As an old ENG shooter par focal meant zooming in fast, focusing and then knowing zooming in and out after that would stay in focus. Focusing zoomed out never really worked.
I think this might be due to the fact that the lens is pre-production. Panasonic MFT zoom lenses in the Leica line-up are "parfocal" (I own the 12-60mm f/2.8-4 and the 50-200mm f/2.8-4 and both are and I've seen reports from other people as well) because the lens automatically refocuses when it is zoomed so I would be very surprised if the production version of this lens won't do that.
Yeah, but that’s just a different way of describing the same mechanism. For it to be still focused when zoomed out after focusing when zoomed in it needs to maintain focus throughout the zoom range, which means that if you focused when zoomed out it would still be in focus when you zoom in.
@@MrBobthened Perhaps but in practice you could never count on that and no pro did it that way, we zoomed in, got focus and we were good, never the other way around.
It's not just for videographers. I'm an exclusively stills photographer and I have the "brother" lens, the Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f1.7 and it's the best m43 lens I have on me. It's SO SO SO excellent.
The way i see it, it’s basically a 25mm prime and a 45mm prime combined into one lens where you might lose a bit of aperture for the convenience of a zoom.
I don't shoot L-mount, micro 4/3rds, or live in Canada, but your personalities and presentation (not to mention the ongoing saga of the foot!) make it worth the watch anyway.
Now that I have a copy of the 25-50, I can confirm that the production version of the lens _is,_ in fact, parfocal. A Panasonic rep said on a livestream that the lens is “electronically parfocal" in that it adjusts focus as it’s zoomed in and out in order to maintain the focus point-so not a traditional parfocal design, but the end result should be the same. I imagine the delayed release of the lens was to fix the issue that prevented so many pre-production copies from working properly (Richard Wong’s review is an example of a properly-working copy). The original Panasonic livestream is here: ruclips.net/video/y1HaQuZZDJs/видео.html
I am more than thrilled. Maybe a stills shooter might prefer other, smaller options, but for video this is just what we asked Santa Claus to bring, and it is not even Christmas yet. Thank you Santa.
loving your reviews boys - hired the 10-25mm for a week and loved it, just need to get the pair now and most bases are covered. I have an ARRI camera but am having a bunch of fun with the GH6!
Not wrong. Top sports physios are horrible to injured athletes. David Beckham was saying his would make him jump off tables when he was injured - not joking.
If a lens isn't parfocal, it is possible to correct this and as far as I know, Panasonic is doing this. At 4:41 it shows this isn't done if the lens is set to manual focus. Since the effect is very obvious with this lens, it might be a good opportunity to do a comparison between manual and corrected zoom to show how good the correction works. This lens seems also to be a good example to show the difference between the normal and the linear manual focus in the new GH5-II.
As a stills shooter on MFT since little over a year and hopefully for the next 2-3 years, and a wannabe filmmaker that doesn't shoot video - this lens was on my list to look into. I am currently using the 14mm f/2.5 for maybe 98% of my shots, and I am really split as to where to go with my next lens. Perhaps going with the 20mm f/1.7 is the smartest option as having a small lens really enables me to shoot in some spaces. But I also want to experience something wider. All my 12.5mm lenses are for c mount and they vignette badly which means I end up being narrower fov than the 14mm. I hope the upcoming LAOWA 6mm T2.1, 27mm 1.5x T2.8 and maybe the MFT Argus f/0.95 lenses are great and we'll priced. Otherwise there is always the Super Nokton 29mm f/0.8 to spent 1800€ on.
Arnaud Marchal Larger digital image sensors one way or another deliver better results. On the other hand the much smaller micro 4/3 sensors permit smaller and lighter lenses and camera bodies. That is very important for many photographers or videographers. If shallow depth of field isn't very important, micro 4/3 are fine with video too. The first digital autofocus mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses was micro 4/3 and was introduced in 2008. At that time digital full frame camera were very expensive and the real professionals or very rich amateurs. Nowadays the price of digital full frame cameras has dropped at prices comparable to many micro 4/3 cameras.
@@ArneHerz when you have 60+ lenses, it's hard for something to 'die', both Nikons full frame mirrorless and Canons apsc mirrorless range have less than 30 lenses combined but you don't see people predicting their 'death'. In interchangeable lens cameras, the amount of quality lenses available to you play a key role more than the camera sensor size. The only downside of it is that for product and certain portrait photography, you'll not get the shallow dof but apart from that, you can get fantastic results.
correction it has a sense of par focal, It's done via firmware that was not yet available on this preproduction model. It will be identical to the 10-25 in terms of pretty much everything including par focal.
Equivalent lenses will always be of similar sizes across sensor sizes. And these two lenses are prime examples of it, actual full frame equivalent lenses and similar in sizes.
I love the 10-25 too. Since I shoot 1080 60fps, I can switch the teleconverter on in my Lumix cameras. It gives me the same range but parfocal. Just an idea.
By looking similar, they bring great advantage not only for the shooter for sharing the same rig, but also the maker itself, as more parts serve on both lenses. At least one other brand (that I can remember; Sigma and Tamron I think) have a set of lenses that look similar, but the shared components seem to be fewer than this pair.
