Birding with the Sony SAL75300

In my last post I indicated that my 'new' Sony a57 had arrived, and I had already taken it out for a test-drive with the Sony SAL75300 (Sony A Lens 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6).

It's been a while since I've had a dedicated 'telephoto' lens for one of my systems, so I was keen to pop the 75-300mm on and give it a spin. I decided to do some bird photography down at my local lagoon. Unfortunately the clouds had rolled in and the weather was a bit overcast, so I had to bump up the ISO to give me some decent shutter speeds at the 300mm end of the lens.

Shagadelic! Sony a57 with SAL75300. f/11 @ 1/250th, ISO 800

From reading reviews of the lens, I knew that the Sony 75-300mm wasn't going to be the sharpest tack in the box - especially at the long end. So I made sure that I shot at around the f/8 to f/11 apertures, which should produce the sharpest images (a couple of stops shut down from wide open). As mentioned above, this also meant that I was having to bump up the ISO to give me fast enough shutter speeds. Hey ho - I guess I'll get to see how it performs at high ISO's as well then 😊

Lens elements in the SAL75300

The lens itself isn't anything to write home about. It is, after all, the cheapest telephoto to 300mm lens that Sony makes. It is also, apparently, a 're-packaging' of an old Minolta 75-300mm lens.

There are no special lens elements in its construction, and it's made mostly from plastic. Although that's not necessarily a bad thing. The plastic is of the modern polycarbonate type - which has proven to be very rugged and sturdy enough for most uses. Of course the lens elements are all glass, and the lens mount is metal. So that's a good thing. Fit and finish is also fairly impressive for such a cheap and cheerful optic. It's just a no-frills kinda product.

Unfortunately, the front lens element rotates, and the auto-focus is driven from the camera body. So it's not blisteringly fast, and it's not whisper quiet. Although it's also not turtle-slow, nor is it annoyingly noisy. It found focus and locked on reasonably quickly, so no complaints there. But it certainly ain't no G master! It also only cost me $149.00NZ. So there's that...

Swan family. Sony a57 with SAL75300. f/11 @ 1/100th, ISO 1600

I wasn't looking for birds-in-flight, so I didn't need to rely on the tracking on the a57. I did, however, set it to continuous hi-speed shooting so I could fire off a shot burst of images. This helps with getting sharpness, as at least one image in a series of burst should be sharp. Probably didn't need to have bothered with this approach looking back on the files. They are all 'relatively' sharp. 

I say 'relatively' sharp for a reason. Because from what I can tell from my brief outing, the SAL75300 never gets 'bitingly' sharp really, at any focal distance. I shot, as I said, at around the f/8 to f/11 apertures, and it seems to me from pixel-peeping that f/8 is the sweet spot.

It is probably hard to tell from the image samples above (click on the image to enlarge it in your viewer), but absolute sharpness (such as it is with this lens) peaks at around the 200mm focal length. Although it is a little difficult to gauge the lenses true capabilities, since all of the above were shot at ISO 1600 and are therefore a little 'noisy' (adding to the overall sense of softness). I will have to do a bit more testing in brighter conditions, where noise isn't a factor, to really get a sense of this lenses capabilities (and I will do).

All-in-all I wasn't blown away by the results from the SAL75300, although nor was I really expecting to be. I think that at f/8, all focal lengths (but especially below 250mm), will produce very good images up to A3 size. Beyond that, sharpness might start to become an issue?

Wading bird, Cobden Lagoon. Sony a57 with SAL75300mm. f/9 @ 1/500th, ISO 1600

The jury is out on this lens presently. I'm not sure that I got the best out of it on my first try, and I want to try again in better conditions. Ideally I would like to see how it performs at ISO 100, with a much 'cleaner' file.

The images here are not 'bad' per-se, they just didn't blow me away as much as I was hoping they would. And yet maybe my expectations were too high? This is, as has already been previously stated, Sony's cheapest telephoto lens up to 300mm - by far. So was there that much to expect in the first place? 

Trouble is, I'm coming from the micro-four-thirds system, where even the super cheap and plasticky Olympus 45-150mm f/4-5.6 (90-300mm fov in full-frame terms) is exceptionally sharp. So I've been a bit spoiled.

I certainly need to use the lens a few more times before I formulate any firm opinions regarding it's sharpness. And then again - sharpness isn't everything. Is it?

Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 lens review

As a landscape photographer, I have a tendency to shoot all my images at the wide-angle end of the focal range. When I'm photographing at a lake, a waterfall, a beach, or a sunset, I'm usually trying to fit a decent amount of the scene into the frame. As such, my Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 lens will spend 95% of its life firmly attached to my camera (until such time as I can afford a 7-14mm f/4).

But what about the other 5% of the time? Well, that's for when I need a bit more 'reach'. Something a little more in the telephoto end of the range. And it's why I kept my Panasonic 45-150mm f/4-5.6 when I was selling everything else.

Waiting for Dinner. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 800 

If you are looking for a lightweight, well-constructed, reasonably priced, and very sharp telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system, then look no more!. The Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph. Power O.I.S. lens (to give its full title), fits the bill perfectly.

How small and how light? At only 210 grams and 73mm (at the wide end - 110mm when extended for full telephoto), the lens is small and light enough to always have in your camera bag. Even the filter size for the front is a tiny 52mm, saving you money over larger - more expensive - filters.

With a focal range of 90 to 300mm in 35mm camera full-frame terms, this lens is the epitome of the 'smaller' and lighter' promise of micro four thirds - without compromising on quality.

To keep the weight down, Panasonic have used quite a bit of plastic in its construction, but there's also metal where it counts (such as the lens mount). And as stated, they haven't skimped on optical quality. The lens uses 12 elements in 9 groups. Two of these are aspherical lenses, and one is an UHR (ultra-high refractive index) lens. This means that image distortion is minimised, resulting in clearer, sharper images. Add to this Panasonic's Power O.I.S. (optical image stabilisation) built into the lens, and you have a very fully-featured lens.

