A Look At The Panasonic 12-32mm Ultra-Compact Zoom Lens
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 окт 2024
- A hands on review of the Panasonic 12-32mm G Vario ultra compact zoom lens for Micro Four Thirds System cameras.
----------
Help keep my channel going - Buy though my Amazon shop at
www.amazon.co....
In association with ePHOTOzine - www.ephotozine.com
Sound post production by Charles Walkowski at www.walkowski.co.uk
See my M43 blog at m43blog.dthorpe...
I find myself watching and rewatching Dave's reviews, whenever I need a refresher on an MFT lens or camera. His legacy is a great one.
Whenever I am looking into buying new gear, I always go back to David's videos. Even when he hasn't reviewed it. He had a brilliant way of evaluating strengths and weaknesses. That mindset is soooo useful to evaluate the need for gear and whether a piece of gear has anything to offer. I miss his input, but I celebrate and enjoy his legacy.
Mine spends most of its time on my GX80 when I need to travel light. It really is one of those occasions when a manufacturer has created a bit of a masterpiece, almost without realising it.
Yes, well put. It would be a useful lens even if the sharpness was compromised for the size. But it absolutely isn't.
Ordered this combo a day ago. Good to hear that you're praising it :)
Yet another good review. David, I miss you so. Blessings.
Humour, data, feelings, wrapped up in an easy listening style... Thanks.
Thank you, Paul - much appreciated.
I find he was reviewing gear I'm slowly switching to. I only found him when he said goodbye. David was very good & thorough in his efforts.
I got one in my gx9: the price increase in respect to the body only version was negligible and this 12-32 has immediately become my most used lens. I can put the camera in my small pouch bag and never wanting to carry more for casual shooting. I would not pick it over my 17.5mm at night, but in daylight the difference in quality does not bother me at all and zoom range comes handy.
I am completely with you on that - I use the 12-32 all the time but take the 17mm Olympus when the light is lower or I'll be indoors. The 12-32 and the tiny Panasonic 35-100mm are unique - and on the GXs - 7, 80/85 or 9 give you a a combination of quality and compactness unequalled in any other system.
Really enjoy your videos David. Balanced and quite a sense of style. I bought this lens for my OMD-EM10ii and love its size, range, and sharpness.
Fantastic lens for the Olympus - much better than the Olympus 14-42 pancake. Mine actually came apart but I glued it back with Araldite. I think Panasonic have upgraded their glue since then!
I bought a Panasonic Lumix GX800 with this zoom recently. I also have a GM1 and this lens is a perfect fit for that little camera. I took some pictures with the lens and it's impressively sharp at all focal lengths, the best kit lens I've used since the Nikon DX 18-55mm VRII.
David, your vocal tone, timing and overall presentation is about the best on the internet! I imagine this is a perfect platform for you! Thank you for all of your hard work to provide us your viewers with great material!
It's a pleasure, Adam. Thanks!
Exceptional review my man. I appreciate the way you put your abuse together with all the necessary details so that a person doesn't have to look anywhere else when they thinking of buying a lens
+Raychristofer Thank you , sir!
Lightweight = plastic which comes at a cost: I used this little gem so much on the GM5 it worn out the folding mechanism. I bought a new one to live permanently on the GM5 which is always in my coat pocket. The optical quality of this little lens is amazing. Thanks for your video.
Yes, the build quality of the 12-32mm isn't the highest, while the sharpness matches its more exotic stablemates. is I have the metal mount version but the one that comes as a kit lens now has a plastic mount. It doesn't matter that mutch but obviously a metal mount will be more robust.
The lens came apart on me a while ago, the zoom ring just came away. I re-glued it with some epoxy-resin and it has been fine since. A common fault, I believe.
Nice video review. Short, pithy, and to the point. I look forward to seeing more of your reviews. Thanks!
Thanks for another great review David. I just love how upfront and informative your reviews are. Cheers :)
That was quick! Thanks, EJ
A great review, useful and informative, as always Mr T. For UK viewers, at the time of writing (July 16) the LCE photo store chain are selling off the last few GM1+12-32 lens for £199. That's why I've got one, and just watched this video. A very handy lens, and neat compact camera too.
Thanks Andrew. The GM1 and this lens are absurdly small for the results they can provide. A real quart in a pint pot.
Good one . I fancy purchasing this lens for travel . I already have a olympus 14 to 42mm lens . It's not cheap in Canada, about 500 dollars plus .
Thanks for the review. Very tempted to pick this one up. I'm in the same boat as you, I primarily use the 17/45 combo on my GX7 and would like to have a 12mm from time-to-time. The other options like the 2/12-35/12-40 would be too much money for a focal length I use infrequently. This may be the ticket. The OIS would also be helpful for video on the GX7.
Yes, the two f2.8 zooms are a bit big for the nature of your outfit. And the 12-32 is only a half stop slower at 12mm anyway. And tiny.
Hi David.
I also have this lens on my Lumix GX85 and love it. Although 12-32 becomes 24 - 60mm 35mm equivilent on GX85. Is it the same on your G7?
Hi Brent - yes, all Micro Four Thirds cameras have the same physical size sensor as part of the standard, so any lens will behave similarly on any of them. The equivalent thing is a bit confusing, I wish we could lose it. With so many different sensor sizes around now, we need to be talking in terms of angle of view since that is universal. Nice lens, isn't it? Tiny but very sharp.
Thanks David, you have sold me on it. It is only around £115 new (separated from kit) on eBay these days. At that price with the impressive quality it is a no brainer to carry along when 12mm is needed. I can also see it being ideal for social occasions when you want a lightweight option for quick snaps. I was considering the wider Oly 9-18mm but it is at least double the price (used), has much worse (unacceptable) corners and no OIS. The only issue is getting used to no focus ring, which might actually be a good thing as I will learn how to make use of the camera's tech.
+Uscenes relaxing videos I'm used to the idea now that the camera focuses more accurately and faster than I can :-(
I manually focus video and macro but in day to day photography I'm happy enough without a focusing ring. I never thought I'd say that but the single shot AF on Micro Four Thirds cameras is the best there is and certainly as near instant as makes no difference.
+David Thorpe I am sure that a camera like my GH4 would be more accurate than I, especially without an external monitor. Focus peaking alone can be a bit misleading I find. In a bidding war now on eBay, should have one ordered in a few hours. Might then get the also reasonably priced 35-100 if I get the hang of it.
+Uscenes relaxing videos Good luck!