Using quite often at night time my 50-100 Sigma W/ Metabones XL Speed booster. Yes the autofocus works beyond my expectations. And it stops down from 1.8 to 1.2 (1.1 is showed in camera). The combo is faster but more expensive if you buy new. And it’s heavy. It reminds me why I like my other fast mft lenses. Weight is an issue whit this combo.
Can't fault Leica for their M43 lenses, a lot of quality glass there. Can't really see this one being quite as useful as the ultrawide though, does still seem like a very video-centric lens.
I saw recenty another review of this lens by Richard Wong. In his test his copy seems to be perfectly parfocal. Do you have any insight to what Panasonic claims on that feature / property? Or maybe his testing scenario was flawed?
We've looked into this extensively with some help from Panasonic and Patrick Tomasso. It seems if you manually focus with the clutch set to the front 'AF' position, the lens is effectively parfocal. I suspect this is what Richard Wong did. When you use the clutch in its back "Manual Focus' position, the lens is no longer parfocal. I'm hoping this will be rectified in the production version, we'll certainly keep you updated.
@@thatjordandrake Doesn't it look like the lens is not truely parfocal and with focus clutch not engaged it is the focus motor that is compensating for focus shift while zooming? Thus focus is not truely manual unless you engage the clutch.
What are the best lenses for Fuji video? First or third party, I think that would be a good topic for a video since so many people are considering Fuji for video now. I love my XT4 for video but the lenses I have aren’t super ideal for video due to stuff like breathing. I’m looking at some third party lenses with clickless apertures but I haven’t found a really good video for this topic.
Very nice, but I'll keep my Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and probably pick up the 50-100mm at some point. With my Viltrox EF-M2 speedbooster, they become f1.2 lenses on Micro Four Thirds. And, since I have the OM-D E-M1 Mark II, there's also phase-detect autofocus, so that helps focus them. The cost is also lower than these Panasonic lenses, and I could adapt them to an APS-C mirrorless camera or just put them on a Canon APS-C DSLR if I had one of those.
Obviously it’s not parfocal if you focus at the wide end. The depth of field is much larger and you focus won’t be precise. You zoom in all the way and focus, then you check if the focus shifts when you zoom out. The 12-60mm f2.8-f4 is practically parfocal.
I shoot portraiture, and if it wasn't for the fact that I also own a Z6 as my primary camera, I'd jump on this lense right away. I mean, it's a F/1.7 *zoom* lense. This is craaaazy.
@@allencrider three added value of FF is that you can crop and in weddings I find myself cropping all the time because you can't always make sure gurning uncle Dave game walked into you perfect shot.
@6:50 My eyes were on my second monitor, when I heard Jordan said about the step motor, then suddenly the noise that I thought something was squeaking. I was like what the heck was Jordan doing? lol
To empty pockets with this beautiful monster, versus carry my Pana Leica 25 f/1.4 and Pana 42.5 f/1.7, that is the question (or is it really?).. definitely a bigger dilemma for those who want to get into native MFT glass, but for those who're already invested, this may not be worth it. @Jordan - Could you perhaps offer your opinion on this lens (and the 10-25 f/1.7) vis a vis the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8? That range is slightly different, but does cover a fair amount of the coveted range between 10 to 50 mm (and is much smaller and lighter, although slower in focal length too).
I would’ve much preferred something like a 20-42.5mm to cover all of Panasonic’s f/1.7 primes in a single video-oriented lens. I find that I rarely use my 10-25mm under 18mm and am pretty sure I wouldn’t get much use out of the long end of this one.
Adding a comment for the algorithm engagement because M43 stuff doesn't seem to get much viewer love. Also, mildly curious if this lens would have the same CA issues on Olympus bodies (even if it's perhaps not marketed as a stills-oriented lens) as some other Panny lenses do.
Looking at the 10-25 mm review on lemstip we can see that lens is just as sharp as the very best prime mFT has out there. So that makes it a really viable option for still shooterstoo If th 25-50 mms as good those two lenses are a fantasticduo for all pupouses within their range.
A Panasonic lens, targeted at videographers that isn't parfocal? I find that hard to believe. Were you using a pre-production sample with pre-production firmware? Another reviewer (Richard Wong) claimed it is parfocal.
I'd love to see this compared to the Sigma 1.8 zooms (the 50-100 specifically) for stills. Been considering to look for a portrait zoom for my G85 for a while and I feel like there's far too little portrait and stills centric coverage of MFT.
In case you’re not familiar with Olympus lenses, the 1.2 primes are excellent for portraits! And the Sigma 1.4 Contemporary primes do an excellent job as well. I know you’re talking zooms mostly but there’s definitely some great portrait lenses in the system I think!
@@ForeverYoungAaron I'm honestly really happy with my 45 1.8, it's just that the focal length isn't something I'll leave on my camera over my 17 1.8 or 12-40 - I'd like to have something flexible enough to leave on while still delivering shallow portraits. Sigma's 56 1.4 also looks great, but that's the same problem as the 45 - they're just a little too locked in for me, I'm more of a 40 (equivalent) or 70-200 kinda shooter generally
@@JennyDarukat I owned both 10-25 and 18-35 for several months. Then I noticed my 18-35 is collecting dust. Especially when you mentioned portrait photography! Using manual focus to shoot portrait is a pain. (Auto focus adapter? Not quite working on 18-35) What’s more important is the image contrast and color is much more vibrant on the Leica. If you only shot video, 18-35 and 50-100 are both okay.