Finally, the lens can often be found for as little as $300.00NZ new (as of September 2021), and obviously even cheaper on the used market. This is outstandingly good value for a lens with such an impressive focal range. And to top it off, Panasonic even throws in a lens hood, even at this price. Kudos Panasonic (and are you listening Olympus!?).

At the beginning of this review, I mentioned that my 'need' for a telephoto lens was somewhat limited. But there's no reason it should be that way - even predominantly as a landscape photographer. Because I'm not just a landscape photographer. None of us are really. We are parents who take photos of our children, grandparents who take photos of our grandkids, and passionate creative types who take photos at all types of events. Chances are, then, that a telephoto lens is going to come in quite handy on most (if not all) of those occasions.

Greenstone Speedway, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

And then, of course, there is landscape photography. Which is not a genre unique to only wide-angle lenses. Telephoto images can be very effective when shooting the landscape. To be honest, I probably don't use mine enough in the landscape - to the detriment of my images.

The above image - Greenstone Speedway, Sunset - was shot recently with the Panasonic 45-150mm lens, and it's one of my favourite images of this year. It's also a shot that I couldn't have taken with the wide angle, since it was impossible to get close enough to the subject to achieve this composition.

So, since I'm planning on using the lens a lot more for 'serious' landscape work, I thought I'd better test it out a little to see if it was up to the task. If you've read my previous post, where I reviewed my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8, you'll know my 'testing' methodology. Which is to say, I don't use test charts, brick walls, or studio environments. I actually go outside, find a landscape, set the camera up on a tripod, and have at it! Then I look at the results in Lightroom at 100%, and see if I'm happy or not. Job's a good'n.

It may be difficult to tell from a web-file on this blog, so let me tell you what I can see full-screen in Lightroom (and you'll just have to take my word for it).

Above are 100% crops of a photo taken of the Greymouth Wharf. The wharf itself was probably about 500 feet away from me (across the other side of the Grey River). For all these images, the lens was extended to the full 150mm telephoto end (a 300mm full-frame field of view). Not usually the most optimal settings for image sharpness - wide open and at full zoom.

Nevertheless, at these settings (f/5.6 @ 150mm) the lens is already very sharp! That's pretty impressive - and I must admit I was surprised. I thought for sure that f/5.6 would be only acceptable, and that it would be even sharper stopped down to f/7.1 or f/8. But this wasn't the case - not with my copy of the lens at least. At f/6.3, at f/7.1, and at f/8, there was no discernible increase in sharpness. That is to say, they were all just as sharp as each other! This is very impressive. I even checked to make sure that I somehow hadn't mixed up the files.

I hadn't. f/5.6 is excellent, as is f/6.3 and up to f/10. It's from f/11 and above that the lens actually gets softer - and this is to be expected. 

Cobden Tiphead, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/200th, ISO 200

The optical performance of the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6, even wide open at the extreme telephoto range, has blown me away. It's sharp - plenty sharp - and is optically an exceptional performer. It focuses quickly on my E-M1 (although it does hunt for focus a little in lower light), feels solid and well built, has a metal lens mount, and produces superb images. For very little money. Seriously - what's not to like!?

If you are looking at specializing in wildlife, bird or sports photography, then of course you are going to want to invest in a little more serious telephoto gear. Something like the Lumix 100-400mm Leica f/4-6.3 or the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro. And notice I said 'invest', since neither of these options could be reasonably called cheap (or lightweight).

Greymouth Wharf. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

But for the rest of us, fortunately, there's the exceptional Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6. I'm so glad I kept this lens when deciding what to sell so I could afford the 12-35mm f/2.8. For the price, it's an amazingly good lens. I'm pretty sure I'll be making a lot more use of it for my images going forward.

An easy 5 out of 5 stars and very highly recommended if you are looking for an affordable telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system. If you are choosing between this and the Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6, I would say go for the Panasonic. They are both optically excellent, but I think the Panasonic has it over the Olympus in terms of build quality (Olympus has a plastic lens mount). Just saying...

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 lens review

What is the single biggest factor in creating quality images with your camera? Is it how many megapixels you have? How about image stabilisation? What about a sturdy carbon-fiber tripod? Or is it holding your breath while taking the photo?

Not surprisingly, it's none of those. Although you'd be forgiven for thinking it wasn't at least one of the above, considering the marketing hype these features get (ok, maybe not the last one). Instead, what will any seasoned photographer worth their salt (excuse the pun) tell you to invest in before buying the latest camera body? It's glass - of course.

Lake Pearson, Canterbury. Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8.  f/6.3 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

Good glass - top quality optics, will dictate more than anything else, the quality of your final images. A pro-level camera body with a cheap plastic lens will struggle all day against a basic camera body paired with a pro optic. And it really is a difference you can tell when looking at your photos. Camera bodies will come and go - that's a given. But good glass - quality lenses - will hold their value, and probably last a lifetime if looked after.

And in terms of a quality optic for the micro four thirds system, they don't come much better than the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asph with Power O.I.S.

If you are a travel, documentary or wedding photographer, this is quite simply a must-have lens. Period. The 12-35mm zoom range, at a constant and bright f/2.8, relates to the 'classic' 24-70mm f2.8 lens that has a place in every professional photographers' camera bag. This covers wide angle to standard telephoto; ideal for landscapes and portraits - and everything in-between.

Because it is part of Panasonic's premium 'X' range of lenses, designed for professional use, it features solid metal construction (with a little plastic and rubber thrown in to save some weight) and rugged weather-sealing. This gives the lens a solid heft, without being too heavy. At 305 grams and 73.8mm in height (extending out to around 94mm when zoomed out), it's a compact design, although it's probably more at home on an Olympus E-M1 or Panasonic GH4 than on an Olympus Pen or Panasonic GX80.

The lens is constructed of 14 elements in 9 groups, and includes 4 aspherical lenses, 1 UED and 1 UHR lens to minimise aberrations and ensure superb resolution. This is also helped by a special nano surface coating on the lenses to help reduce ghosting and flare. That's a lot of optical 'tech' in one lens. But what it means 'in reality' is superb image quality. And that's what really matters.