Late in to party, but that one is one of the best lensen ive ever had. Sharp, not clinical sharp, but good sharp. None CA what so ever, and thats pure image quality, there. No CA. A kit Zoom that is close to in IQ to a Sony E 35mm and or a 1,8 and Zeiss E mount, even contrast is really good. Its stupendus good. 70 gram of kit zoom, 20mm. What more could one ask fore?
Nice review as usual David. What are your thoughts on the comparative image quality between this lens at 14mm and your 14-140mm at the wide end at 14mm, Is there much of an image difference and which one looks better?
I love hearing you get so worked up over "just" a kit lens, DT.
That shot with the full kit in one hand pretty much says it all!
It does, doesn't it? I do love original thought and design.
Love your reviews. I've just recently switched to M43 after my last holiday. I decided I needed to get a smaller camera with fewer and smaller lenses. I now have a GX80 with a Panasonic 14-140 but I am trying to decide on a compact lens for some street photography, I have narrowed it down to the Panny 20mm 1.7, this 12-32 Compact Zoom lens and the Olympus 17mm - I cant decide between the three though....
For street work, I'd recommend the Olympus 17mm. The 12-32 is excellent but you already have this range covered by a zoom. The 20mm is a bit long in the tooth now and focusing performance is not to the best modern standards. I think the 17mm would add the most to your outfit. It is tiny and fast and certainly a lens I'd never be without.
@@DavidThorpeMFT thanks David, I had narrowed it down to the 17mm and the 20mm but you have just made my decision easier. Thank you.
New to your channel,great review! For sure getting this lens next 🙌
One you'll never get rid of!
As usual a great review. Thank you David.
Thanks you!
Thanks so much for all your videos David, I have now finally decided on the GX80/85 with this lens. They have a great deal on at Cameraworld which I am taking advantage of. This set up will be great for my street photography and will nicely complement my Nikon D750 DSLR which I use for my Professional work. Thanks again for all you efforts and unbiased opinions.
You're welcome - some of those deals are to be jumped at, I think, fantastic value.
Just found another amazing deal through Park Cameras - GX80 with the 2 lens set up, 12-32 & 35-100mm kit lenses for £449 after £200 cashback !! Astonishing deal, so I cant wait to get it delivered. Might be handy to view some reviews of the professional Oly and Pano lens options next - maybe I'll be weaned off my DSLR one day? Thanks again David ;-)
I saw that one - fantastic value. I've got reviews of the main Micro Four Thirds Lenses, both makes work as well as each other on either make of body. I sold my DSLRs when I found myself always picking up the little Panasonic when I went out and thinking how handy it would be to have a small camera and a bigger one that took the same lenses. So tidy!
David, thank you, yet another lens I am looking at and you have reviewed.
As a compliment to a prime set up of 14, 25, 45 I think this would work for a general walk about.
Does it compare well to the 35-100 f4.-5.6 that I have and love??
+alan white Thank you, Alan. Yes, it matches it perfectly, just as sharp and just as impossibly small for its type.
+David Thorpe Thank you David, I will give one a go then.
Hello & thanks for great review! I Own LUMIX G Vario Lens, 12-32mm, F3.5-5.6 ASPH., Micro Four Thirds, MEGA Optical I.S. - H-FS12032K attached to my Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GM1 camera. When I video record on ANY settings, I hear the lens mechanism focusing on the sound track. Is this normal?
For whatever this is worth: I got this as a GX85/80 kit lens mid 2019. The mount was changed, and is now all plastic. Everything else seems identical. - Furthermore, as of Feb 2020, the two big-name camera shops in the USA no longer carry this as new! It also isn't available on Panasonic's webstore. Seems to be discontinued. - If you can find a used one in good shape (and esp with the metal mount) for $100, it may be a worthwhile investment.
Yes, a very worthwhile investment. Very, very small and light, very sharp, a perfect standard zoom. Sometimes I like to venture out with just a 17mm prime but I'll put a 12-32 in my pocket just in case. I didn't know Panasonic were contemplating or had dropped it. A bad decision. Maybe they have a 10-45mm of the same size - and price - in mind. I doubt it 😕
@@DavidThorpeMFT I hadn't known either. I only accidentally stumbled upon the absence of new 12-32s when I realized the originals were an all metal mount, mine being plastic. Panasonic does seem to still make/sell a 14-42 mkii ($250) and pancake 14-42 ($400.) I may, out of anxiety, casually shop for a used metal-mount pancake 12-32m ($100?) before they become hard to find
@@TonySkraba It's still listed on Panasonic's UK site, though I can't tell if it is the plastic pr metal mount. Whether that means it is available or not, I 'm not sure.
Just got the lens with the gm1 + 2 other lenses (20mm, 45-150mm), for a RIDICULOUS price. The 12-32 wasn't detected by the camera, so I opened it up and it happens that there was a bad connection. I fixed it now, and I'm really happy about the GM1 + 12-32 combo. I was looking something small that I could take all my other Panasonic MFT lenses and act as Camera B when I do interviews. I also have the GX8, with which I use the 25mm, but I found it a bit too big to carry around, as the GX8 already has an odd shape, so I'll give it a shot with the 20mm. Not sure what to do with my 14-42 though...
The 14-42 does seem a bit redundant since the jump from 32mm to 45mm is not so great. I suppose you could put it on whichever camera wasn't in use as a backup in case of a fault but it's hard to think of anything else. Selling is the best answer, I suppose but it may just be better kept as a spare give the prices you get for standard zooms second hand.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thanks for your answer. I'll probably keep it for now. I'm also looking into getting the 14-140 3.5-5.6 for my travel documentary. I could sell my 14-42, (2x) 45-150 to cover the cost. To be continued!
Nice work David. I am a little suprised you were not too hung up on being hampered by not having an actual focus ring though. One of the great strengths of the GX7 is its manual focus ability with focus peaking. I guess manual focus with this particular lens really isn't suited to it?
I just accept that the lack of a focus ring is the penalty paid for extreme compactness and I hope I made it clear that manual focusing with this lens, while it can be done, is a pain in the ***. And also, with the GH3, impossible as far as I could see.
So it's not that I'm not too hung up on it, just that it's a price to pay. As I said, I see this lens either as the kit lens for the titchy GM1 or as a supplement to other lenses. As someone's _only_ lens on a camera other than the GM1, I'd prefer one of the other standard zooms - actually, probably the Olympus 12-50.
Interesting comment, a, you picked out what is the main, maybe only sacrifice this lens makes to its size and which could be make or break for many photographers.