Definitely not a primary stills option. Added to the 10-25 it doesn't offer much over a standard full frame and a 24-105mm after you use increased iso to counter the difference between f1.7 and F4.
Why no one can make a lens like the Samsung NX S lenses, 16-50mm F2-2.8 and the venerable 50-150mm F2.8 I never seen lenses so rasor sharp, such beautiful bokeh rendition, good focus pulling capability, super quiet focus motor. Just overall lovely lenses.
The 24-70mm S Pro is as sharp as the 16-50mm S, I have both (still have two copies of the 16-50S). The 24-70mm S is even a bit sharper at the wide end. Bokeh is better on the 24-70mm S Pro too. However the weight, colors and versatility (MFD on the wide angle) are better on the 16-50mm S. The 4k of the NX1 is still awesome too.
@@slows728 The M4/3 24-70mm is that not more like a 36 to 105mm in APS-C world? What annoys me in the M4/3 world is the lack of zoom's that can compete with the compact fast zooms of APS-C world and full frame, Panasonic F1.7 zooms are really large, much larger than my Samsung S lenses apart from the 50 to 150mm one. Mind boggling to be honest.
@@SMGJohn The Panasonic 10-25mm for M43 is not so much larger than the 16-50S. The quality is great, contrast and microcontrast is really awesome on this lens. But the 16-50S has more bokeh. Both have awesome colors.
@@slows728 Ah okay the full frame lens, yes I used it, I used to have a Panasonic S5 but I had to return it, too heavy, going from NX1 to S5 is like going from a speedy hatchback to a monster truck.
For the price of this lens you could buy a full frame body and primes second hand. See the difference in IQ straight way, especially in low light. DoF and ISO performance is the killer for micro four thirds as a photographic format. Would be interested in seeing the t-rating for thos lens too, especially at the far end of the zoom range.
I can get this lens second hand for 1100 bucks. Where's my modern ff camera and primes between 20mm and 50mm with f3.4 apertures? I'd need a 20, 24, 28, 35, and 50 to really cover the same bases as this zoom too. DOF and iso performance on m43 are perfectly fine. They are lesser than FF but already perfectly sufficient for 100 percent of photographic needs. Not 99.9%. There ain't a goddamn thing on this planet I can't shoot with m43 and in high enough quality to be paid for it.
It's still much cheaper to achieve the equivalent range/DOF on larger sensor, for example, Tamron 35-150 2.8-4, Sigma 50-100 1.8. If on budget, I'd adapt those lenses onto M43 bodies.
Given Lumix’s F1.7 primes are so budget friendly and light weight, this F1.7 zoom seems only value to those really need to zoom a lot in making video with shallow dof that F2.8 is not sufficient.
They're still making new lenses for M43? Joking aside I think the Leica lenses for M43s are fantastic. They always have a very rich look to the images; (now I'd like to see what an equivalent Leica lens looks like in L mount form).
За эти деньги можно будет взять Sony A7 IV (180к) + добавить и взять значительно дешевле объектив, как и более универсальный - такой как Tamron 17-28 (2.8) или 17-70 (2.8)
From a physical perspective there is like a 2/3 of a stop difference. Not a big deal imho. The real issue is current m43 sensors are a generation behind or more. My point being it's not a system design flaw but more a specific model issue.
@@romenorom I'm just calculating from sensor size: fujifilm apsc is about 370mm^2 versus 225 mm^2 for m43. That's a ratio of 1.65 to one, not 2 to one giving 0.717 stops of extra light (recall a stop is a doubling of total light). That's closer to 2/3 of a stop than a whole stop. I'm not saying 1/3 of a stop matters much, but if we are being technical let's do it correctly. Of course one could argue that cropping the m43 to a 3:2 aspect ratio makes the apsc have a full stop of advantage, but by the same token we could be cropping the apsc to 4:3 aspect ratio and getting only 1/2 a stop of advantage.
Yeah I have exactly the same thoughts about this lens. The 10-25mm I think is acceptable having a 2.5x zoom ratio considering that it's unique not just in M43 but all systems, being a fast lens that goes up to 50mm full-frame equivalent but also all the way down to 20mm ultra-wide. It's known that making an ultra-wide lens faster is difficult, especially a zoom. There also aren't any fast ultra-wide prime lenses with autofocus for M43 so the 10-25 fills this gap too. However the 25-50mm should be a less difficult focal range to implement in a fast zoom so I think having at least the same 2.5x zoom ratio as the 10-25 was expected, if not even a slightly higher ratio such as 3x; so 25-75mm. That would've been perfect, and Panasonic could have included 135mm and 150mm in their marketing blurb about the traditional filmmaking focal lengths that their f1.7 zooms are meant to cover. There are also many great fast primes already in that range in the M43 system; Panasonic's own Nocticron, Olympus 45mm f1.2, Sigma 56mm f1.4 and Olympus 75mm f1.8. There is no 135mm equivalent in M43 so Panasonic could've taken care of that too. The f1.7 zooms are very expensive so it would've been nice to see this 25-50 go that little bit further. Maybe they were limited to what they could do having to make it exactly the same dimensions as the 10-25 and physically could not extend the focal length further. I'm sure it will do well in its niche as an optically excellent video lens, I've already looked at a number of sample images and they look lovely. Out of my budget atm but hopefully one day I'll be able to afford the f1.7 pair, despite my disappointment at the focal length not being pushed further it still looks like a lovely lens that produces beautiful results.
