Image on top shows the Nocticron and the Fuji XF. Both lenses have f/1.2 aperture and hopefully similar pricing.
–
These are the official Panasonic Nocticron 42,5mm f/1.2 Asperhircal Power OIS lens specs via Digicameinfo:
– Lens construction: (one ED lens, one UHR lens, two aspherical lens) 14 pieces in 11 groups
– Focusing: inner focus
– AF motor: screw integrated stepping motor
– Equipped with aperture ring
– Image Stabilizer: POWER OIS
– Barrel: Metal
– Aperture blades (circular aperture iris) 9 pieces
– Minimum focusing distance: 0.5m
– Maximum magnification: 0.1 times (0.2 times in terms of)
– Filter size: 67mm
– Height: 76.8mm
– Maximum diameter: 74mm
– Weight: 425g
The lens will be announced the next days but one important info is still missing….the price! I hope it gets a similar pricing like the today announced Fuji 56mm f/1.2 lens which costs $999 here at Amazon. Ok, this lens has no stabilization and likely doesn’t focus as fast (Panasonic AF is known to be better compared to Fuji).
Fingers crossed guys!
180 Responses
Ahhh…. what price ££$£$£$£$£
The Panasonic is significantly larger (filter size 67 versus 62mm).
We’ll see for the first real world samples… for now I’m sticking with
the probably much softer old Pen F 42mm f1.2 (with a 49mm filter size 😉
which sharpens up nicely at f2.
Iwert
uhm…if these specs are right, then the panasonic isn’t significantly larger. It’s only one mm thicker and 6mm longer. Apparently that’s the size cost of OSIS?
Not significantly bigger, but still bigger and probably heavier. Where is the advantage of a quite smaller sensor? We’ll have to see the performance of both. If the Panasonic performs wide open as good as the Fuji stopped down to 1.8 (to have equal DoF) then that would explain the size. But I doubt it will be the case.
Why doubt? So far the panasonics outperform the fuji in terms of sharpness
what are you basing that on? comparing lens by lens for the ones i own with equivalent focal length and dof, only the panny 20mm beats its fuji counterpart.
Yes…the photos above are VERY misleading as the Panasonic is the larger lens (although one would not expect this do to the difference in sensor format for each system, the Fuji being much larger APS-C you would expect that there lens would be larger)..and more importantly the Panny does have larger glass elements than the Fuji based on Filter Size 67mm Panyy vs 62mm Fuji ( and more of them: 14 elements in 11 groups for the Panny vs only 11 elements in 8 groups for the Fuji)..This equates to the weight of 425gms for the Panny vs 405gms for the Fuji. With the Leica branding expect the MFT lens to cost considerable more.
Why do people expect that its price is near to Fuji? Leica standard, quality, and performace is perhaps world best. Even $1500-$200, it’s still a steal.
Bahahaha! Typical brandboy response 😛
It´s not made by Leica!
It doesn’t matter. Leica is Leica !!!
LOL! That is so not true. This is a Leica branded lens made in japan (I believe not China, which is positive.) Leica just oversees the design of the lens. If this was a Leica lens, handmade in Germany you could expect a price tag of $3000-$4000. I think these lens are better quality, perhaps because of it…..but remember Leica also rebrands Lumix cameras and charges a ridiculous premium and the camera is the SAME as the Lumix. So I look at the performance of these lenses in the reviews…not the name stamped on it. That being said…I expect this to be a very good lens…but VERY expensive…partially simply because of the branding…which questionable may add to the performance but definitely adds to the price.
I have to disagree. I like Panasonic, and have the 25mm 1.4, and that is most definitely not quite up to Leica standards. Great lens, but don’t call this an outright Leica. Maybe the 45mm will be better (looks to be metal at least), but Panasonic has branded lots of stuff with Leica (including my Pana Lx-5 pocketcam). They can’t ask those kinds of prices for this lens. If it is that expensive, I will rather buy the Oly 45 + Oly 75. For roughly a thousand or less, I’m onboard.