Good point. If I can develop my relationship with ePHOTOzine I should be able to do more. At the moment I have to buy or trade everything I do!
Hi David, thanks for your videos - I've just subscribed.
I have a GX7, and have been pleasantly surprised with the 14-42 the kit lens. I'm wondering if the compact 12-32 lens would give the f2.8 12-35 a run for its money for landscape shots? I'll probably be shooting at around f8 for a wide depth of field. The size difference isn't an issue for me, as I may well use it on a GH body too. The extra versatility of a fixed f2.8 appeals, but is there much between them at the narrower apertures?
Thanks! At f8 both lenses are past their best though still very good - f5.6 is optimum for the 12-32, f4 for the 12-35. At f8 the 12-32mm tends to be a bit better than the 12-35 so unless you really want the extra aperture (and it sounds like you don't) the smaller lens would fill the bill. Both are a big improvement on the edge performance of your present lens at the wide-angle end.
David Thorpe
Many thanks David.
Just snapped up a new one for £110 to go on my Olympus OMD-EM1...Thanks for excellent review 👍
Thanks for the kind words. This lens is a real keeper - there's nothing that could replace its combination of compact form and sharpness.
Another lens! Review as good and enjoyable as ever.
Hi David, that was really good video. Its funny that I own a 12-32mm that came with my GX80 and recently bought a GX Vario PZ 14-42mm, which you compare to in this video. I wanted to explore whether the latter could be a good substitute of the 12-32 due to the extra 10mm (for portrait or avoiding getting to close in street photography). I just tried to compare both of them two days ago and couldn't really find a significant difference between both other than the obvious foca length and that the 14-42 has a slightly bigger aperture at 32mm for instance. I was thinking on selling the 12-32 but your analysis got e thinking... Do you think 12-32 is an overall better choice to keep?
Thank you!!
The 12-32 has always struck me as being sharper than the 14-42 but for me the attraction is the tiny size, the downside being the restricted zoom. There's no question that the extra 10mm makes a huge difference to the versatility and given that any sharpness difference there is is not significant in day to day use, the 14-42 looks the better bet to me. I think that's probably the conclusion you have come to yourself, actually. Just to add, the 12-32 really needs to be paired with the little 35-100 Panasonic for a decent zoom range but that changes the game somewhat and is a lot slower and less convenient.
@@DavidThorpeMFT thank you! It makes sense. Also I like the fact that the 14-42 has a metal mount (I have the plastic version in my 12-32). I might keep both of them for a while and see which one it's actually the more convenient for my personal use but the 14-42 might be winning the battle for now.
Thank you!
I have no evidence but I'm suspect of plastic lens mounts. My 12-32 is an old one and came with a metal mount. It also collapsed on me and I fixed it myself with Araldite! I think Panasonic have sourced a better glue now!
Hi David. Looking for a small lens for my g85. I have the 14-140. Early in this video if I recall correctly you are saying you prefer this to the 14-42 as the wider angle you find more useful, but later you say if you picked just one you’d go for the other: 14-42 due to being more suitable for portrait. I think you’re saying it’s because of the other lenses you already have and carry. (I’m ALSO close to being sure to get the Olympus 17mm 1.8, one of the others you mention here and have well reviewed!). Any clarification on a more recent opinion since this review? Does the 14-42 also have stabilization? Thanks:)
Hi Robert - since you have the 14-140 (what a useful lens!) and will have the 17mm, the 12-32 makes most sense - it really is small. The 14-140 will do portraits just as well as the 14-42 standards. My point about having just the one lens is that the 12-32mm has a rather restricted zoom range, whereas the 14-42 has a bit more and is useful for portraits where the 12-32 is that bit too short. As I say, given the lenses you have, the 12-32 makes most sense because it means your G85 will go in the smallest bag making it a take everywhere camera. Most times when doing portraits you'd have it planned so take the 14-140 with you.
The 17mm is a great general purpose lens given its speed and a very different experience from using a zoom. The zooms are much more versatile but there's something about a prime, small and fast and you can often use your legs instead of a zoom ring!
David Thorpe thank you so much David for your reply. I really appreciate your time and expertise. Having been a point & shooter for so long now (travel super zooms, the Panasonic zs30 etc) I’ve gotten VERY used to zoom usage only which is why I snapped up getting the 14-140 right away and love it. This has all been at the expense of course of what primes offer, so yes, I appreciate the advise as I make these new choices which should help with new experiences, particularly in low light:)
Got one for 70 dollars, second hand with no marks of use. Like I was very very lucky. Love this lens, for the price it's a must have. I only use manual lenses but sometimes it is useful to have a AF zoom lens
At that price it's hard not to buy! A lens you hardly know you have with you but sharp as well. What a bargain, though.
the pictures at 4:30 are stunning !
Thanks! They are my favourite thing, a city at work, full of people and lights and that sense of movement and excitement so that you never know what you'll see next.
i agree. the best pictures happen on travels. im excited that im going to tokio next week :D
was kit lens on my gx80, nice compact and sharp enough walk around lens, can pick up for around £100 for the plastic mount model and around £200 for the metal mount model, probably cheaper still on the bay. 👍
I have the metal mount one which used to come as kit when I bought my GM5. It fell apart as many do but rather than brave Panasonic's unhelpful repairs service I solved the problem with a few dobs of Araldite. It's very sharp and actually as good as any of my other lenses in spite of its size. Probably a helpful side effect of restricting the focal range.
My main RUclips channel has over 3m subs and I used this lens mostly for years.
This lens combined with a GX85 (can get it for free in a two lens kit) is a fantastic b-roll gimbal lens. Can use the zoom and, because it weighs nothing, the lens trombone will not put the system out of balance on the gimbal.
Yes, it's a very handy lens. I was really knocked out when I first used one because I expected such a tiny lens to sacrifice sharpness but it didn't. It's lenses like this that exploit the possibilities of Micro Four Thirds, highly innovative.
Hi David - good review, but have you tried this on any Olympus bodies?
Hi Nick, no I haven't. It will work just the same as on Panasonic but you won't have any manual focusing and the Olympus in body doesn't makes the in lens stabization redundant.
Great review! How do you compare the Panasonic 12-32 vs. the Olympus 12-50 in their shared zoom range?
drchadf Thanks! Both lenses are very sharp in the centre, though the 12-32 is exceptionally so. It's at the edges where the difference shows, the 12-32 being sharp right across the frame all the way through its range whereas the 12-50 falls away. None of which takes away from the 12-50 being a brilliant 'all purpose' lens.