The image is simply beautiful, with some real Leica vibe. Yes you can get shallower DoF with FF, but the vibrant colors, the micro contrast, the in and out of focus transition of this lens is not commonly found on FF lenses. The matched color is another exclusive feature of cinema lenses.
Some years ago a famous youtube channel presented by a married couple always predicted that mft didn't had a future and wouldn't last long. I wonder if they are sponsored by non mft brands.
shame it's not parfocal, real shame. Greater shame that Panasonic can't just account for that in software and make it parfocal for all intents and purposes
@@salmanul_fares It is a design issue. HARDWARE design and it has nothing to do with "firmware". Can a new firmware create some new glass in that lens ? Do you ppl have schools ?
I saw a lot of images from A7SIII but at the end I think this combo 10-25 and GH5 is still the best video combo you can get.
Images are so beautiful.
No joking, this lens really has a Leica vibe.
@@waynecake5867 yeah
As an old ENG shooter par focal meant zooming in fast, focusing and then knowing zooming in and out after that would stay in focus. Focusing zoomed out never really worked.
I think this might be due to the fact that the lens is pre-production. Panasonic MFT zoom lenses in the Leica line-up are "parfocal" (I own the 12-60mm f/2.8-4 and the 50-200mm f/2.8-4 and both are and I've seen reports from other people as well) because the lens automatically refocuses when it is zoomed so I would be very surprised if the production version of this lens won't do that.
Yeah, but that’s just a different way of describing the same mechanism. For it to be still focused when zoomed out after focusing when zoomed in it needs to maintain focus throughout the zoom range, which means that if you focused when zoomed out it would still be in focus when you zoom in.
@@MrBobthened Perhaps but in practice you could never count on that and no pro did it that way, we zoomed in, got focus and we were good, never the other way around.
It's not just for videographers. I'm an exclusively stills photographer and I have the "brother" lens, the Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f1.7 and it's the best m43 lens I have on me. It's SO SO SO excellent.
Didn’t know this lens was gonna be a thing but now that I know about it I sure would love to try it out! Glad to see continued support for the system
The way i see it, it’s basically a 25mm prime and a 45mm prime combined into one lens where you might lose a bit of aperture for the convenience of a zoom.
That is the way you look at it because you don't want to see it.
@@hankroest6836 ok dude
Like the Leica 25mm f1.4 and the Leica 42.5mm f1.2 Nocticron?
@@MattJett yea
Barely any though - the difference between 1.4 and 1.7 and 1.2 and 1.7 isn't really that big.
I don't shoot L-mount, micro 4/3rds, or live in Canada, but your personalities and presentation (not to mention the ongoing saga of the foot!) make it worth the watch anyway.
Now that I have a copy of the 25-50, I can confirm that the production version of the lens _is,_ in fact, parfocal. A Panasonic rep said on a livestream that the lens is “electronically parfocal" in that it adjusts focus as it’s zoomed in and out in order to maintain the focus point-so not a traditional parfocal design, but the end result should be the same. I imagine the delayed release of the lens was to fix the issue that prevented so many pre-production copies from working properly (Richard Wong’s review is an example of a properly-working copy). The original Panasonic livestream is here: ruclips.net/video/y1HaQuZZDJs/видео.html
But Tony told us micro four thirds is dead.....!
Well this one is aimed at necropolis 🤷
glad you're recovered
Thanks! I'm back to normal.
I am more than thrilled. Maybe a stills shooter might prefer other, smaller options, but for video this is just what we asked Santa Claus to bring, and it is not even Christmas yet. Thank you Santa.
I wish both the 10-25mm and 25-50mm were stabilized and parfocal, then they would be the perfect lenses for MFT.
Thanks for the review, you guys! It's always interesting to me to see how new cameras are coming along.
1. They do this for salary let's hope you are thanking everyone in your life who is doing their job.
2. This video was about a lens not cameras.
loving your reviews boys - hired the 10-25mm for a week and loved it, just need to get the pair now and most bases are covered. I have an ARRI camera but am having a bunch of fun with the GH6!
Yeah Jordan make him walk
the movement is good for the foot
and the pain builds character xD
Not wrong. Top sports physios are horrible to injured athletes. David Beckham was saying his would make him jump off tables when he was injured - not joking.
If a lens isn't parfocal, it is possible to correct this and as far as I know, Panasonic is doing this. At 4:41 it shows this isn't done if the lens is set to manual focus. Since the effect is very obvious with this lens, it might be a good opportunity to do a comparison between manual and corrected zoom to show how good the correction works.
This lens seems also to be a good example to show the difference between the normal and the linear manual focus in the new GH5-II.