The  G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 also features Panasonic's Power O.I.S (optical image stabilisation), although I have this turned off on the lens in preference for the in-body image stabilsation of my E-M1. If, however, you have one of the latest Panasonic bodies, I do believe this lens can take advantage of dual-I.S. - meaning the lens and camera stabilisation will work together for super-power image stabilisation! Apparently.

Cobden Estuary. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 X.  f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

It's no secret that I sold all my other micro four thirds lenses (bar one) to purchase this lens to pair with my OM-D E-M1. That's called 'putting your money where your mouth is'. Yes, the quality of the glass you put on the front of your camera really does make all the difference. Why didn't I get the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro instead? Simple - economics. I found the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 at an amazingly good price (second hand), while the Olympus was a little more expensive. I have owned the 12-40mm before, and it's an outstandingly good lens. But optically, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be much between the two.

Having now got the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8, I also needed to do my own testing with the lens - to establish the optimal settings for my use-case (namely landscape photography). To do this, I simply take the camera out, and shoot with it! No test charts, no brick walls, no controlled studio environments. I actually take the lens outside and test it by taking photos, and then looking at them to see what I think. Revolutionary - I know.

100% crops of the 'Cobden Estuary' image above.

The resulting images aren't beautiful portfolio worthy landscape shots. But they serve a purpose. To get the shots I needed, I placed the camera on a tripod, set the lens to its widest 12mm (24mm in full-frame terms), let the camera autofocus half-way into the scene, and then went through the full aperture range. Easy.

In doing so, what have I determined is my 'optimal' f/stop when using the Lumix G X vario 12-35mm on my Olympus OM-D E-M1? It may be hard (or impossible) to tell from the crops shown above, but it looks to me like somewhere between f/5.6 to f/8 is the lenses sharpest setting across the entire image. Actually, a very close inspection in Lightroom of the full range of f/stops would suggest that f/7.1 gives me ultimate image sharpness.

Seems like an odd f-number for ultimate sharpness, but there you have it. In fact, somewhere in the deep, dark recesses of my mind I seem to recall watching a Youtube video where another landscape photographer who uses an E-M1 Mk2 said that f/7.1 on his Olympus lens gave ultimate sharpness as well. Might be an Olympus camera thing?

Across the Estuary to Greymouth.  E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 X. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

Oddly enough, I've been shooting a lot at f/6.3 lately - also for no apparent reason - and getting very sharp images. I just need to bump that up one-third of an f-stop, to f/7.1, and I'm there - optimal sharpness.

Just for laughs, I also had a close look at how these apertures performed at infinity, by shooting out towards the Greymouth wharf - focusing again half-way into the scene. And once again, same result. Between f/5.6 and f/8 (so that would be f/7.1) was the sharpest.

This is probably also hard to see from this image on the blog - you'll just have to take my word for it. What I would say, from testing all apertures at 12mm, is that central sharpness is good at f/2.8 - best at f/7.1 - and then begins to fall back to just good again by f/11. The very high f-stops of f/16 to f/22 are to be avoided at all costs - and aren't necessary with micro four thirds anyway due to the extra depth of field achieved with the smaller sensor. 

I would also note, zooming in to the buildings in the distance at 12mm, that there is a tiny amount of barrel distortion noticeable. Not surprising at the widest end of the lens, and probably something that would get corrected automatically on a Panasonic body (but not on an Olympus). It's easily fixed in Lightroom, and I didn't even notice it until I zoomed right in and pixel peeped. But certainly something to be aware of if you are also going to use this lens on your Olympus camera body that won't automatically correct the distortion.

Ultimate sharpness? E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm @ f/5.6

Finally, a word about using this lens for video. Dunno. I'm not a video guy. I will use this lens 99.99% of the time for stills shooting. Sorry.

But... from what I've seen on-line, and read in reviews, this lens is also considered a must-have for shooting video in the Panasonic eco-system. So if you are looking at this lens for video work, you won't be disappointed (by all accounts). 

So, do I recommend the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asp lens if you are a micro four thirds user? You're damn tootin' I do! It's a superb lens, in practically all respects, and just might be the only lens you will ever need? It's certainly worth looking at on the used market, where a mark 1 version of this lens (which is the one I have) goes for around $500.00NZ. That's crazy good value for a lens that sells for $1500.00NZ new (for the mark 2 version).

The difference between the mark 1 and the mark 2? The mark 2 is now 'freeze-proof' rated to -10, while the mark 1 isn't. And there is a slight O.I.S. update in the mark 2 as well. Other than that, and a re-designed look (all black in the mark 2 as opposed the black and grey on the mark 1), they are optically the same. If you have the money and want the reassurance of a warranty, then obviously opt for the mark 2. But, if you're on a budget, a good used mark 1 is the way to go.

If you have only ever used a mid-range kit lens on your camera, whatever system you shoot with, then you should seriously consider 'upgrading' to a pro-level lens. Forget about that new camera body that's just been released. You really don't need an extra 2 megapixels. Invest, instead, in glass. And then you will really notice an improvement in your images. Guaranteed.

The Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 Asph is an easy 4.5 out of 5 stars on my Olympus OM-D E-M1. Pair it with a Panasonic GH5 and it would be hard not to give it a perfect 5. Just get one already!

Photo walk No.2 during Lockdown

Spring has sprung here in New Zealand. Yay!

On the West Coast, that often means wet weather - unfortunately. But, as luck would have it, the first week of Spring has instead brought some wonderful sunny days. And with it, comes a chance to get out and stretch the legs, in my local neigbourhood, during Lockdown.

'Spicy' revisted. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6. f/5.6 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

We are very fortunate to have some rather picturesque places within walking distance of our home. These include; a beach, farms, an estuary/lagoon area and tiphead. So there is no shortage of interesting subjects to photograph.

Having said that, when you are confined to a reasonably local area - one that you've walked almost daily for several years - familiarity can breed a little contempt. To 'spice' things up (excuse the pun from the image above), I decided on my second night's walk around the same area, to just use my telephoto lens. I kept the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS lens when I sold all my others, because although I don't use one all that often, I do find a telephoto handy to have. It's also very small, and very light-weight for a telephoto, so takes up hardly any space in the camera bag.