Hope you are doing well David.
Hi David!
Knowing that it has no manual focus ring, how will it work with an olympus omd em10mkiii? Have you tried it on olympus bodies? (had the em10mki and just sold it for a mkiii)
I know that I won't be able to manual focus, but I guess that I'll always be able to use the touch to focus to put the focus point where ever I want right?
I want it as a cheap wide angle alternative zoom, until I can afford (without feeling guilty) or find a good deal on a 12-40 2.8 pro.
Thanks a lot, and as always, your videos are a pleasure to watch.
Thanks Jan. Yes, I've used the 12-32 on my Olympus bodies frequently. In fact, I don't even consider which make body I'm using when I change lenses. It works just as it does on a Panasonic. I don't find any reason to manual focus given how fast and accurate auto is these days but if I did I'd use the screen as you suggest. If you do buy a 12-32, I doubt you'll get rid of it when or if you buy a 12-40mm. The uniquely small size on an E-M10 size body gives you an almost pocketable camera which certainly isn't the case with the 12-40! It's like 2 different cameras, really.
Just a thought but do check if the lens has a metal or plastic mount. Many with a plastic mount have come from a dealer split body/ lens kit and should be cheaper. It's not a hugely important thing but if you do ever sell it, I think most buyers would prefer the metal mount.
David Thorpe Thank you very much for your fast response!
And thanks a lot for the advice about the mount.
I rarely use manual focus too. I only use it for night landscapes and for that I have the Olympus 17mm 1.8 with its manual focus distance scale. Such a lovely lens along with the Olympus 45 1.8.
I should definitely try out a 12-40 to see how it balances on an em10 body. The mkiii has a better grip, but still I guess that it won't be so comfortable as the 12-40 weighs almost as much as the camera.
Finally, how come you've never reviewed the 75 1.8 Olympus prime?
PD: Now I'm going to enjoy your new video about the Panasonic's G1 to G80 journey.
This lens came with my Panasonic Lumix FG7 but in silver. I paid £130 used for it with the camera included. I can see the lens is £100. I definetly saw sharp nice immages with this lens compared to other lenses or is it a different lens altogether? Looks very similar and same specs.
It's exactly same lens optically - which is what really counts - but the mount on the lens sold bundled with a camera body has a plastic rather than metal mount. Does it matter? Not really. Maybe after an awful lot of use the metal would hold up better but given how good modern plastics are, I doubt that it would make much difference. If I was buying and the plastic mount one was cheaper, I'd buy the plastic mount item.
David Thorpe Thank You for the info. Cheers
How would you compare this lens with the 12-35mm f2 8.is the 2.8 has better image quality and sharpness?
Thanks for the review... what is your opinion about the new Canon G1X mark II? i am between the Pana GX7 an the Canon G1X mark II?
I'm the wrong person to ask, really, Giannos, because I specialize in the M43 systems equipment. But in the case you mention, there's no contest because the GX7 (or any MFT camera, Olympus, Panasonic), offers specialist lenses far beyond what the Canon's fixed lens can do.
The GX7 gives access to a system that enables you to do pretty much anything you might want to, now or in the future. If you want to go further into photography, the MFT system is the way to go. Or, of course, DSLRs, as I used to use.
I'd be happy for any Canon G1X user to refute my reasoning, by the way. For Giannos to make a good choice for himself, the more information he has, the better.
David Thorpe Thank you very much for the reply and the opinions,i already own a full frame DSLR but the big downside is the size and weight.. am not a pro i do it just for me and i want something smaller for everyday use and anywhere i want to go lightweight.. Thanks again, one step closer to the GX7 i guess :)
Excellent review! Thanks.
Thanks!
Is manual focus of this lens compatible with newer Panasonic bodies eg. G7? i mean manual focus on the menu of Panasonic body
+triztan roman It is, though I find the screen based MF at best just usable.
+David Thorpe great,thanks i will be getting this, seems good for travel
I use the left and right keys to fine focus with this lens, the screen is all over the place.
Thanks for the review. I bought a 14-42mm G Vario MKII (not the pancake you refer to in this review) when I bought my GX7. I'm about to buy the GX9 and am unsure whether to keep the 14-42 or buy the kit with 12-32. I cannot find any proper comparisons between the 2 lenses. What would your thoughts be? Both are compact enough for me
The 12-32 is the sharper of the two but the shorter zoom range is a handicap. It makes sense in context with the 35-100 mini zoom but as a standard zoom that 10mm matters, making it definitely less versatile and less suitable for portraits, for example.. The other thing is that the kit 12-32 comes with a plastic mount which limits its resale value, if not longevity. The sharpness of your G Vario is perfectly good - I don't imagine you have found it lacking in any way - so personally I would buy the GX9 body and use the G Vario, especially since the main USP of the 12-32, its tiny size, is not a factor in your thinking.
Just checking this for clarity, it occurs to me that talking of the 12-32 as tiny is quite funny - the 14-42 itself is tiny by comparison with other systems!
@@DavidThorpeMFT thanks, that was pretty much my thinking too though I've read conflicting things about which is sharper, especially at the edges. I do have the 35-100 which is why the 12-32 appeals but it just doesn't look very well built in comparison to the 14-42. I also have the 12-35 2.8 with my G9 as a main system, this is more for travel and street photography. The GX7 was an accidental introduction to M4/3 and I fell in love with the system to the point of ditching my Canon gear. Recently upgraded to the G9 but missing that beautiful and compact feel of the GX7 so will be getting the GX9 unless the new GX10 is released in the next few weeks
@@DJColinCook My 12-32 is the metal mount one, an earlier one. Like many of the 12-32s, mine came apart. I fixed it with a dose of Araldite since when it has been fine - meaning, presumably that my glue is better than Panasonic's 🙁 I don't imagine there's a GX10 due yet but having said that my inside information amounts to a big zero.
@@DavidThorpeMFT thank you for the help. Decisions, decisions! :-)
@@DavidThorpeMFT Do we know when Panasonic changed the mount from metal to plastic, and why? Do you know if it was it just the mount material that was changed or were any other changes made to the lens? Info on the change seems sparse at best....... Great review BTW and love your presentation style
Very good review. Thanks.
Thanks, Mike, glad you thought so.
I saw you on TWIP. Brilliant interview.