Update: According to Panasonic, the lens should be electronic parfocal, so there must be something wrong with the behavior in this video.
As a stills shooter on MFT since little over a year and hopefully for the next 2-3 years, and a wannabe filmmaker that doesn't shoot video - this lens was on my list to look into.
I am currently using the 14mm f/2.5 for maybe 98% of my shots, and I am really split as to where to go with my next lens. Perhaps going with the 20mm f/1.7 is the smartest option as having a small lens really enables me to shoot in some spaces. But I also want to experience something wider. All my 12.5mm lenses are for c mount and they vignette badly which means I end up being narrower fov than the 14mm.
I hope the upcoming LAOWA 6mm T2.1, 27mm 1.5x T2.8 and maybe the MFT Argus f/0.95 lenses are great and we'll priced.
Otherwise there is always the Super Nokton 29mm f/0.8 to spent 1800€ on.
Was impressed by the sharpness of the GH5 used to shoot this video. Another great one.
Interesting Chris and Jordan, my parfocal test result is opposite to your one. Sorry guys I think Panasonic sent me a better copy than yours :D
Micro 4/3 is still very very strong.
... but... but what about all the channels predicting M43's death?
Arnaud Marchal Larger digital image sensors one way or another deliver better results. On the other hand the much smaller micro 4/3 sensors permit smaller and lighter lenses and camera bodies. That is very important for many photographers or videographers.
If shallow depth of field isn't very important, micro 4/3 are fine with video too.
The first digital autofocus mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses was micro 4/3 and was introduced in 2008. At that time digital full frame camera were very expensive and the real professionals or very rich amateurs.
Nowadays the price of digital full frame cameras has dropped at prices comparable to many micro 4/3 cameras.
@@AgnostosGnostos "lighter lenses" Its 1.44lb for an F3.4 lens lol
No, it's 1.7. Stop making stupid calculations and shallow dof fallacy.
@@ArneHerz when you have 60+ lenses, it's hard for something to 'die', both Nikons full frame mirrorless and Canons apsc mirrorless range have less than 30 lenses combined but you don't see people predicting their 'death'. In interchangeable lens cameras, the amount of quality lenses available to you play a key role more than the camera sensor size. The only downside of it is that for product and certain portrait photography, you'll not get the shallow dof but apart from that, you can get fantastic results.
correction it has a sense of par focal, It's done via firmware that was not yet available on this preproduction model. It will be identical to the 10-25 in terms of pretty much everything including par focal.
woo! another monster
I love 1025 so much, fantastic sharpness and contrast
this should be another amazing lens for M43
Equivalent lenses will always be of similar sizes across sensor sizes. And these two lenses are prime examples of it, actual full frame equivalent lenses and similar in sizes.
The GH5 is just such a nice image still for an aging camera.
Funnily enough, cameras don't get worse over time haha
@@Simoneister it's because newer cameras are better and better
Gotta agree with ya
A lot of my friends working in the industry say GH5 color is much richer than A7S3
It is also a very workable camera. Ergonomics, menus, customization and more
trying to decide whether I should get the 10-25 and 25-50 pair or a speed bosster and the sigma 18-35 and 50-100. Such a hard decision!
I love the 10-25 too. Since I shoot 1080 60fps, I can switch the teleconverter on in my Lumix cameras. It gives me the same range but parfocal. Just an idea.
Com'on Jordan, give Chris a break😜😂.
By looking similar, they bring great advantage not only for the shooter for sharing the same rig, but also the maker itself, as more parts serve on both lenses. At least one other brand (that I can remember; Sigma and Tamron I think) have a set of lenses that look similar, but the shared components seem to be fewer than this pair.
Using quite often at night time my 50-100 Sigma W/ Metabones XL Speed booster. Yes the autofocus works beyond my expectations. And it stops down from 1.8 to 1.2 (1.1 is showed in camera). The combo is faster but more expensive if you buy new. And it’s heavy. It reminds me why I like my other fast mft lenses. Weight is an issue whit this combo.
Feels deceptively light even with the battery grip on the GH5II, and even more so on the GX8…
…
Can't fault Leica for their M43 lenses, a lot of quality glass there. Can't really see this one being quite as useful as the ultrawide though, does still seem like a very video-centric lens.
lovely bokeh
I saw recenty another review of this lens by Richard Wong. In his test his copy seems to be perfectly parfocal. Do you have any insight to what Panasonic claims on that feature / property? Or maybe his testing scenario was flawed?
We've looked into this extensively with some help from Panasonic and Patrick Tomasso. It seems if you manually focus with the clutch set to the front 'AF' position, the lens is effectively parfocal. I suspect this is what Richard Wong did. When you use the clutch in its back "Manual Focus' position, the lens is no longer parfocal. I'm hoping this will be rectified in the production version, we'll certainly keep you updated.
@@thatjordandrake Doesn't it look like the lens is not truely parfocal and with focus clutch not engaged it is the focus motor that is compensating for focus shift while zooming? Thus focus is not truely manual unless you engage the clutch.
Is the lens stabilized?