Going around the same area, in the same evening light, you can't help but sometimes be attracted to the same images. I couldn't help myself as I walked past this public rest area again on the second evening. I just had to stop and take the exact same image as the previous night (see last post), but this time with the telephoto lens. If nothing else, I thought it would make for an interesting comparison between the two lenses.

And interesting it is! For while I gave a glowing review of the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 and said how super sharp and clear the images were that I got from it - I actually think the image I took with the 45-150mm is actually sharper! 

Waiting for a Wave. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/200th, ISO 1600

My overall impression of this small, light, cheap telephoto zoom lens is that it is, indeed, very sharp - even wide open at f/5.6 and 150mm (300mm equivalent on full-frame). Just like its Olympus sibling (the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6) that I have raved about in the past, the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 punches way above its weight, and has the capability of producing seriously great images.

Of course it doesn't compete with the truly pro glass of the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 Pro or the Panasonic Lumix 35-100mm f2.8. But at a fraction of the weight, size and cost of these pro lenses, the Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 is a no-brainer if you need a 'good' telephoto lens for the odd occasion when you need one. Pro wildlife or bird photographers look elsewhere. But for the rest of us, the Lumix or Olympus cheap telephotos are well worth owning.

Spring is in the air. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

Telephotos are great for getting a bit closer to the action if you're a sports and/or wildlife shooter. But they are also a great option for portraiture and landscapes. Their narrow field of view, compression of elements within an image, and their ability to 'isolate' a subject, are all helpful ways of telling a particular story. And they can also be used to zoom in on unsuspecting subjects if you are in 'stealth' mode. 😄

The photo above, of the couple watching the sea crashing against the rocks, was obviously taken from behind, but also from a fairly long distance away. They were completely unaware of my presence, allowing me to wait with my camera poised to capture just the right moment. I probably stayed for about 10 minutes taking a series of images, as the sea crashed around them and they enjoyed the view. The telephoto lens has compressed the elements within the image, to make it look like the sea is crashing around them a lot closer than it actually was. From the photo it looks like they are in serious danger of getting wet! But in reality, the waves were a good 15 to 20 meters away from them and well out of harms way.

Spring sunset silhouette. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/8 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

The photo above was taken at exactly the same time as the photo of the couple watching the sea spray. Three young women turned up to also watch the sunset, and as they were getting ready to walk down along the rocks, I noticed that they made a prefect silhouette against the setting sun. I fired off two shots before they moved further down the rocks and the effect was gone.

Once again, the telephoto lens has allowed me to grab the shot from a good distance away, with my subjects completely unaware they were being photographed. I don't always shoot this way - I guess it feels a little bit 'creepy' or a bit paparazzi? But in both scenarios above, none of the people in the photos can be identified, none were photographed in a 'compromising' situation, and the final result is - I hope - very tastefully done. No one - as they say - was harmed in the making of these photos.

Heading out to fish. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 40-150mm. f/8 @ 1/80th, ISO 1600

Many photographers who think of landscape images, think only in terms of wide angle lenses. But a telephoto lens is an invaluable part of every landscape photographers kit. As mentioned above, it can help isolate, compress, and simplify a scene - all exceptionally useful techniques when shooting landscapes. A wide-angle (or ultra-wide angle) that tries to include a massive vista can often lead to unimpressive images. Whereas if you isolate, frame, and capture a smaller portion - maybe just the one area of light as it caresses the peak of an impressive mountain - then you will often come away with a much stronger composition. Indeed there are many mountain landscape photographers who would say that their telephoto lens is their most used optic.

Blaketown Tiphead Shipwreck Monument. E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 800

Whether you use a telephoto lens a little, or a lot, it's always a good idea to have one in your camera bag. The Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS (to give it its full name) is an excellent choice for someone on a budget, but who still wants a well made (metal mount), sharp and lightweight lens. When I was selling all my lenses to purchase the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8, the Lumix 45-150mm was the only lens I decided to keep. And I'm very glad that I did.

As a landscape photographer, who wants to travel light, I don't need the heavier, more expensive 'pro' versions of this lens. I'd mostly shoot them at around f/5.6 to f/8 anyway. And at those apertures, the cheap, light and inexpensive (relatively speaking) Panansonic 40-150mm f/4-5.6 is probably about 95% as sharp as them anyway!

What I do occasionally wish for, however, is a little longer reach. Something like the Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 or Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6. At 300mm on the long end, that equates to a whopping 600mm angle-of-view on a full-frame system! If I was a bird or wildlife photographer on a budget, I'd definitely have one of those. But I'm not, so they will have to wait. My use-case for a lens with that sort of reach is even more limited than with the telephoto I already own! 

On the other hand, my sister-in-law actually owns the Olympus 75-300mm, so I may get to 'play' with it one day and do a quick review? Could be fun to take to a wildlife park - once we get out of Lockdown, of course.

Photo walk during Lockdown

In my last post I talked about taking the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 lens out for a landscape shoot during Lockdown. I enjoyed using it, and it takes some beautiful images, but I still think it isn't a very 'portable' setup.

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

For that, I turn to my own camera gear - and the Olympus OM-D micro four thirds system. For me (and yes, it is very subjective), it offers the perfect balance of size vs image quality. And by that I mean excellent size, and excellent image quality. Many view anything less than full-frame to be a compromise, at least image-wise. I disagree. Strongly.

Sure, if you're a 'measurebator' or 'pixel peeper', then you won't be caught dead with anything less than full-frame (or maybe even digital medium format). But, on the other hand, if you're a photographer who enjoys the creativity of capturing an image, then you'll use any number of tools to achieve your vision. None are better than the other. They are simply different.

'Spicy'. E-M1 with Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/80th, ISO 200 + Polariser

This isn't another way of saying that 'gear doesn't matter'. I've argued many times elsewhere that I find this an incredibly trite and blatantly untrue statement. Of course gear matters. Give a sports photographer at the Olympics a pinhole camera and ask them to cover the games with this one piece of gear. See how far that gets you - or them for that matter. It's all about having the right tool for the job. And in that regard, of course the gear matters.