I thought I looked young, energetic, handsome and manly, the kind of man that women dream of.....that is what you meant isn't it? Ok, maybe not but thanks anyway :-)
I have the Olympus E-PL1 with it's original collapsible kit lens. One major problem with it is that there is some "wiggle" in it. It becomes a problem that with the shutter movement, it will ever so slightly shift the sections of the lens that it will just subtly blur the image, even when on a tripod. I love the look of this Pana lens, but fearful of the same wiggle problem. Can you comment on the rigidity of the sections of the lens?
mamba109 Mine seems ok, no wiggle but the outer barrel has come unglued and I presume I have to send it back to Panasonic. Until then I thought it was quite well made. I wish someone would offer an 'ordinary' kit lens, f3.5-5.6 but made to the same standard as the f2.8s from Olympus and Panasonic as an upgrade.
***** Disappointing ins't it? I've just put some resin glue on mine and I'm hoping for the best.
The wiggle problem was well known on the original version of that lens, and was fixed in the newer version which came with my E-PM1 in 2012. I haven't heard of any similar problems on any other lenses since then.
Excellent edutainment 👍🏻
Hi David. I have the Lumix gx-800 and own the Olympus 45mm f1.8 and Olympus 40-150mm. The latter being almost useless for me because no stabilisation. My budget is no more than £300. Considering getting a second hand Panasonic 14-140mm although I do care about quality so also considering a prime: Olympus 17mm f1.8 maybe. What would you recommend for landscape photography?
Oh and I also have this lens I believe which came with the camera. Bit i find it to be lower quality than my Olympus 45mm so don't use it much.
I actually like my 45mm for landscape. It keeps things at a natural perspective which I like. I also like taking in part of a scene more than the whole thing which tends to diminish it in my view. Otherwise a 17mm is nice. I don't really go for the 'get it all in' philosophy because the wide angle, while giving flashy results, doesn't really show the scale of one thing as opposed to another. But, horses for courses and that's just my personal outlook. In the end, the 14-140 looks the best bet to me. It's not going to be as sharp as your 45mm but in reality no zoom is except maybe the Olympus 12-40 but they hold their price too well. Or, as an alternative, the 15mm f/1.7 Panasonic sprigs to mind, which is a terrific lens and stopped down to f/4 as good as your 45mm. No wide-angle will match the edge to edge sharpness of your 45mm at wide apertures, though. A bit of thinking aloud here - 15mm for the prime and very best IQ, 14-140mm for versatility. The 15 isn''t stabilized but even my shaky old mitts don't need it for a wide angle.
@@DavidThorpeMFT wow thanks for the detailed response. Those are very logical conclusions that have my decision a lot easier 👌. And agreed it's more challenging to tell a story with wide angle lenses and the lack of scale can make a picture look lackluster but I think it will improve my compositional skills.
@David Thorpe, I like this lens but I have many doubts in contrast with Panasonic 14mm f2.5 (First Gen). I know those lens are different for different use, Zoom vs Prime, f3.5 vs f2.5, Wide vs No so wide... and so go on . I want to know your personal thought about whats is better in general. Maybe If the autofocus is equally fast, same IQ, maybe no big differences, probably the 12-32 is better for general purpose, or maybe the "big" diaphragm is more important in the 14mm (Noise departament). I read about some filters attached in the 14mm makes it wide like 11mm without losing much quality. I have Sigma 19mm DN, which works wonderful, fast AF and probably no so far from 17mm in IQ terms, but its a little big for G3. Sorry my english and thanks for your time.
+vamooooos Your English is good, no worries! I'd take any filter that reduced the focal length to 11mm without losing quality with a pinch of salt. I've tried a few and read about them but it just can't be done. Makers spend huge amount of money and computing time designing their lenses and an add on from a third party just isn't going to be up to scratch. Nonetheless, if funds are limited, you have 11mm where you didn't before. The 19mm Sigma is optically excellent, as good as any MFT lens actually.
If I were going to choose, I'd go for the 12-32mm. It's more versatile and just as good optically as the 14mm - plus it is stabilized. That goes a long way to bridging the speed difference.
+David Thorpe Thanks David for your answer, I´m aware for the chinese adaptors... I have one bought in a combo with my old Fuji S6000fd, horrible in every single way. But sometimes (maybe) one of these works no so bad for video (easily be tempted for 11mm :P).
I shoot a lot macro with 60mm micro and D700, know a quality lens and I pleased with m4/3 in many regards (Lenses/ AF speed / weight / Size). I haven't a small polyfunctional lens paired with my G3 to perform informal outings (and focal reducer too to use my F Lenses). Parent of mine will travel to China, it´s doing me a favor, so your information is welcome :)
+vamooooos Glad it helped.
Some Folks over at DPreview have had issues with this lens - the barrel coming unstuck or one of the telescoping piece of the lens falling out. Have you had any issues with yours? I saw at least 2 or 3 posts.
A Sylon No, nothing like that with mine. Could be a faulty batch, nuisance though.
A Sylon I had that issue.
Great review, thanks.
I have gx7 with 12/2, 20/1.7 and 45/1.8.
What do you think that i sell 12/2 for to get an second body as gm1+12-32 ? i read every review on the 12-32, at wide angle 12mm, it' very good and sharp. I don't need light because i use often 12/2 for landscape.
Thank again
That sounds sensible to me, Cristophe, if you really don't need the speed of the Olympus 12mm.
I'm seeing the 12-32 available now on its own, without the GM1 body so the question is, do you really need a second camera body?
David Thorpe i already have an GF1 and i really dont know if i want to replace it by a gm1.
Greatly admire the diner photo. Neon at night.
Thanks - yes, great colours aren't they?
Hi David.. would you consider thr Panasonic 15mm f1.7 a better alternative to the Olympus 17mm f1.8?
I prefer the 17mm as an all rounder because it is less obviously wide angle than the 15mm. I have had my 17mm a long time as a general purpose lens. If I want a wide angle, I prefer 12mm. But that's just me. Depending on what you do, the extra angle of the 15mm might suit you, if you are shooting always urban scenes for example. Not so good for people though.
When you zoom through the range while focused on the statue, it seems to keep the focus regardless of focal length, is that the case or did you do some stop motion trickery or similar? Cheers
I didn't do anything special for that shot, Liam. I think it just a combination of plenty of depth of field and a relatively slow zoom allowing the autofocus to keep up easily.
@@DavidThorpeMFT haha I completely forgot about autofocus! I've used af-s for 10+ years and forgot that continuous autofocus is a thing!
@@blizzydesigns It's whatever works, Liam. The AF-S is getting so fast now that for many fast moving things - humans, for example, the AF-S is fast enough to nail them. With single, you have to watch and anticipate and let go the shutter at just the right moment. Provided you have the chops, it can be the best way. I go all the way back to covering football matches with a plate camera - no auto anything but we still got good pictures.