The zfc is so beautiful with old lens. Wouldn't mind if nikon released official speed booster
Great video, like always! 👍🏻 At 3:59 min that is a Nikon Z fc! But why? 😀
What are the best lenses for Fuji video? First or third party, I think that would be a good topic for a video since so many people are considering Fuji for video now. I love my XT4 for video but the lenses I have aren’t super ideal for video due to stuff like breathing. I’m looking at some third party lenses with clickless apertures but I haven’t found a really good video for this topic.
Very nice, but I'll keep my Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and probably pick up the 50-100mm at some point. With my Viltrox EF-M2 speedbooster, they become f1.2 lenses on Micro Four Thirds. And, since I have the OM-D E-M1 Mark II, there's also phase-detect autofocus, so that helps focus them.
The cost is also lower than these Panasonic lenses, and I could adapt them to an APS-C mirrorless camera or just put them on a Canon APS-C DSLR if I had one of those.
I'd love to see apsc lenses like these. 33-70/35-70 f2.2 or something like that
I mean there's already an excellent Sigma 18-35 and 50-100 1.8, maybe a mirrorless video centric version of the same DG DN branded.
There is 17-70 f2.8 by Tamron, also at an affordable price.
Obviously it’s not parfocal if you focus at the wide end. The depth of field is much larger and you focus won’t be precise. You zoom in all the way and focus, then you check if the focus shifts when you zoom out. The 12-60mm f2.8-f4 is practically parfocal.
I shoot portraiture, and if it wasn't for the fact that I also own a Z6 as my primary camera, I'd jump on this lense right away. I mean, it's a F/1.7 *zoom* lense. This is craaaazy.
If Blackmagic were to update the m4/3 Pocket Cinema Camera (120fps please) then this lens would be an instant buy for me
And internal ND
I think that pair would be great for wedding work.
For wedding work full frame makes more sense.
@@Seanonyoutube Nah. Not enough 16 x 20 prints ordered for full-frame to make sense.
@@allencrider three added value of FF is that you can crop and in weddings I find myself cropping all the time because you can't always make sure gurning uncle Dave game walked into you perfect shot.
@@obscurelines You just made a case for using medium format cameras at weddings instead of full frame.
@@allencrider been there done that.
Love these reviews, you guys. Keep it up! :)
Making Chris earn his pay check. Good on yah Jordan. If you don't get this sit, neither does he
Great review, thanks!
@6:50 My eyes were on my second monitor, when I heard Jordan said about the step motor, then suddenly the noise that I thought something was squeaking. I was like what the heck was Jordan doing? lol
To empty pockets with this beautiful monster, versus carry my Pana Leica 25 f/1.4 and Pana 42.5 f/1.7, that is the question (or is it really?).. definitely a bigger dilemma for those who want to get into native MFT glass, but for those who're already invested, this may not be worth it. @Jordan - Could you perhaps offer your opinion on this lens (and the 10-25 f/1.7) vis a vis the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8? That range is slightly different, but does cover a fair amount of the coveted range between 10 to 50 mm (and is much smaller and lighter, although slower in focal length too).
its nice that the focus and aperture rings are matched between the two but Panasonic should go the extra step though and sell a geared version
The 10-25 is so good with range, this one is much less desirable IMO.
disagree, way more interested in this lens than the other 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️ although I do wish it was just touch longer
I would’ve much preferred something like a 20-42.5mm to cover all of Panasonic’s f/1.7 primes in a single video-oriented lens. I find that I rarely use my 10-25mm under 18mm and am pretty sure I wouldn’t get much use out of the long end of this one.
Shot on the GH5? Interesting
Let's hope Panasonic will make these zoom lenses also for the S series...
Way too big for FF
Seriously funky outro music there...
Thanks to our friends at BeatSuite!
@@thatjordandrake The music in your videos is always very good, very well chosen and well integrated.
@DPReview TV : Please give an example of micro four third perfocal lense?
Adding a comment for the algorithm engagement because M43 stuff doesn't seem to get much viewer love.
Also, mildly curious if this lens would have the same CA issues on Olympus bodies (even if it's perhaps not marketed as a stills-oriented lens) as some other Panny lenses do.
2:54 : I see what you did there
can't wait for the video :)
damn I was gonna use this for blurry christmas lights. bummer.
The Ninja Atomos slows down auto focus?? Is that true
Looking at the 10-25 mm review on lemstip we can see that lens is just as sharp as the very best prime mFT has out there. So that makes it a really viable option for still shooterstoo If th 25-50 mms as good those two lenses are a fantasticduo for all pupouses within their range.
As sharp as a prime? That'd be incredible. Where is the lemstip test?
@@LexTNeville It's sharper than the majority of prime lenses.
I thought it was full frame on the fist glance, it would be a genius lens and all I need with f1,7 :-)
The only issue with this is the size. A friend of mine owns the 10-25mm and it is built & weighs like a tank.
As if the price is no issue lol
This will be great on the new GH6.
BAD JORDAN... making Chris Hobblet do a walk & talk :'( Love that lenses
50-135mm F3.5 zooms were introduced in the early 1980's but didn't survive the transition to AF a few years later.
It still has the speed of a 1.7...
A Panasonic lens, targeted at videographers that isn't parfocal? I find that hard to believe. Were you using a pre-production sample with pre-production firmware? Another reviewer (Richard Wong) claimed it is parfocal.