PL25 costs $600 only. In all fairness, I’d be shocked that at this price it would stand toe to toe with Leicas sold 10x the price.
I think you missed my point. Panasonic manufactured “Leica” products are cheaper and of less quality than true Leica products. This is why I expect the Nocticron to be around $1000 in price. They cannot command much more, and probably did not put the level of quality in it as a true Leica (which is fine – I really want this lens since it has OIS, which my GH3 sorely lacks..)
I really want this lens…I think it will be an excellent lens…but with all of the large glass elements, metal build and the branding I am guessing $1399-$1499 at introduction. Just read this page…many are impressed with branding and are buying a fashion accessory. It will sell, and hold its value. I love my P/L 25mm. (Definitely one of the best MFT lenses available),but this lens looks like a step up in build quality. We will all find out soon enough, though!!!
Dude, stop saying that! 🙂 If panasonic uses this page for research, we don’t want them to get the idea they can get away with $1500! 😉
(Personally, I can’t swallow paying $1500 for this lens either, regardless of how nice it is)
LOL!…yeah I know…..I think that this is getting too pricey for MFT…but with the $1400 tag on the M1 and it being camera of the year like EVERYWHERE……is NOT helping!!! I want it to be cheaper…but they are going to sting us with this one, because they can.
Selling off my 45mm f/1.8 Oly may pay the tax and shipping!!! LOL!>
…but I also have to say…every time I look at images from my Oly 75mm…I am always wowed by the sharpness….I am definitely expecting that here with another f/stop of light ..but not as much reach obviously. It also depends on how sharp the images are at f/1.2 that really matters, especially for pricing. There is a LOT of glass in this lens though…. 14 elements….that is a LOT of lenses…wow. Expectations are definitely high.
If Leica already had a similar lens for other mounts, I’d agree, but their micro Four-Thirds lenses don’t seem to be Leica quality for a discount.
@ Matts
Please don’t post comments like this.. makes m43 users look like stupid fanboys
I bet that we all will have to see a debate or comparison between these two for long long time.
I think you’re right about that Larry. This comparison pic has me wondering just how the lens hood will attach to the Nocticron, I wonder if it be a thread-on hood.
AF speed is no longer a key point to me. According to Fuji’s current bodies and latest XF lens, AF is far more than enough.
Yes, according to Fuji. In low light the latest bodies and lenses are still much slower than Panasonic.
+1
Yea, the Panasonic 20mm is certainly ‘known’ for its AF speed 😉
Yeah, it wasn’t terribly fast focusing on my G1.
On my GH2, it became hair splitting…
fuji have bigger and way better sensor af on bodys is great so ….keep hoping and wishing that tiny sensor performs better than a point and shoot
You ain´t full-frame, you are simply ¨oligo-frame¨.
This just shows a lack of understanding of scale. Four thirds is almost the same size as the Fuji sensor. Both are many times larger than point and shoots. Both are between 1/4 and 1/3 as large as full frame, in terms of area, putting them much closer to full frame than point and shoots. Benchmarks bear this out, with four thirds sensors beating many APS-C sensors and matching most others on all key metrics.
Basic numeracy is a good skill to have when comparing things. 🙂
APS-C is 50% larger than MFT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Thirds_system#Sensor_size_and_aspect_ratio
strikes again….
Mr Fuji is obviously nervous…
MODERATOR: WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO KICK THE TROLLS???????
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
WARNING: ANOTHER USELESS POST FROM FULL-FRAME……………..
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
The fuji XF is f/1.2 for an APS-C sensor and the FoV is nearly the same, so the Panasonic should be less expensive! Except if the Panasonic is far better of course.
OK this 42.5mm f/1.2 should be a pretty lense but i’m waiting for the spec, price and availability of the 15mm f/1.7. Less impressive but more useful for me 🙂
Since when a lens price is based on that?!