But... conversely, the gear also doesn't matter as much as many photographers pretend (or hope) that it does. Yes, certain situations might call for specific functions. But beyond that, for most photographers, it really doesn't matter if the camera is full frame, medium format, or micro four thirds. Especially when you consider most peoples' use-cases.

Sundown, Cobden Tiphead. OM-D E-M1 with Lumixs 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/1250th, ISO 400

Ok, rant over. Suffice to say that when I use the Olympus OM-D E-M1 (which is considered by many an 'old' camera), I'm using an incredibly responsive, superbly designed and highly capable camera/computer that captures stunning images. Match that with a professional optic like the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Aspherical Power OIS (to give it its full name) and the only thing that's holding it back is me.

I firmly believe that pound for pound, and dollar for dollar, nothing comes close to micro four thirds. I've used practically every system, every sensor size, and a plethora of body and lens combinations over the last 36 years of being involved in this fantastic hobby/profession. And when I consider all the systems and weigh up the cost, the features, the functionality and the image quality, my Olympus micro four thirds system stands together with the best of them.

How can I be so bold? Well, in this instance, I believe that a picture paints a thousand words... and speaks volumes for the capabilities of the E-M1 specifically, and micro four thirds generally.

Blaketown Tiphead Sunset. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/160th, ISO 400

All the images I took, walking around my neighbourhood to try out the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G, are simply stunning.

Yeah, ok, that sounds a bit self-congratulatory. 'Look at me. Big shot photographer'. But that's not really what I mean, or what I'm trying to say. What I really mean is that the photos from this camera and lens combination really 'pop'. There's a certain quality to them that elevate them a step above your normal everyday snapshot - even though ostensibly that's exactly what they are. Admittedly taken in some quite nice light.

There's a sharpness to all of them, although they're not 'over' sharp. And a clarity to them, although they don't look overly 'digital' (to me at least). The colours are exceptionally captured, yet also true-to-life. And the files are robust and easy to work with in post-processing. What's not to like?

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon at dusk. E-M1 with 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/20th, ISO 1600

Most of this, of course, is due to the superb capabilities of the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G lens. It is a professionally designated lens, and as such offers professional quality results. It's a solid lens without being heavy (maybe 'dense' is a better description), balances perfectly on the professional E-M1 body, and performs flawlessly. Zooming is very smooth and well dampened, while autofocus is snappy, quiet and accurate.

It comes equipped with Panasonic's Power OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation), although it won't work in conjunction with the E-M1's image stabilisation, so I have turned it off on the lens. Olympus's in-body 5-axis image stabilisation is far superior to the one in the lens, so should be used in preference.

Not much more can be (or needs to be) said about this fantastic lens. I ummed and arred about getting it for a while, and even after buying it (secondhand) I wondered if I'd done the right thing selling most of my other lenses just to get this one. But that was before I had seen the images it produces. Now, after only using it twice, I don't think I've done the wrong thing at all. I did the same thing the last time I owned an E-M1 - selling all my lenses just to get the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. I never regretted that decision either. Camera bodies, as they say, come and go. But good glass lasts. And this is very good glass.

Of course all pro-level 24-70mm f2.8 lenses, from all the other manufacturers, are exceptionally good optically. But the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G is all these things, at half the size, half the weight - and at half the price! DSLR photographers love to gloss over this fact, or find comparison's where this doesn't quite work. But in actuality, the truth of the size/price/weight savings comparison with APS-C and full frame is real. And the benefits of micro four thirds are obvious to anyone who has seriously made the switch.

Swan Lagoon.  E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/8th sec (hand held), ISO 1600

In my last post, after I had used the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 on a landscape shoot, I summed up by saying that I was seriously rethinking my choice of system. I think that might have just been the euphoria of getting out and taking some photos after being in Lockdown.

In reality, a simple walk around my local neighbourhood, taking some 'snaphots' in the early evening light, has proved to me without doubt what an amazingly special camera system the Olympus/Panasonic micro four thirds is. Return to full frame? Humpfh!!! What was I thinking!?

Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC Mini Review

Last post I mentioned my somewhat brief experience with the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC lens (or the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di II VC LD IF lens to give it its full and proper title - whew!). Although I only had it for a few hours, and returned it due to some internal lens element issues (some fungal blooming was developing), it was long enough to take some test images and formulate some opinions of the lens in general. Opinions I'm going to share here... 😀

First, let me repeat that last sentence. 'Opinions' I'm going to share here. These are just my opinions, from my admittedly brief time with this lens. Of course a few hours with a lens isn't enough time to give an in-depth review (hence the 'mini review' in the title of this post). But it's also more than enough time for me to formulate an opinion on any piece of gear, one way or the other. Oh, and spoiler alert - I would have returned the lens even if it didn't have fungus issues.

Initially though, I have to admit to being impressed by the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC. At 570g it's a fairly hefty and substantial piece of kit, and certainly has a 'presence' to it. It looks the business, and the fit and finish is of a reasonably high quality. Nothing wobbled or creaked on my second-hand copy, even though it looked as if it had a reasonable amount of use.
There is a lot of plastic involved in the lenses construction, but it has a metal lens mount, and the plastic feels extremely dense and solid. As mentioned, it really does feel very substantial in the hand (and on the camera).

Unfortunately, this also happens to be my first grumble with this lens. I actually think it's a bit too hefty. Yes, seriously. Maybe I've been a bit spoilt using mirrorless over the last two years, but even the all-metal constructed M.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro I was trading in for this lens only weighs 382g. I also think that some of the issue I had was because it seems to be a very back-heavy lens. A lot of the weight felt as if it was concentrated at the mount-end (rear), making it a very unbalanced lens. Attached to the Canon 50D body, the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC gave me the impression that it was placing a lot of strain on the cameras bayonet lens mount. I'm sure this isn't an issue - I haven't heard of any camera mounts being destroyed by the tamron. But it's certainly the feeling I got when I used this lens, and I can't say I've ever felt that way with a lens before - ever.