I have the Olympus 12-50mm 3.5-6.3 lens, but have been looking at this lens... Is it any better? Obviously I know the Olympus gives you a power zoom and weather sealing, but is this lens any sharper at 12mm?
Hi Brandon - I really like the versatility of the but at 12mm, while very sharp in the centre, it's not so good at the edges and goes off centre and edge at the 50mm end. . The 12-32 is biting sharp, wide open, right through the zoom range and with its diminutive size and weight, a truly unique lens. But no 50mm end, of course.
Hi great review, can I ask, would this lens be compatible with epl5?. I ask because I know there's no switch to turn off I.S in lens.
Cheers.
Yes, it'll work fine with the Olympus body. There's a menu entry that lets you choose between lens or body stabilization. It's hard to know which would be best so you'd need top try it for yourself but they are probably very similar.
Am I right in thinking that this would not be suitable for use on the Olympus as the image stabilisation can't be turned off on the lens
No, it works perfectly on the Olympus. The Olympus menu gives you the choice of using the lens or body stabilization. It defaults to the body and there's+ ni reason to change that. The confusion arises because both makers have technology which combines the lens and body stabilization to further improve stabilization. Called dual IS (Panasonic) or Sync IS (Olympus), it only works with the body maker's own lens so won't operate with Panasonic body/ Olympus lens or vice versa. The improvement is fairly marginal and though worth having, not enough to influence a choice of lens.
Got this little gem as a kit with my gx80. Mine does not have a metal mount though. How come?
It seems that after a while the 12-32s supplied as kit lenses with a camera were given a plastic mount. It doesn't matter in terms of performance but I imagine it wouldn't wear as well if often mounted/ dismounted.
Awesome review, I'm sure this video will get popular more with the upcoming GX80/85/GX7 Mk2
+Daron Lim Yes, good match i should think. And double stabilization too!
My G7 came with the 14-42mm, I'm wondering if it'd be worth it for me to get this Panasonic 12-32mm? Now as mentioned, I do have the 14-42mm lens and if I was going to add one wide angle lens, that'd work for BOTH photos and video, do you think I should add that 12-32 mm, the Panasonic LUMIX G 14mm f/2.5 ASPH II Lens, or a Rokinon 16mm T2.2 Cine Lens for Nikon F. I do have a speedbooster to mount nikon lens, so Rokinon would be like a 24 mm and I'd gain around one stop because of the booster? Basically I'm wondering how that 14mm panasonic compares to the Rokinon. The panasonic is crazy cheap on Amazon US.
The little 12-32 is as sharp as any of the lenses you mention even wide open so it would be worth buying just as a 12mm. There are two versions, one with a plastic mount, one with metal, not that it matters greatly but many people don't like plastic. it is stabilized too, unlike the others. I am not sure it is worth having that and the 14-42, though. The Panasonic 35-100 makes an ideal pairing with the smaller zoom, a combination that would serve well on any camera in fact . Both the 14mm and Metabones/Rokinon would be as sharp as a tack but any extra speed is nullified by the lack of stabilization in most circumstances. I would buy the 12-32 with a view to getting the 35-100 later and then a high speed prime like the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 for low light later on. That would give you a coherent strategy for the future for both video and stills. All compact and very, very sharp too.
David, thanks, good advice. Now the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 would act as a 50mm on my G7. I guess the Rokinon speed booster combination would be mainly for video. Yep, the fact that the 12-32 is stabilized is a big plus. THanks again
+Philippe Orlando You can make the 12-32 9.5mm wide the the Ricoh GW6 wide angle converter (my initial tests look great). But prices seem to vary for the Ricoh. I got lucky with the lens, step up ring and wide angle converter for £135 all new off ebay.
is there huge noticeable diffrience between shallow depth of field from 20 mm 1.7 and 12-32?
At 20mm, the 12-32mm is f/4.7 which is around 3 stops difference. So, yes, a very noticeable difference in depth of field with these lenses at open aperture.
Mine seem to come with a plastic mount since it is black. Kit-lens of the GX85. I do not know if it is the same as this spec for spec but it seems like it is.
The stand alone 12-32 comes with a metal mount, the kit lens with a plastic one. Otherwise the lenses are exactly the same.
Good concise review.
Thanks!
If it wasn't for my lumix 12-60mm I'd get one ,but no point duplicating a lens ,do have a 42.5mm lumix and a lovely lens that is along with my 45-175mm lumix ,but wouldn't mind adding either the 20mm lumix or the leica 15mm ,decisions decisions lol
It's hard to know how much you'll actually use a lens before buying it. The reason to buy the 12-32 is its uniquely tiny form. If the size is not so crucial, there are standard zooms with wider ranges which might be better for many photographers. The 20mm is such a useful focal length but it doesn't focus as well as more modern lenses. It's a shame Panasonic didn't update it. Nonetheless, it is a sharp and compact lens and if you don't need _lightning_ focus, its focusing is perfectly adequate. The 15mm, a very sweet lens.
How do you get the lens to fold back down to pancake size? I just got one and rotating the focusing ring will not fold it back in. Did I get a bad one?
I'm assuming you mean rotating the zoom ring? As you turn it you should feel a resistance. Turn harder ( don't actually force it) to overcome the resistance and it should telescope in. If it really doesn't, if it keeps turning but nothing happens, it sounds as if the lens rings may have come unglued. It isn't unknown with these lenses. It happened to me and I put dobs of Araldite 2 part resin glue on the inside of the ring and its been OK ever since. Strange that I should have better glue than Panasonic but there it is!
Thanks! Someone on Amazon already told me how to do it, so am good now. Nice lens for the money, I got the cheaper silver import one so saved a bit of money, but no warranty. Hopefully the ring won't come loose, but at least I know how to fix it if it does now. thanks.
Would it work with GH5?
As a kit lens, which would you recommend? Between Panny's 12-32mm vs Oly's 14-42mm?
If you mean the pancake 14-42 Olympus, definitely the Panasonic. The Olympus is all rihgt but it never really looks crisp. The Panasonic is more restricted in zoom range but much sharper. And stabilized, of course, if you have a Panasonic camera body.
+David Thorpe I plan to use it with my ep5.
I'd still get the Panasonic, it's a much better lens than the Olympus pancake. There are several 14-42 non-pancake zooms to choose from which are much better of you prefer an Olympus model.