I really can’t understand why most of the MFT lenses are tele or portrait lenses. Only because it’s easier and cheaper to build? Maybe I’m a venusian, using only “normal” and wide angle lenses ? (that’s to say for MFT sensors < to 25mm). What kind of photography, and what kind of photographers the manufacturers are educating for the future : flowers photographers and moms shooting their sons playing soccer? It's a real problem : Look for instance at the Flickr streams and all the shitty pictures here…
Not sure what you are talking about, there are several wide lenses, and some ultrawide as well.
+You’re right, but it seems there’s about 3 tele lenses for one wide or normal lens.
A wide or a tele (or a “full frame” camera) won’t make you a better photographer.. 😉
Humm… I’m not agree with you. I think that the “point of view” given by a lens, the opening angle of view, the depth of field and the distance to the subject change the rendering of the pictures, the links between the photographer and the subject, and most of all the links between the photographer and the “culture” of the photography (the pictures still existing, the works of the great photographers, etc.).
WTF?
shitty pictures have nothing to do with focal length.
that’s one of the stupidest remarks I’ve ever seen on here. (and that’s saying a lot)
that’s like saying a 4 door car is worse than a 2 door one.
if you don’t like tele, don’t buy it, but F%&K OFF with that “my way of seeing things is better than others” attitude.
Please be polite and stay cool 🙂
Obviously, the notions of “subjectivity”, “deep of field” and most of all “point of view” are unknown for you.
Well, calling pictures shitty because of not liking the focal length used isn’t really very nice or polite either.
There simply is a difference between quality and taste, and a liking for a certain focal length has everything to do with the later and nothing at all with the first.
Being a good photographer has everything to do with being able to make use of the tools you have, and very little with what tools you prefer.
WOW! The Nocti weighs in almost 30% heavier than the Oly 75mm …I think we can find the price will at least follow that same formula. 🙂
its says it has 14 elements vs the 10 for the Olympus…so 70-80 USD per element? 🙂
However, this Nocticron weighs about 20% less than the 42.5 manual-focus Voigtlander. 425 grams compared to 572 grams.That’s good news because the Voigt is a beast to carry around on a GX7.
The Voigtländer 42.5mm may be a bit heavier, but it’s hardly a beast. In fact, it works quite well with the GX7. No handling difficulties here. Remember, you don’t use the body as a fulcrum, you support the lens with your left hand and focus. P&S refugees need to understand this basic point. 😉
It uses 58mm filters, too, so it’s significantly narrower than the Nocticron. Dimensions: 64.3 x 74.6 mm – Weight 571g (1.26lb.)
The question remains… what will the price be?
It’s not a beast performance-wise, it is by far the sharpest lens I’ve ever used. http://www.flickr.com/photos/steven_hight/sets/72157636440815456/ It seems just a bit of a mismatch on the GX7, it feels like it would be better suited on a GH3, maybe. I’m glad it handles well for you though.
Few years ago, I laugh out loud when I see a small NEX body with Sony’s huge lens. Nows today I laugh again when I see m4/3 small body with this gigant Nocticron. What a ridicolous combo. lol!
That’s especially true with the Panasonic GM1, but it will probably fit the GH3 and Olympus E-M1 quite nicely.
Yes, this will look great on my GH3
but some how is defeating the purpose of having a lighter and smaller camera
The Panasonic GH3 is a smaller and lighter camera but it has enough room for external controls and it is big enough to provide (reasonably) good balance with larger lenses.
ok but it’s a whole different story as we have many options… this is meant to be a special combo, if you are not able to realize…
It’s roughly the same size as the Olympus 75/1.8, not really a big lens at all.
Gigant Nocticron? You seem to be easily impressed 🙂
1) Come on Panasonic: price and AVAILABILITY already
2) So much for the size advantage of the lenses….. filter size is even bigger than the Fuji’s!