Pruning. Canon 50D with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC. 1/320th @ f3.5, ISO 100. (at 17mm)

The other annoyance I noticed straight away with the lens was to do with the VC (vibration control). It makes a very audible 'clunk' sound as the vibration control kicks in - which is very annoying. The VC works - no doubt - it's just quite noisy, and quite noticeable while it's doing it! I don't know if this is the same with all Tamron's VC lenses, but it was certainly the case with this lens.

Tree - Opawa. 50D with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC. 1/250th @ f3.5 (at 17mm)

And finally (I did say this was a 'mini' review), we come to IQ (image quality). It's ok. Really - just ok. Centrally it's sharp from f2.8, but the corners are very soft, especially at 17mm. It also exhibits quite a high level of purple fringing, and stopping down doesn't really help in this regard. Purple fringing was clearly evident in areas of high contrast, even at f5.6.

There's obvious distortion at the edges at 17mm (look at the lean on the house at the edge of the frame), but I won't hold that against the lens - it's fairly common for standard zooms at the wide angle end.

Finishing on a positive - vignetting seems well controlled at the wide angles, wide open, and autofocusing was quick and responsive (albeit with a little noise from the focusing motor).

No, as I said at the beginning, I didn't do exhaustive tests. Don't need to. Wandering around a park on a Monday morning, taking 'snaps' of anything that took my fancy, at apertures that I would normally shoot at, tells me everything I need to know about the lenses image quality and performance. And for me, it was a lens I struggled to like and get along with. So I went back that morning and exchanged it for the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. And I have to say, the performance is night and day different.

Outside Springfield - Canterbury. Canon 50D with Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS. 1/60th @ f11, ISO 100

I prefer everything about the Sigma, when compared to the Tamron. Ironically, at 565g, it's only 5g lighter than the Tamron - but it feels a lot lighter because it's a better balanced lens. The front element is even bigger (77mm vs 72mm) which would normally suggest a lens would be heavier, but the Sigma is a fraction lighter despite the bigger front. In operation the Sigma is quieter and faster, and has a much better (i.e. silent) image stabilisation system (Sigma call it OS - optical stabilisation). It's also considered a sharper lens that the Tamron, and while I can't confirm this with a side-by-side comparison, images I've taken with the Sigma have been crazy, insanely sharp. On par with the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 I owned once upon a time ago. And corner sharpness on the Sigma does seem significantly better than on the Tamron.

I'm not a Sigma fanboy, or a Tamron hater. When I walked out of the camera store with the Tamron I was a very excited and happy camper - until I actually used it. The Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC lens I used was an unbalanced, noisy beast that I didn't get along with (lens element issues aside). Images from it were just so-so, and I would have a hard time recommending the lens to anyone.

Ironically, when I was returning the lens the next day, a woman was purchasing a brand new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC over a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 HSM OS. Apparently the Tamron was $100 cheaper. I would have paid the extra $100 bucks for the Sigma...   

The Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro - my precious!

It's arrived - it's arrived - my precious - my precious (typing in my best Golem voice).

Just a couple of weeks after committing to sell all of my micro four thirds lenses to purchase the M.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro - it's in my hot little hands! I'm so excited (can you tell?) and thrilled that it's worked out even better than I imagined. How so?

I'm not going to lie - I wavered in the middle of the process for a few days. Since I already had the Panasonic 25mm f1.7, I briefly considered going to a three prime lens kit - getting the 17mm f1.8 and the 45mm f1.8 to go with it. There was even a couple of reasonably priced 17mm f1.8's come up for auction on-line, so I was sorely tempted.

But I watched a few more glowing video reviews on Youtube for the 12-40mm f2.8, took a few deep breaths, and stuck to my original plan. And then, what sold it in the end, was the amazing deal I eventually got for the 12-40mm f2.8 Pro!

With three of my lenses already sold, I still didn't have quite enough to by the lens new (from Hong Kong via a Trademe - a NZ internet auction site). There weren't any coming up second-hand for auction, so I decided to use social media to see what I could find. I belong to a couple of New Zealand Photography Buy, Sell & Trade Facebook groups. I placed a WTB (wanted to buy) advert without really expecting anything much, but the next day I received a reply.

Cobden Beach Tiphead. OM-D E-M1 with M.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro lens. 1/800th @ f5.6, ISO 200

A photographer in Invercargill (lower South Island) had one that he didn't use very often (he's more of a macro shooter), and was considering selling it. Excellent condition, hardly use, etc, etc. Long story short, we struck a deal and he sold it to me that evening! I had just enough money from the sale of my lenses thus far, and so ended up saving about a third of what it would have cost me for a brand new one! Ironically, I later found out that with the money I paid him for his lens, he purchased one of the 17mm f1.8 lenses I had been considering on Trademe.

Coal River Heritage Park. E-M1 with M.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. 1/640th @ f3.5, ISO 200

The 12-40mm arrived two days later and I finally had my first Pro f2.8 lens for my Olympus micro four thirds system. As described, the lens is in immaculate condition, and is indeed a perfect match for the E-M1, especially with the grip attached. It looks beautiful, feels solid, and oozes quality. I couldn't be happier.

Greymouth Crane. E-M1 with 12-40mm Pro f2.8. 1/800th @ f4.5, ISO 200

But it gets even better.... 😀  As well as sending me the lens, I also received a book dedicated to using the OM-D E-M1 and a variable ND filter and a polarizing filter! All for free! That's probably $200NZ worth of free stuff, and I'm very grateful to the seller for his amazing generosity. It's great to know that there are still some generous-hearted people in the world, especially when you are the recipient of that generosity. I'm especially looking forward to giving the variable ND a try - I've never used one before, but always been curious to try them out. And now I can. Thanks Paul!

Drill Sculpture. E-M1 with M.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. 1/640th @ f4.5. ISO 200

All the photos in this post (except for the product photo) where taken on my first outing with the E-M1 and 12-40mm f2.8 Pro combination. It was unfortunately a disappointingly drab morning, and the location I had originally intended to photograph was covered in so much thick fog that I had to turn back. So instead I wandered around in the freezing cold and took a few 'snaps'. Not my best work, and all pretty dull, but at least I got out and started building up some muscle-memory with the gear.