+David Thorpe Thanks for the replies! You are awesome, mate. I appreciate a lot! :)
any strong reason to get a 25mm f1.7 or f1.8 prime lens if I have this zoom lens?
Other than the obvious one of the extra speed, no. The results from the 12-32mm are just as sharp in practical use. And the zoom is stabilized too, not strictly necessary on such a lens but still a valuable asset.
Thanks! I enjoy your reviews.
Hi
can I use it on my olympus omd em10 ? and would it auto focus ? thanks ..
Hi Meshal - yes, it'll work and autofocus on your Olympus just as well as it does on a Panasonic body. The lens' stabilzaation won't do anything but that doesn't matter since you'd use the Olympus in body stabilization anyway. It'll make a wonderfully compact and quality combination, actually.
David Thorpe thanks a lot, in your opinion, should J take this lens or the olympus 12-50mm ?
Hi David, just getting into photography and I love your videos. Just bought myself a GX85 camera that can with this lens in a kit. Could you recommend a couple of other lenses to supplement it? I was thinking the 20mm f1.7 and something else with a longer zoom. Kind regards, James
Hi James - the Panasonic 35-100 f/4-5.6 is absolutely perfect for the GX85, tiny like 12-32 and just as sharp. The 20mm is bit old and slow on the focus by the latest standards. The Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 would supplement them well but the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 is a lovely match for this camera and the pair almost act as a modern day Leica.
David Thorpe thanks for the advice David, just reading your handy guide and working my way through the settings. I'll stick to iA+ for now and go from there!
iA is very capable - frighteningly so. At some point as you gather experience you will want to do something differently from it and experiment with the other methods (aperture priority first, probably). But the object is to take pictures and it doesn't really matter how you do it.
Would the 25mm f1.7 Panasonic Lens complement the gx85. Would you also recommend the 45-150mm F4.0-5.6. Longer shots?
Yes, the 25mm would go fine with the GX85. The 45-150mm Panasonic is a very useful lens with its built-in motor zoom. It's very sharp at the lower zoom range but performance drops off by 150mm. Nonetheless, it's a very good value lens and even at the 150mm end the performance is perfectly good and usable.
What caused the image to look like that 3:50? Shutter speed too fast?
No, just shadows.
Can I use this lens with Panasonic Lumix g85 camera
Shouldn't be a problem. I use it with my gx 7 & Oly cams. Sadly, David is no longer with us to answer.
How do you rate the Panasonic Lumix G 14 mm F/2.5 Aspherical AF Lens?
Clive Ellis I sold mine when I bought an Olympus 12mm and wished I hadn't. Such a tiny lens and nice and very sharp too and currently £175 on Amazon. It's a real take anywhere lens.
Hi David.. Quick question.. The ring that extends my 12-32 lens has just detached so it looks like I need a new lens for my GM1. I have a 20mm pancake and a lumix 35-100 lens, and wondered before I just replace like for like and buy a new 12-32 should I be looking at other options for my standard lens? I'd be interested in your instant option.. Many thanks in advance.. I bought the GM1 after watching your reviews and continue to be impressed with it.. I've captured some wonderful photos and memories with it so thanks for your advice previously too. Ps I'm using my camera for every day photography and am no expert, although I do shoot using manual settings.
Hi Harvey, first of all, i don't think there is a better standard lens for the Gm1 so I'd think a direct replacement would be the answer. On a more cheerful note, my 12-32mm came apart just like yours. I repaired mine simply by re-gluing the ring with Araldite resin glue. You need to be careful that it doesn't slop all over the place but judiciously applied round the ring it isn't difficult to do. My 12-32 has been functioning perfectly for the past couple of years since I glued it. The way I see it, if you are going to have to replace it anyway, there's nothing to lose.
Hi.. David.. Many thanks for your reply... I did wonder whether it could just be glued.. I'll give it a go!
Thanks again
Cheers
Harvey
And the gluing appears to have worked 😀👍
@@harvey8662 Good!
lens hood: JJC LH 37 EPII.
Thanks for that!
did anyone tried this lens on Blackmagic pocket cinema camera?
+ Luis Murrighile
is perfect lumix 12 - 32 with Blackmagic Pocket
I shoot mainly landscape...! Would there be difference of quality between panny 12-32 and panny 12-35 f2.8 once stopped down to f8-f14. thanks
With both lenses (and indeed all Micro Four Thirds lenses) performance drops off after f/8. The 12-32 holds up better than the 12-35 in this case, though it will be noticeably less sharp stopped down beyond f8. Up to f/8 the 12-32 is better for edge to edge sharpness.
The reality is that both lenses are very sharp but the 12-35 is only worth its money if it is used at f/2.8 a lot. For landscape, it isn't worth the extra outlay.
So considering size difference of sensor between M43 and full frame (1/4 size) the depth of field at f8 of micro four third is equivalent to f32 of full frame sensor ? I mean 4 times DOF. Thanks
More like f16
The only way to manually focus is sliding up and down the camera's touchscreen? Ridiculous, you should at least be able to switch them back and forth, like zoom with the touchscreen and focus with the ring if you want. But I doubt I'll be buying this lens anyway, I still have the 14-45 which I love.
The zoom ring is a mechanical linkage so couldn't be controlled through software unless the ring had an electric motor built in. Which would be pointless because the lens would have to be bigger. That's why the zoom range has been restricted too. The whole point of the 12-32 is that it is tiny and light. If you want separate zoom and focus rings, you buy your 14-45 or a 14-42. But for a lot of people, including me, in return for the 12mm wide angle and excellent IQ, I'll accept those limitations. The bottom line is, the 12-32 is one of many standard zoom choices for Micro Four Thirds and we can buy whatever we prefer.
will this fit on a Sony a6000?
Afraid not. Sony has a proprietary lens mount. This is a Micro Four Thirds standard mount which means that any lens of any make, Olympus, Panasonic, Sigma, Kow, whatever, marked Micro Four Thirds will both fit and function perfectly on any Micro Four Thirds camera. A lens this small couldn't be made for Sony, which uses a bigger sensor.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Not strictly true, Sony has a kit lens (16-50) which is of very
similar size/weight and provides wider range.
@@DM-sc4zy The Sony is probably closer to the Panasonic 14-42 motorized zoom which is 21g lighter and 4mm shorter. The 12-32 Panasonic is shorter at 26mm and weighs an astonishing 70gms - 46gm or 1.6 oz less. If Sony could have clipped that weight, I am sure they would have but they are subject to the same laws of optics as everyone else. As I say, couldn't be done for APS-C, thought could easily be surpassed for a smaller than Micro Four Thirds sensor.
how is with the gh4?