Will this one be so much better than my Olympus 45mm 1,8, I really like that lens…
If it will cost 3 times more than the Oly and deliver less than 50% better sharpness then it will be way overpriced even considering the 1 stop advantage and the better materials used and overall feel.
christ, can you try to be a little bit more optimistic?
Sorry, not sure if you are a troll or really pessimistic, but there are NO indications it will cost ANYWHERE near that price-range….
Andy, I may owe you an apology. I suppose if you refer to the Oly 45mm 1.8, it may indeed be roughly 2.5-3 times more expensive. I can live with about $1000 (or less), since it has a one stop faster aperture, and combined with OIS that my Camera lacks (or IBIS rather), it will become far more useful for my purposes, than the Oly is as it stands.
ya me too, I though he compared with the 75mm
I’ve compared it to the Oly 45mm f1.8 🙂 Yes, for Pana users this new f1.2 OIS is a blessing but depends how much it will cost…my guess is that it will have a MSRP of 1100-1200$ in the US and 1000-1100 Euros in the EU.
I am not knocking the 1.8/45, but its easy to tell how a lens may be overpriced by setting the rules and presenting it as if it is how it works.
I mean, fine for you if lens sharpness is the thing. I can’t think of a soft lens as being desirable for one thing. But when you thing about it, there are many in these talkbacks that values minimal software correction, something for which PL lenses are good for. How much would they pay for a fast 45mm that mostly does it all optically?
Hi Jules, I agree. All or some of these will be actual benefits that can justify a price that is much higher than the Oly:
-1 stop faster means better low light capability
-1 stop faster means more shallow DoF if so desired. (closer to what FF are typically capable of)
-Metal Construction
-Hopefully some of the “Leica rendition” which is hard to put a finger on, but they give pleasing images, and the general consensus seems to be be a tad “nicer personality” than Olympus lenses (who are also very nice, don’t get me wrong!)
-Possibly sharper (at least if stopped down)
-built in OIS for those that don’t have IBIS
-Hopefully weather-sealed, but I don’t think so???
> How much would they pay for a fast 45mm that mostly does it all optically?
see the pana leica 45/2.8 macro: 600-800 euro.
I dont think this 42.5/1.2 should cost much more than that – though it will.
in my opinion, there’s more pictures that the macro can make that the fast lens can’t, than the other way around.
Thats probably a virtue of the shooting style, but I’ve said more than once how that 5cm focus distance between the 1.7/20 and the 1.4/25 makes a difference.
That admitted, I believe the PL macro 45 is heavily under appreciated.
I expect the Nocticron to be substantially sharper than the Fuji 56mm at apertures wider than f/2.8. But then, how sharp does a portrait lens need to be? Both optics incorporate aspherical surfaces (presumably to improve edge resolution), which is a questionable design due to the potential deterioration of transition zones (in other words, expect some nasty bokeh artifacts in slightly OOF surfaces).
From a purely optical perspective, the humble Olympus 45mm may prove to make a better portrait lens than both, especially in uncontrolled conditions.
A portrait lens should be VERY sharp as you have to focus on the eyes. On the other side, I’m not a huge fan of skin
blurringretouching, but you still can do this lately, if you want.Not true.
There are several examples of highly-praised portrait lens that sharpness is not the key point. For example, Nikon’s 105DC (De-focus Control) is one of “hall of fame” lens for portrait shooters. This 105DC is not impressively sharp but it’s very famous for its beautiful rendering.