Of course the lens performed as expected. The zoom ring is smooth, but with a certain amount of 'resistance'. This means there's no hint of zoom-creep, with no wobbles or looseness on the lens. Even the hood and cap feel reassuringly solid. The range is just about perfect, with 12mm about as wide as I like to shoot landscapes (24mm field of view in 35mm terms), and 40 (80mm on a full-frame DLSR) hitting the sweet spot for portraiture. I don't do a lot of portraiture now that I don't shoot weddings, although that might all be about to change with the birth of my first grandchild early next year (2019)!

Now that the 12-40mm is literally my only lens (I've finally sold all the others), I've decided I would like some sort of telephoto - just for the times when one might come in handy. The 40-150mm is the obvious choice - and no, not the f2.8 version (although there's no denying that would be sweet). An Olympus 40-150mm f4/5.6 is on its way to me as I write this. But that's not all - it comes with some other goodies. More on that next time....

Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. The ultimate zoom lens for micro four thirds?

In my last post I waxed lyrical about my recent purchase of the Nikon D200 for tickling my DSLR-shooting fancy. Whenever I purchase any new (second hand) equipment, I get excited about the 'potential' other purchases that could be involved. This generally means lenses. And so I started downloading Nikon lens brochures and going giddy over the prospect of a 24-70mm f2.8 or 70-200mm f2.8 to really make the D200 shine.

Nikon's Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8 Pro lens - sexy!

But then, suddenly, I had a rare moment of lucidity (hey, at least I admit it). As nice as the Nikon D200 is, I have an even better system that I really should be focusing my attention on.

I wrote in my last post that my 'main' kit is my Olympus OM-D E-M1. I've built it up into quite a comprehensive system, with zooms, primes, grips, extra batteries and external flashguns. But with my recent surgery, a rather damp winter, and focusing most of my attention on peripheral areas like film and DSLR's, the Olympus hasn't been getting a lot of love.

I'm still totally blown away with how amazingly good the OM-D E-M1 actually is. In many ways, it's more camera than I can handle, with features and controls that I will probably never ever use. As a stills photographer, I'm not really interested in its video capabilities (although I have used it for video), and the Art Filters also don't get used since I prefer to do effects myself later on in post. I've never played with Live Composite (although I would like to one day), or Silent Shutter (which again, might come in handy?). I have it set up very simply - almost like a film camera - and prefer to use single-shot, center focus point and recompose. My one concession to technology is the eye focus tracking when shooting portraits. Watching the focus point follow the subjects face as they move around the frame is just magical, and it's been consistently reliable with focus accuracy.

But.... (yes folks, there's always a but), what I've felt I've always lacked in my kit is a truly stellar lens - something similar to a Nikkor or Canon 24-70mm f2.8 professional lens. Truth be told, I've never owned the Canon or Nikon versions either - but I've always wanted to. I have owned a few Canon 'L' lenses, and without exception they were worth every penny (even second hand). So instead of dreaming about a Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8 for my D200, why wasn't I dreaming about the equivalent lens for my Olympus E-M1? Why not indeed....

The title page from Olympus USA for the Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro lens

The 'ultimate' zoom to use as a walk-around, shoot anything, style of lens has to be the Olympus M. Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. It even says so on their website 😉

I've lusted after this lens since moving to micro four thirds. I've even shot with one - briefly - for an afternoon (see post here). That was the shoot that convinced me I wanted an E-M1 (I owned the E-M5 MkII), and of course I was also impressed with the IQ from the 12-40mm f2.8. When I eventually sold my E-M5 to get the E-M1, I didn't have a big enough budget to get the 12-40mm as well - ending up with the 12-50mm EZ f3.5/6.3 instead. And as great as that lens is, it ain't no f2.8 Pro!

The construction of the 12-40mm f2.8 is astonishing. Equipped with a full metal body, the lens is fully sealed against dust and moisture, and is freeze-proof down to -10 degrees. It has one EDA lens, two Asperical lenses, one DSA lens, two ED lenses, two HR lenses and one HD lens (and no, please don't ask me what that all means) for 10 elements in 9 groups. It has a 7 bladed circular aperture ring, goes from f2.8 to f22, has a 62mm front filter thread, an MSC mechanism for smooth video, and Olympus's 'Zero' coating on the front element for extra dust, dirt and fingerprint resistance. This was Olympus's first professional zoom for the micro four thirds system, and as such, they threw everything they had at it!

It was released the same time the OM-D E-M1 was, as the perfect lens to pair with their first professional micro four thirds body. I guess you might even consider it to be the E-M1's 'kit' lens. And yes, that's very tongue-in-cheek, because no matter how you look at it, the 12-40mm f2.8 Pro is no kit lens.

But it is the perfect partner for the E-M1, in the same way that Canon and Nikon's 24-70mm f2.8 lenses are the perfect partner for their flagship DSLR's. At 12-40mm the Olympus has an equivalent focal range of a 24-80mm lens in full frame terms - and of course it has the constant f2.8 aperture.

Yes, we all know by now that all apertures are not created equal when it comes to creating a shallow depth-of-field. The sensor size will dictate a lenses ability to create that creamy background 'bokeh' - and a full-frame sensor is always going to give you the ability to create a shallower depth-of-field. But it's not impossible to create shallow depth of field at f2.8 on micro four thirds - and I'd rather have f2.8 at 40mm than the f5.6 I have at the moment with my other zoom. So I'm getting one - right?

Well actually yes, I am. I've decided to sell all the other lenses I own for micro four thirds - just to get the one lens: the M. Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. I've already sold a couple, and have a couple to go. Once they are all sold I'll have enough to buy a brand new 12-40mm lens direct from Hong Kong. It's a bit cheaper doing it that way (around $900NZ as opposed to $1300NZ from a camera store), and although I'd like to buy locally, the saving really can't be ignored. It's how I brought my 12-50mm EZ originally, and I've been very happy with it.

