Author Topic: 17/20mm Pancake vs 14-42mm EPL -1 (Read 4302 times)

ACF · « **on:** December 30, 2010, 07:17:38 AM »

I have the 14-42mm kit lens for my EPL-1. I'm thinking of buying a pancake lens after reading this - http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm I want to try to take the kind of wild, wide angle distorted images on that page. So what I'm looking for is a wide angle lens, but my 14-42mm is described as a wide angle lens with an angle of 75 degrees, which is bigger than the pancake lenses anyway. So would there be any real point of buying a new lens?? Realistically I should be able to create wild looking images, like the ones in the article above with my 14-42mm lens.

Or have I just got it all wrong?! I'm new to interchangeable lens cameras..

traveler_101 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 30, 2010, 07:40:02 AM »

Hi ACF,

I just glanced at the article, but I can answer your question right off: "no." At the same time you won't be creating those type of images with either the 17 or 20mm lenses either. The article concerns ultra-wide lenses. He's talking 14mm FOV, which for your camera would have to be a 7mm FOV (4/3 cameras have a 100% crop factor). What you need to look into is the Panasonic 7-14mm or Olympus 9-18mm ultra wide zoom lenses made specifically for m43 cameras.

ACF · « **Reply #2 on:** December 30, 2010, 10:06:57 AM »

Thanks for your reply. So was I right in thinking that my 14-42 will get similar results as the pancakes, making it a pointless buy? Also with the 7-14 or the olly version would I get near to the desired wide angle pics as in that article?

Thanks Aaron

voyager · « **Reply #3 on:** December 30, 2010, 07:59:30 PM »

You will with the 7-14mm, but it's very expensive. The 14-42mm is equivalent to a 28-84mm lens on a full frame camera. To put it in perspective, the other brands that use an APS-C sized sensor have 18-55mm kit lenses, which is also equivalent to 28-80mm in full frame. There's a 2x crop factor on Micro Four Thirds, so you need much wider lenses to achieve the same results. But the 7-14mm is equivalent to 14-28mm on full frame, which is very wide.

ACF · « **Reply #4 on:** December 31, 2010, 01:49:44 AM »

Ok, cool. So whatever the lens, double it?

I have a four thirds mount. Would the olly four thirds equivalent be basically the same, but cheaper? Unless I can find a cheaper second hand panny, I think that one's out the window.

voyager · « **Reply #5 on:** December 31, 2010, 01:51:15 AM »

You can buy Four Thirds lenses that will autofocus with Micro Four Thirds cameras and have the same focal lengths as them, the only catch is you have to buy an adapter and settle for less than par autofocus speed.

ACF · « **Reply #6 on:** December 31, 2010, 03:32:40 AM »

I've already got the four thirds adapter, I use it with my 40-150mm. The auto focus Isn't an issue for me with this lens, I'm always tweaking the focus manually anyway.

I've found a 9-18 on ebay in hong kong for £360 delivered. But after searching for images with both lenses, I don't think I'm going to be happy till I own the Panasonic

Are there any older alternatives, with which I'd have to buy another mount maybe? I'm not bothered if I have to use MF all the time, just bothered about price.

I've also got a mount for the old Minolta AF lenses (Sony Alpha I think), I have to use them in full time MF.

traveler_101 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 06, 2011, 02:42:13 AM »

Quote from: ACF on December 31, 2010, 03:32:40 AM

I've found a 9-18 on ebay in hong kong for £360 delivered. But after searching for images with both lenses, I don't think I'm going to be happy till I own the Panasonic

Are there any older alternatives, with which I'd have to buy another mount maybe? I'm not bothered if I have to use MF all the time, just bothered about price.

Hi ACF,
Here are a couple of links to threads on the 7-14 that bear up your point about its quality.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=34533711
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=96942#post96942

I have noticed that the price has come down a bit (15%) since I was looking, but it is still equivalent to a small fortune. I don't see them for sale used, but have stopped looking; it seems to me, though, that when a photographer gets ahold of one he hangs on to it. The price might very well be worth it to you and I don't think there is a good alternative out there for M43 wide--except for the Olympus 9-18. Well, there is also a standard 43 Olympus wide--7-14, I think--and since you already have the adapter, maybe you can find one used??

I can only tell you what I decided to do. I acquired a film camera, a relatively inexpensive Voigtlander Bessa-T. In part this was because I already owned a wide angle Voigtlander lens (15mm/f.4.5) which I was using on my E-P1(30mm EFL), and in part because I was becoming interested in Rangefinder cameras from what I learned reading camera boards. Now I have three lenses for the Bessa--15, 25 and 35. Two of them work well on the E-P1 as well. So I often carry two cameras, setting up the E-P1 for short tele and the Bessa for wide angle and wide-normal. But to adopt this solution, you would have to be interested in film and all that that implies; it certainly doesn't save you money in the long run.

traveler_101 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 06, 2011, 05:48:08 AM »

Quote from: ACF on December 30, 2010, 10:06:57 AM

Thanks for your reply. So was I right in thinking that my 14-42 will get similar results as the pancakes, making it a pointless buy?