Very nice - obviously the size is less of an advantage since the GH4 body is so much bigger but it works well and is certainly among the sharpest of standard zooms. I prefer it to the 14-42s on the GH4 or any other body.
David Thorpe Did you manage to focus it manually on the GH4?
Zvi Meniker I did but I wouldn't bother. Very clunky with the onscreen focus slider. I'd prefer to focus automatically using the focus lock button. But basically, I'd treat the lens as auto-focus only.
+David Thorpe I've noticed good low light quality on every review of this lens, while the newer G X Vario Lumix Lenses (including my 14-140) are very noisy in low light. How does this stand, regarding low light image quality, in comparison to the current Lumix G X zoom lenses? Also, would you say the new G X Vario lenses focus significantly faster on AF, or is it unnoticeable? Thanks for reading my barrage of questions.
+thedexterbros The lens doesn't have any direct effect on noise levels, that is down to the sensor. Indirectly, a slower lens may require a higher iSO setting to get manageable settings in low light but the 12-32 and 14-140 have similar speed so any differences in noise are down to the camera model used and its sensor or the ISO choices of the reviewer.
All the newer Panasonic lenses focus at much the same speed, that is blindingly fast. The older ones can be a bit slower for example, but none are slow. I'd avoid the 20mm if you want ultra fast focus but that's about it.
This lense makes the perfect partner for a 14 mm prime and maybe a 45 mm prime.
Yes, it does. I'd never have believed a lens could be made this small and sharp but jere it is.
@@DavidThorpeMFT most people who complain these days that the M43 system got just as big as FF forget to say that the FF system doesnt have such small compact lenses, yes, some M43 lenses are just as huge as FF lenses, but FF doesnt have its own smurfish 12-32 mm, or the crazy small 35-100 mm. I got both and paired them with a GH5s, and as a fish eye i got the olympus 9 mm f8, thats even smaller than the lumix 14 mm.
Hello! Thanks for your video. I own this lens with an Olympus camera.
Yesterday I handed my camera to a friend, Jerry-whom I thought knew what he was doing-, and 10 seconds later he hands it back to me saying the lens won't retract.
My guess is that he used too much force trying to retract it, when he found the resistance. You know, when you use too much a bottle cap and it stops screwing down, or a mayo lid? I think something like that occurred.
We took off the plastic ring of the lens and underneath we discovered an oil-filled surface and some sort of slider (?) that serves to retract and adjust the lens. This slider seems to work as it allowed us to finally retract the lens (so it's not a problem with the lens itself, but with the plastic ring), but of course this isn't a solution as it's impractical to take off the plastic ring every time I stop using the camera, plus the oil that covers the mechanical parts stains my hands.
I was wondering if you have heard of anything similar before, or it ever happened to you? Do you know of any forum threads or somewhere on the web where they talk how to fix it? Should I take it to a professional mechanic (where do I find one)? I would like to think there's an easy fix, as it seems that the plastic ring is the only thing affected (I still can take pictures with the lens)... If not, do you think I should charge Jerry the whole lens as new?
Thanks in advance!
It's a pretty common problem, Aaron, one which I had myself. I solved it by putting a couple of good dabs of Araldite on it. I don't know the proper chemical name for the glue but if Araldite doesn't sell where you are, it's the two part resin glue which you mix before applying. The problem is that Panasonic don't use a strong enough glue when they assemble the lens. It'll be obvious where to apply the glue, just make sure it doesn't spread anywhere else other then the slider.
Definitely Jerry's fault - I'd mend the lens myself and then send him a bill for whatever massive charge Panasonic woud levy for doing it 🤣
Hehe, I completely forgot to report back here. Thanks for your input. I was able to fix it with some double-sided tape, the kind that you can find in any stationery. It feels a little sturdier now, so I hope it holds!
Thanks again!
Fingers crossed!
I know I'm late to the party, but I just got a used GX800 with this lens as a cheap small camera to have in my bag at all times so that I can leave my G9 at home and only use it for serious stuff. I know it's a pancake, I know it's foldable, I know it's small and lightweight and sharp. But my god, the barrel distortion and CA are just damn awful. This lens produces some of the worst colour fringing I have seen in Panasonic lenses and I have quite a few of the more popular ones. The distortion is so bad, it's impossible to get a usable panorama stitch with more than 3 shots. I'd say it's almost as bad as my phone camera in terms of distortion and CA. I think I'll keep a prime like the 14mm or the 20mm on the GX800 from now on :(
I haven't tried a GX800 but a lens like the 12-32 can only exist via digital correction. I use mine on my GX9 and G9 with no problems. Do the images look OK on the camera monitor? It sounds to me as if the PP software you are using doesn't recognise the lens.
Maybe you got a bad copy of the lens, or the correction software in the body is not working? If you think distortion and CA are bad with this lens, try Panasonic's 7-14, they're horrendous! I got a GX800 new a few years back with the 12-32 and I've no issues with the combination, it does stunning night-time cityscape panoramas in-camera too. And it's small enough to fit in a jacket pocket.
Dear sir.
Your video editing skills are moderate at best. The audio editing is even worse.
But the content - It has the best I can find in anywhere.
You don't speak too fast as many other do and you stick sticktly to the topic.
Thank you for focusing to the relevant. I'll subscribe.
You flatter me! My video editing skills are non-existent and my audio editing skills worse than that.
My content has to be OK, otherwise I'm dead in the water :-)
I tried to improve the audio in my Olympus 60mm review ruclips.net/video/uwd6votlsSI/видео.html
Maybe you could take a look and see if you think it is better. The video editing, I don't know what else I could do.
David Thorpe
Best m43 content on utube dont feed the trolls David. ; )
*****, ummm... That was hardly trolling.
Basically I said what you you said. Best M4/3 content.
I dont think so llja You forgot to mention the very start of your post...
"Dear sir.
Your video editing skills are moderate at best. The audio editing is even worse."
*****, quoting like that is taking out of context.
From now on I'm going to ignore your trollings.
RIP
How would you compare this lens with the 12-35mm f2 8.is the 2.8 has better image quality and sharpness?
Overall the 12-32 is better, particularly with regard to the edge sharpness. For practical purposes, you can just leave it wide open all the time and it is sharp right across the frame. Like all the f/2.8 zooms, the extra cost is only justified if you are going to use it wide open a good deal of the time.