At some point in a photographer's career, when they start getting 'serious' about the hobby, they are told by some wise old sage to invest in glass. Camera bodies come, and camera bodies go (at an alarming rate), but good glass practically lasts forever. And can sometimes even go up in value. No photographer ever regretted buying pro-quality glass for their camera (although their bank balance may disagree).

Most reviews on the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro lens are positively glowing. Some even call it the best zoom lens they've ever used, on any system, period. That's impressive and exciting praise for perhaps the 'ultimate' lens for micro four thirds. I can't wait.....

Panasonic Lumix 25mm f1.7 G - initial thoughts

In my last post I hinted at the end that Santa had been very good to me in 2017. I've been wanting to complete my micro four thirds kit with the two missing pieces (for me) of the puzzle; a decent flashgun and a fast 50 prime lens. Mrs Clause has been listening (thanks honey), and now I finally have both - although the lens that is the subject of this post was actually a present to myself 😉

Panasonic Lumix 25mm f1.7 G next to the excellent Canon 50mm f1.8 STM.

In the last few months of 2017 I shot a wedding, several portraits for work and a food assignment - all with my Canon 40D and the 50mm f1.8 (exclusively for the portraits and food photography). I enjoyed using the 40D with 50mm - it's a great piece of kit. But, having said that, I only used it because I didn't have the equivalent set-up with my E-M1.

For the wedding, I didn't have a flash - or a fast portrait lens, so I went with the Canon 40D (and borrowed a friends flash). For the portraits and food, again, I was missing that fast prime/portrait lens. On the 40D, the 50mm f1.8 has an equivalent field of view of an 80mm medium telephoto lens, ideal for portraits. Although I do often think it's just a little too 'tight' for some of my uses at 80mm?

Panny 25mm f1.7 G on the OM-D E-M1. A very nice combo.

I've had a hankering for a fast 50mm to go with my Olympus for a while - as a general purpose prime and occasional portrait lens. At 25mm, the Panasonic is bang on the 50mm field of view for micro four thirds (25mm x2 = 50mm), and at f1.7 is almost as fast as it gets. Olympus have their own 25mm's - an f1.8 that is about $200NZ more expensive than the Panasonic, and an f1.2 that is stupid, crazy expensive because its - f1.2 (and part of their 'Pro' line). For my budget the only consideration would be the f1.8. Yeah, OK, the Oly f1.8 is probably 'better' made, with a little more metal to it, but is it going to be $200 better in image quality? I think not.

At $255.00NZ leading up to Christmas with a Panasonic promotion, I just couldn't say no. But then there was the small matter of actually paying for the lens (just a minor inconvenience). With the flashgun problem solved as a Christmas present (more about that in a later post), my OM-D E-M1 kit was almost complete. So I decided to bite the bullet, and sell my Canon 40D to get the required funds to purchase the Pannny 25mm lens. A week later, with the Canon sold, the deal was done and the Panasonic arrived between Christmas and New Year (overnight from Photo & Video in Merivale, Christchurch - thanks Greg).

Fits the E-M1 like a glove. Sleek, black and gorgeous!

With the E-M1 body, 3 batteries, Olympus 12-50mm EZ lens, Panasonic 45-200mm, Panasonic 25mm f1.7, Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN (more on that later as well), and Godox TT350'O' flashgun - I now have an Olympus mirrorless kit to take on any challenge.

Initial impressions on the Panasonic 25mm f1.7 G are positive. It's a very 'handsome' lens when attached to the E-M1, and the size and weight are perfect. It's a little thinner compared to the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM, but has about the same heft in the hand (both are plastic with metal lens barrels). It's quick and quiet in operation, and the focusing barrel (which makes up almost the entire body), is silky smooth. But looks alone don't make a lens -right!? To see how it would perform as a day-to-day walk-around lens, I took it with me on a family outing to Punakaiki - as my only lens!

Punakaiki Rocks. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 25mm f1.7G lens. f4 @ 1/1000th. ISO 200

Many people swear by the 50mm 'standard' prime as an ideal walk-around everyday lens. I get a little nervous at the prospect of carrying a prime as my go-to kit, even though I know it's really only psychological. I've done my own tests before to see how much 'zooming with the feet' is required for a 50mm to cover the field of view of the 35 to 70mm zoom (see the post here). It was literally a case of 5 steps back, or two steps forward. And I have to say, I happily shot all afternoon with the Panny 25mm without once wishing I had another lens with me.

Pancake Rocks beach. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic Lumix 25mm f1.7 G lens. f4 @ 1/2000th sec. ISO 200.

There is an old saying that you 'Cut your cloth accordingly'. That's what you have to do if you are using a 50mm prime lens - cut your cloth accordingly. No, it's not an ultra-wide, so don't go looking for ultra-wide images. And no, it's not a telephoto - so don't go looking for telephoto images either. It can be used for landscapes (see the images above), and it can give the impression of a short telephoto for portraiture if you get in reasonably close to the subject and use the f1.7 aperture to blur the background. But every lens has its uses, and its limitations - and I'd rather carry a 50mm field of view with me than just an ultra-wide or just a telephoto - both of which would be more limiting than the 50mm.

Limpets on the Rocks. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 25mm f1.7 G lens. f4 @ 1/320th sec. ISO 200

One of the other great features of the Panasonic 25mm f1.7 is its close-focusing capabilities. At just 25cm for the closest focusing distance, you can achieve some shots approaching macro territory. And as with macro lenses, the closest you focus, the shallower the depth of field becomes - so make sure that the aperture is closed down enough for a decent depth of field. At f4 (f8 equivalent in terms of depth of field on a full frame sensor), the bottom Limpet that I focused on is sharp in the center, and starting to blur slightly along the outer edges. The Limpet itself is probably about 3cm in length - so that's not a lot of depth of field!

Initial impressions of the Panasonic Lumix 25mm f1.7 G are very positive. I want to do some more shooting wide-open at f1.7 - to see what I think about its portrait capabilities. But I'm already very happy with my post-Christmas purchase.