Aaron, this is a separate question from the wide angle issue which I addressed in my previous post. The 14-42 is a good kit lens and gets very good reviews (see here for example, http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1275/cat/all) but it is not equivalent to the image quality of the pancake lenses, especially the Panasonic 20mm/f1.7. That is a great lens, widely loved; I very much like the rendering it gives. It is rather pricey, though it has dropped considerably from the $400 I paid for it a few months ago. Importantly, it is a "fast" lens, i.e. you can shoot in low light. The maximum aperture on the 14-42 is what--3.5, I believe, compared to 1.7 on the 20mm Panasonic. Quite a difference!

Another way to get away from relying on the kit lens is to buy "legacy" prime (single focal length) lenses in the range 40mm to 50mm from Olympus OM, Konica Hexanon, Minolta Rokkor, and others. Some are cheap and very good. I shoot a Olympus OM 50mm/f.1.8 on my E-P1. It cost hardly anything, less than the OM > M43 adapter actually, and I am very satisfied with it. Looks great on the camera too. In fact it is parked on the camera right now. It gives you an equivalent (an EFL, effective focal length) on the M43 system of 100mm, which I find very useful for certain kinds of shooting. Of course it is MF, but you said earlier that you often touch up your focus manually anyway.

asterinex · « **Reply #9 on:** January 06, 2011, 11:16:07 AM »

Quote

Another way to get away from relying on the kit lens is to buy "legacy" prime (single focal length) lenses in the range 40mm to 50mm from Olympus OM, Konica Hexanon, Minolta Rokkor, and others. Some are cheap and very good. I shoot a Olympus OM 50mm/f.1.8 on my E-P1. It cost hardly anything, less than the OM > M43 adapter actually, and I am very satisfied with it. Looks great on the camera too. In fact it is parked on the camera right now. It gives you an equivalent (an EFL, effective focal length) on the M43 system of 100mm, which I find very useful for certain kinds of shooting. Of course it is MF, but you said earlier that you often touch up your focus manually anyway.

I just bought an Olympus OM 10 + auto-W 28mm 1:2,8
and an Olympus OM 10 + auto-S 1:1,8 f=50mm . I'm still waiting for the adapter I ordered in China

How would you compare these old lenses to the 20mm pana (IQ) ? is it comparable ?

traveler_101 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 06, 2011, 02:17:14 PM »

Quote from: asterinex on January 06, 2011, 11:16:07 AM

I just bought an Olympus OM 10 + auto-W 28mm 1:2,8
and an Olympus OM 10 + auto-S 1:1,8 f=50mm . I'm still waiting for the adapter I ordered in China

How would you compare these old lenses to the 20mm pana (IQ) ? is it comparable ?

Hi asterinex,

I'd be interested to hear how you find the 28mm/f.2.8. Technically it probably won't equal the panasonic 20mm IQ, but it may offer a pleasant rendering different than the cool, subtle colors of the panasonic. And then a 56 EFL differs from a 40. Enjoy the 50/1.8; it's really a nice lens.

adash · « **Reply #11 on:** January 06, 2011, 02:25:33 PM »

Quote

How would you compare these old lenses to the 20mm pana (IQ) ? is it comparable ?

The pany is better. The 50mm will however become a great portrait lens and the 28mm.....well, I don't quite know.

mikmas101 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 06, 2011, 04:44:09 PM »

Quote from: asterinex on January 06, 2011, 11:16:07 AM

I just bought an Olympus OM 10 + auto-W 28mm 1:2,8
and an Olympus OM 10 + auto-S 1:1,8 f=50mm . I'm still waiting for the adapter I ordered in China

How would you compare these old lenses to the 20mm pana (IQ) ? is it comparable ?

I have owned both these lenses for some time and (recently) the panny 20mm, much as I really like the OM lenses and they are both very sharp performers there is no real comparison. The 20mm is in a higher league IMO - but also costs a lot more than both combined.

asterinex · « **Reply #13 on:** January 07, 2011, 11:39:07 AM »

[quote

Hi asterinex,

I'd be interested to hear how you find the 28mm/f.2.8. Technically it probably won't equal the panasonic 20mm IQ, but it may offer a pleasant rendering different than the cool, subtle colors of the panasonic. And then a 56 EFL differs from a 40. Enjoy the 50/1.8; it's really a nice lens.
[/quote]

I will definitely post some pictures of both lenses

17/20mm Pancake vs 14-42mm EPL -1