I'd love to see this compared to the Sigma 1.8 zooms (the 50-100 specifically) for stills. Been considering to look for a portrait zoom for my G85 for a while and I feel like there's far too little portrait and stills centric coverage of MFT.
In case you’re not familiar with Olympus lenses, the 1.2 primes are excellent for portraits! And the Sigma 1.4 Contemporary primes do an excellent job as well. I know you’re talking zooms mostly but there’s definitely some great portrait lenses in the system I think!
But this lens has the Leica vibe, this is a real difference.
@@waynecake5867 it is, it's just also twice the price and I'm not in a position to pay that
@@ForeverYoungAaron I'm honestly really happy with my 45 1.8, it's just that the focal length isn't something I'll leave on my camera over my 17 1.8 or 12-40 - I'd like to have something flexible enough to leave on while still delivering shallow portraits. Sigma's 56 1.4 also looks great, but that's the same problem as the 45 - they're just a little too locked in for me, I'm more of a 40 (equivalent) or 70-200 kinda shooter generally
@@JennyDarukat I owned both 10-25 and 18-35 for several months. Then I noticed my 18-35 is collecting dust. Especially when you mentioned portrait photography! Using manual focus to shoot portrait is a pain. (Auto focus adapter? Not quite working on 18-35) What’s more important is the image contrast and color is much more vibrant on the Leica. If you only shot video, 18-35 and 50-100 are both okay.
Great good guys!
Power OIS sync.....?
Jordan makes Chris walk… Jordan does his entire part of the review sitting down… Come on man! LOL
Geez, Jordan, why are you taking it so easy on Chris?
I would've made him do a JOG-&-Talk!
;-)>
Definitely not a primary stills option. Added to the 10-25 it doesn't offer much over a standard full frame and a 24-105mm after you use increased iso to counter the difference between f1.7 and F4.
Why no one can make a lens like the Samsung NX S lenses, 16-50mm F2-2.8 and the venerable 50-150mm F2.8
I never seen lenses so rasor sharp, such beautiful bokeh rendition, good focus pulling capability, super quiet focus motor.
Just overall lovely lenses.
The 24-70mm S Pro is as sharp as the 16-50mm S, I have both (still have two copies of the 16-50S). The 24-70mm S is even a bit sharper at the wide end. Bokeh is better on the 24-70mm S Pro too. However the weight, colors and versatility (MFD on the wide angle) are better on the 16-50mm S. The 4k of the NX1 is still awesome too.
@@slows728
The M4/3 24-70mm is that not more like a 36 to 105mm in APS-C world?
What annoys me in the M4/3 world is the lack of zoom's that can compete with the compact fast zooms of APS-C world and full frame, Panasonic F1.7 zooms are really large, much larger than my Samsung S lenses apart from the 50 to 150mm one.
Mind boggling to be honest.
@@SMGJohn No the 24-70mm S Pro is for L-mount (Full Frame) so it is a true 24-70mm.
@@SMGJohn The Panasonic 10-25mm for M43 is not so much larger than the 16-50S. The quality is great, contrast and microcontrast is really awesome on this lens. But the 16-50S has more bokeh. Both have awesome colors.
@@slows728
Ah okay the full frame lens, yes I used it, I used to have a Panasonic S5 but I had to return it, too heavy, going from NX1 to S5 is like going from a speedy hatchback to a monster truck.
Jordan you MONSTER!! You made Chris walk....to think I once thought you were a good person....dissapointed.
I wonder if they're going to make a 50-100mm f/1.7 xD That would be INSANE.
A 70-200 FF f/2.8 on a SpeedBooster (or equivalent) would be 50-140 f/2 ... actually I have all those bits ... hmmm ...
For the price of this lens you could buy a full frame body and primes second hand. See the difference in IQ straight way, especially in low light. DoF and ISO performance is the killer for micro four thirds as a photographic format. Would be interested in seeing the t-rating for thos lens too, especially at the far end of the zoom range.
I can get this lens second hand for 1100 bucks. Where's my modern ff camera and primes between 20mm and 50mm with f3.4 apertures? I'd need a 20, 24, 28, 35, and 50 to really cover the same bases as this zoom too.
DOF and iso performance on m43 are perfectly fine. They are lesser than FF but already perfectly sufficient for 100 percent of photographic needs. Not 99.9%. There ain't a goddamn thing on this planet I can't shoot with m43 and in high enough quality to be paid for it.
I think Jordan is hiding out of the frame somewhere with a whip in his hand, saying "Walk Chris, Walk!"
Chris, be thankfull that Jordan didn't insist on a hop & talk instead
It's still much cheaper to achieve the equivalent range/DOF on larger sensor, for example, Tamron 35-150 2.8-4, Sigma 50-100 1.8. If on budget, I'd adapt those lenses onto M43 bodies.
The Sigma 50-100 has insane breathing though. I'm quite tempted to get one, but the breathing makes me think twice.
@@professionalpotato4764 True. Options are limited on apsc.
I'm so confused about getting a m43 camera and lens that is bigger than a fullframe in size
Enough smaller choices in m43 world. Take a look at those 1.8 primes
You can only be confused by it if you think that size should have been the only advandage of MFT.
