Best Micro Four Thirds Lenses | Panasonic Lumix Lenses 

How do u fine the g9 works for photography?

@@calebjones7769 it's a very good camera.

Thank you. Lol about the transition from studio to “utilitarian storage”

The whole trifecta of Sigma primes is worth , not just mentioning, but buying!

I'm not sure if i would like it. It's seems a bit superior to 20mm/f1.7, but ... ... size and weight of 45-200? Ehh ... not exactly what I prefer :-( I don't know, I'm considering buying it for half year but when I realize how big and heavy it is I start to look for something else. Advantage of 20mm/f1.7 is that it does not scare people.

I got it for my Sony,

Yeah you can’t go wrong with that.

I also have the 20mm f/1.7, it's probably the best lens in terms of quality price ratio. It's incredibly sharp and very easy to use in various situations. I let it connected to my camera all the time to shoot or store the camera in my little bag. It's perfect for street photos or landscape.

How is 25mm too close but 35mm is not..??

@@joelarrarte8486 distance, it's about distance between you and the camera. 25mm was to close for the distance I'm using it for.

so happy to hear that :-) I got a used GF1 with 20mm/f1.7 for only 70 bucks in 2020. I'm soooooo happy with it... thank you guys*\0/*

I currently have the 12-60mm lens 35mm focal length. Is there any lens with similar focal length (35mm or 50mm) with lower aperture than atleast 2.4 or 1.8 for a reasonable price?

@@duatasolo1412 Do you mean a 35mm & 50mm full frame equivalent? Or micro 4/3 equivalent field of view?

@@duatasolo1412 In full frame equivalent, the 14mm f2.5 (28mm full frame) is the best budget for me, it's fast, sharp and portable of its size, then the 25mm f1.7 (50mm full frame) is also the best budget prime for, sharp and portable too, I usually stick to Lumix native lenses because of its form factor.

@@johnvincentespiritu4768 yes, full frame scale. Thanks man. My only concern about small focal length lens is the portrait photography. is 28mm good enough for closeup portraits?? Was actually thinking for 50mm but that's got to be a prime lens which i cannot afford at the moment. Yes i want to stick with lumix too, i have g85. Would that 28mm lens be about $200?

@@duatasolo1412 for the lumix 14mm f2.5 is acceptable for portraits, you just need to get a little bit closer to the subject to get that bokeh background, also good for vlogging if you're in to that, I still recommend the 25mm since it has longer focal length and wider aperture for portraits, their price is quite the same but for my 14mm, I bought it for a bargain of 125$ (which almost the price of the 25mm of 150-160$ new) but maybe you can find the 14mm on a old Camera body which I see can sell for around 60$ or less.

Such an interesting critique to a multimedia video content creator. But I have to agree.

I think you’re right. For me of those two lenses the 14-140 is far more versatile. It’s my go to lens. But if low light is an issue then 35-100 can’t be beat.

I’ve barely used my 100-300 at all. A handful of times. Would be interested to know how you find opportunities to utilize it.

@@mouseykins01 To my surprise I had fun with it outdoors, picking out interesting bits of the landscape while sitting on a panoramic mountain top. It requires a different way of observing the environment. Much more attention to detail is required as the images will have reduced content - which suits my style, actually. Generally, I think it is useful in places that have a very wide and far overview with plenty of things in it. In more narrow situations it is useless.

Does panasonic still have leica features or something to that effect? Just startwd shopping, cheers

@@svnbit8408 Yes, they have a number of Leica glass lenses. They are amazing.

sony

It's called the P leica 10-25 f 1.7. Very fast, high end optics.

@@harryniedecken5321 $1,882.71 yeah sorry don't want to pay that much. I only buy lens that are around 1000 or less

@@EyeLensWeddingVideography I completely understand. Same.

absolutely no

One of the few I don’t have. What are your impressions of it?

You are 100% right. The Leica-Lumix 12-60 is now my "go to lens". It is very sharp and more versitale than the Pansonix 12-35, even though it is slightly slower. That extra reach, means a lot in the field or while carrying just a few lenses. Thanks for bring this lens up in to the conversation. My camera bag has the 8-18, 12-60, 50-100, these are all very sharp and the glass is Leica. This is in no way to disparage the regular Panasonic Lumix lenses. They are all fine as well.

I live in the US, originally from England.

You clearly have zero clue about lenses.

@@kencur9690 You have no fundaments to say that, yet, you criticise me... What ever you think it makes a prime lens better is subjective.

@@ruylastra7249 I have no fundaments? And how do you even know which “fundament” I do or do not possess? I am assuming you mean basis? The basis is your inane comment. And what are you blabbering about prime lenses and subjectivity? Clarity in optics is very much an objective subject, and yes, in 99% of the cases you very much get what you pay for.

@@ruylastra7249 I mean, what you are doing here is a clear case of rationalization, to somehow make you believe that you can get the same quality lens for cheaper. It is precisely what you accuse “ostentatious people” of doing. The irony! You can get good enough lenses at reasonable prices, and with differing quality at different price points, but let’s not fool ourselves here: truly good optics are never cheap.

remember we are poor... review all the lens 👍

That’s what the title says, no?

FYI see following which states, "With the Four Thirds system, the diagonal length of the image sensor is about 1/2 that of 35mm film. This facilitates the conversion of the focal length required for a given angle, which is about 1/2 of the focal length of the 35mm film camera lenses. Users who are accustomed to the traditional 35mm film camera can easily estimate the angle of view of a Four Thirds camera (for example, a 14-50mm lens for Four Thirds camera is equivalent to a 28-100mm lens for 35mm film camera) ." www.four-thirds.org/en/special/lens_knowledge.html

@@rickkoloian4179 which does not invalidate anything i said. crop sensor crop the center of the image and make it appears to be twice as large. from picture composition point view, it is similar to a FF zoomed in. but this similarity ends here. zooming also has other characteristics such as lens compression which the background of the image will appear larger and compressed closer to the foreground, this aid the look of bokeh among other things . crop lens does NOT do any of the lens compression because it is NOT changing your focal length. it is simply taking the FF image and crop the center. the main misconception that people has is that MFT system functions like equivalent FF system zoomed twice and take the picture. this is wrong. there is no change of focal length involved at all. MFT system behaves as if FF system take the picture at the same focal length, and zoomed in after the picture is taken. remember the action of zooming has more impact than just AOV. This is the reason why street portrait is almost always taken with long focal length further away from model, not short focal length and close to model even if the angle of view and composition is the same. It has everything to do with control and compressing the background. a 25mm focal length will not give you that compression if it is on a MFT or even on a cellphone (which often has crop factor of 10 to 15) For MTF company to claim something like 25mm for MFT is 50 mm equivalent of full frame because they have same AOV is not different than someone claims a burger from burger king is as good as some dishes from Michelin restaurants because they have the same calories. there are more to focal length than just AOV.

@@ghunterforever The problem is you are not using "crop" in the way it is normally defined which is "the act of excluding elements from an image frame." In this case the MFT sensor is another image frame resulting in focal lengths one-half the size of a 35mm equivalent, not a crop. See www.slrlounge.com/glossary/cropping-definition/

@@ghunterforever Lots of theory, obviously no practice. Try actually comparing equivalent lenses and see what you get.