Comments on: Wide-Angle Micro 4/3 Imatest Results

By: jseliger

jseliger — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:55:53 +0000

Ethan:

Haha, there must be something off if the 14mm is at the top and the 25mm at the bottom. I’m sure the copies of the 25mm is fine but maybe the testing method should be in question?

Keep in mind this: “The first graph shows the numbers for each of our lenses (zooms measured at 30mm) with the lens aperture wide open.” If you compare the 25mm to other lenses at 1.8 or 2, the results might be very different, as the 2.8 test implies.

By: tex

tex — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:45:01 +0000

Thanks for the tests, Roger. I’d love to see the SLR Magic 12mm t/1.6 added to the mix – 12mm native mount m43 lens, and you offer them for rental, right? I’m sort of intrigued by this lens, and would like to see more data on it than I’ve been able to find online, so far.

By: jseliger

jseliger — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 05:44:14 +0000

Any chance we’ll see the Olympus 17mm f / 1.8 added to the table, or has this ship sailed?

By: Geoff

Geoff — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:20:56 +0000

Re: “Actually the rental guy could care less.”
Actually you actually could NOT care less. If you cared less, then at the moment you care a bit more.

By: Lt. Gruber

Lt. Gruber — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 15:44:13 +0000

Excellent test, thank you! The Panasonic Leica 25mm fanboys probably lie crying under the bed by now. Six copies, six, and I have no reason to believe you are a sloppy tester. I’ve used both the 25mm and the 20mm and in the end I held on to the 20mm. Not only do its photos look sharper en more contrasty, it’s also the most portable lens of the two. It seems that my eyes did not deceive me.

By: Ethan

Ethan — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 07:26:37 +0000

Haha, there must be something off if the 14mm is at the top and the 25mm at the bottom. I’m sure the copies of the 25mm is fine but maybe the testing method should be in question? I’ve own most of these lenses except for the Voigtlanders and I think this chart is all sorts of wrong compared to real world use IMHO.

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 18:35:01 +0000

Thanks Roger for the reply and the link. According to tests you posted, Panasonic 14mm gives 90 to 160 lp/ih more than Sigma 19mm at f4 and f2.8. Does it mean Panasonic 14mm is sharper than Sigma 19mm?

I am asking this question because I don’t know whether it is meaningful to compare MTF of two different focal lengths.

By: Roger Cicala

Roger Cicala — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 15:42:27 +0000

Hi Sam,

I’m aware of it. It’s one of the things that got me to write this: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/why-arent-the-damn-numbers-the-same

Could be any of a number of things: test chart used, testing cameras, testing distances, lighting. I’m not sure what. I’ve repeated our tests a couple of times (there were some other results I was surprised at) and gotten the same results.

So this ends up being one of those ” the majority are correct ” things in my mind, and a good example of why one person’s results (including mine) have to be correlated by others before they’re considered fact. When a number of reputable testers disagree with me, I conclude they are probably correct and my results are wrong. But in this case, I haven’t been able to figure out why mine are different.

Roger

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:19:27 +0000

Roger this is not a criticism. Your test results for Panasonic 14mm f2.5 are so different from others. This lens is generally regards as a mediocre lens. Only advantage is the size.

By: Dante

Dante — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:56:46 +0000

Thanks so much, Roger.

This is the kind of review that I really appreciate, direct comparisons and telling it like it is. Great job!

Dante