You get a 20-50mm and 50-100mm equivalent with f/1.7 light gathering capacity. What more do you even want? What more can they even do for you?
Given Lumix’s F1.7 primes are so budget friendly and light weight, this F1.7 zoom seems only value to those really need to zoom a lot in making video with shallow dof that F2.8 is not sufficient.
Wish I could afford it.
They're still making new lenses for M43?
Joking aside I think the Leica lenses for M43s are fantastic. They always have a very rich look to the images; (now I'd like to see what an equivalent Leica lens looks like in L mount form).
За эти деньги можно будет взять Sony A7 IV (180к) + добавить и взять значительно дешевле объектив, как и более универсальный - такой как Tamron 17-28 (2.8) или 17-70 (2.8)
Review the Olympus 12-100 F4
If m4/3 sensors would have a similar performance of xt2 or xt3 will be a stellar system.
From a physical perspective there is like a 2/3 of a stop difference. Not a big deal imho. The real issue is current m43 sensors are a generation behind or more. My point being it's not a system design flaw but more a specific model issue.
I have all my hopes on the gh6
@@Wreneagle sensor is not so much smaller. But dynamic range and Iso sensitivity is one stop worse.
@@romenorom I'm just calculating from sensor size: fujifilm apsc is about 370mm^2 versus 225 mm^2 for m43. That's a ratio of 1.65 to one, not 2 to one giving 0.717 stops of extra light (recall a stop is a doubling of total light). That's closer to 2/3 of a stop than a whole stop. I'm not saying 1/3 of a stop matters much, but if we are being technical let's do it correctly.
Of course one could argue that cropping the m43 to a 3:2 aspect ratio makes the apsc have a full stop of advantage, but by the same token we could be cropping the apsc to 4:3 aspect ratio and getting only 1/2 a stop of advantage.
Awww.. papi can walk now.. ❤️
There should be 14-40mm f2.
It should be T1,3 and parfocal.
Just like my Olympus prime lenses!
Sony Alpha we need apsc lens like this
Com'on Jordan, make Chris run.
Chris not learning from his mistakes, still wearing flip flops.
to be fair, work boots that are re enforced against nails are not very common
Jordan, I very much hope that Chris is thanking you for completely unselfishly shouldering the majority of the load in this video… 😜🤣
25-70mm F1.7 would be great. 50mm F1.7 is just a tad short on the long end. 10-25mm is 2.5X this is only 2X
You don't do physics right ? Yes, it DOES show.
Yeah I have exactly the same thoughts about this lens. The 10-25mm I think is acceptable having a 2.5x zoom ratio considering that it's unique not just in M43 but all systems, being a fast lens that goes up to 50mm full-frame equivalent but also all the way down to 20mm ultra-wide. It's known that making an ultra-wide lens faster is difficult, especially a zoom. There also aren't any fast ultra-wide prime lenses with autofocus for M43 so the 10-25 fills this gap too.
However the 25-50mm should be a less difficult focal range to implement in a fast zoom so I think having at least the same 2.5x zoom ratio as the 10-25 was expected, if not even a slightly higher ratio such as 3x; so 25-75mm. That would've been perfect, and Panasonic could have included 135mm and 150mm in their marketing blurb about the traditional filmmaking focal lengths that their f1.7 zooms are meant to cover. There are also many great fast primes already in that range in the M43 system; Panasonic's own Nocticron, Olympus 45mm f1.2, Sigma 56mm f1.4 and Olympus 75mm f1.8. There is no 135mm equivalent in M43 so Panasonic could've taken care of that too.
The f1.7 zooms are very expensive so it would've been nice to see this 25-50 go that little bit further. Maybe they were limited to what they could do having to make it exactly the same dimensions as the 10-25 and physically could not extend the focal length further. I'm sure it will do well in its niche as an optically excellent video lens, I've already looked at a number of sample images and they look lovely. Out of my budget atm but hopefully one day I'll be able to afford the f1.7 pair, despite my disappointment at the focal length not being pushed further it still looks like a lovely lens that produces beautiful results.
Here for Chris’ foot. 😂
The image is simply beautiful, with some real Leica vibe. Yes you can get shallower DoF with FF, but the vibrant colors, the micro contrast, the in and out of focus transition of this lens is not commonly found on FF lenses. The matched color is another exclusive feature of cinema lenses.
Jordan is awesome
Some years ago a famous youtube channel presented by a married couple always predicted that mft didn't had a future and wouldn't last long. I wonder if they are sponsored by non mft brands.
But MFT is dead, isnt it? ISN'T IT?
Wait... Where is my third kidney...?
shame it's not parfocal, real shame.
Greater shame that Panasonic can't just account for that in software and make it parfocal for all intents and purposes
Maybe through a software update
@@salmanul_fares It is a design issue. HARDWARE design and it has nothing to do with "firmware". Can a new firmware create some new glass in that lens ? Do you ppl have schools ?
And I thought the GFX lenses were huge...
Why this channel don't do monetize money from advertisement? -_-
Killer looking lens. Now all I have to do is sell a kidney or a lung and go buy it!!! 😉😉😉