocre sharpness especially in the long end. Very high CA.

How on earth does this lens deserve 3 out of 5 stars for its optics?

For instance the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, which scores better in all areas, gets 3 stars.

[Klaus]

[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1344786961' post='19757']

Perhaps you have a revised version, which could be interesting too :-)

Could you provide the serial number or part of it ?



[url="http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/pz14-42/lens.html"]http://www.wlcastlem...14-42/lens.html[/url]

[url="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCGX1/page16.asp#lens"]http://www.dpreview....page16.asp#lens[/url]

[url="http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/GX1/GX1A.HTM#blur"]http://www.imaging-r...1/GX1A.HTM#blur[/url]



For someone hitting the nail on QC for so long, I thought it might be of interest ;-)

[/quote]



These shutter speeds are normal during our lab tests I'd say so no - I've seen no evidence for this here.

Frankly, we are talking about mainstream shutter speeds and as such it would hit all users.

It seems unlikely that this is a wide-spread issue then.



Hunting rare ghosts with serial numbers seems rather odd considering the suggested scope.

[Klaus]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1344789242' post='19758']

A standard zoom with very small aperture. Very high distortion. Very high light fall off towards the corners. Mediocre sharpness especially in the long end. Very high CA.

How on earth does this lens deserve 3 out of 5 stars for its optics?

For instance the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, which scores better in all areas, gets 3 stars.

[/quote]



The difference is that you can see all flaws of the Tamron with conventional setups whereas the flaws of the Panasonic are hidden from normal mortals. The *** rating reflects this.





I can certainly see your point that this is unfair to some degree. If we rated it with -say- 2* on the basis of the uncorrected data we would have faced counter arguments from the MFT user group.

[Plochmann]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1344789242' post='19758']

A standard zoom with very small aperture. Very high distortion. Very high light fall off towards the corners. Mediocre sharpness especially in the long end. Very high CA.

How on earth does this lens deserve 3 out of 5 stars for its optics?

For instance the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC, which scores better in all areas, gets 3 stars.

[/quote]



And let's not forget that it is pancakish, not a normal lens. For the price, compactness, and sharpness I think it is more than 3 stars respective to its market. Watch the promos for this lens, it's all soccer moms taking pictures of their kids.