I prefer a nice rendering too as it gives more impact then just the sharpess stat does.The Oly 45 has a good balance in sharpness/rendering (with some dominance by the sharpness), while the summilux 25 has an almost perfect balance here (more analogish sharpness imo)..btw less sharpness is easily compensated by using open apertures, giving the point of focus more impression of sharpness. Perfect sharpness works only with perfect models or normal subjects who dont care 🙂
Yes, will not point a sharp lens on my mother’s face again, she cares…
Obviously a good portrait consists of the iris of one eye in fine detail, and the iris of the other in complete bokeh 😉
No question the Oly 45 is the best value out there, and it’s freakin’ awesome on the little GM1. That being said, this Leica will probably significantly up the bar for m43 portraits. There is just something special about Leica designed optics, they don’t always chart the best for MTF and vignetting, but the rendering often looks amazing in the end… less clinical, a bit more more mystical.
I completely agree. My 25mm f/1.4 almost never leaves my camera just because the results I get with it blow every other lens I own out of the water. That includes the 45 1.8, 12-40 2.8 and 60 2.8. There’s just nothing like it.
while i understand your enthusiasm about the 25mm…i think its a bit exaggerated to say it blows away other fl types; wideangle and tele types like the ones you mentioned have their way of rendering effects, which cant be achieved by a 25. Dont tear down other fl just because you prefer this(without doubt) excellent lens.
Yes, good Leica glass does have an identifiable quality. It is not a diffuse or “mystical” rendition, but rather structured. It remains to be seen how much of this character the Nocticron gains. Comparing the old and new versions of the 25 Summilux, the former behaves like a Leica. The latter not as much.
By the “old one”, you mean the four thirds version, not the micro four thirds version, right?
Yes.
The rendering difference between the 20mm and PL25 was enough for me to sell off the 20 and keep the 25. So to my eyes I’m guessing it’s still there to be had, even if the packaging has changed a little from the 4/3 version but to each their own.
m43 lenses at ca 45 mm (85-90 mm equivalent) need be stopped down to 2.8 or so in order to have both eyes and the nose tip/ears reasonably in focus. Thus f/1.2 or f/0.95 is not needed for normal portraits. These wide openings are more for artistic use and low light use (concerts, etc.)
this is just the general way of thinking how a portrait should be achieved,and is purely subjective, according to the taste of the photographer. At very close distances it has a certain meaning, to avoid a too big oase of blur, but at further distnces one unsharp eye(which is different then a blurry eye)adds to a subtle 3d effect in portraits. Just dont overdo. Too many people just think too much in extremes when we talk about this.
It’s interesting that the filter size is 62mm on the FujiFilm lens and 67mm on the Panasonic lens. Hopefully, the geometry will increase the optical quality of the Panasonic lens to counter the typical need for software corrections.
Not only that, it’s larger heavier than Fuji!
Panasonic: length 76.8 mm, diameter 74 mm, weight 425 g
Fuji: length 70 mm, diameter 73 mm, weight 405 g
Not by much, but I expected the opposite.
Not that I’m interested in any of the two…
One of the reasons I can think of is that Leica insists on as little software corrections as possible. Let’s hope.
But….most,if not all of Fuji’s lenses are optically corrected.
I hope both lenses are very sharp wide open. Both are going to be optically corrected.
Thinking the panny is going to blow the fuji away is stupid.
Why? What fuji equivalent lens is sharper than a pana lens?
Um, the XF 14/2.8 is one of the best wide angles for any camera system, period. It destroys anything Panasonic has released in that range. Likewise, the Fuji 23/1.4 is utterly phenomenal and the 60/2.4 is just as good as the PL 45. The 18-55 Fuji is as good as the Panny 12-35 and the Fuji 55-200 is as good as the 35-100. And one who owns or has owned the majority if lenses I just mentioned (and has extensively used all of them), I know of what I speak. There are some outstanding lenses for m43, but Fuji’s glass is amazing. All of them have gorgeous bokeh too. The only Panny lens that is notably sharper in comparison with an equivalent Fuji is the 25/1.4, which is sharper at f/1.4 than the Fuji 35/1.4. Both are pretty equal stopped down a bit.
Given how good the recent high end Fuji primes are, I expect the 56/1.2 to be phenomenal. Of course, I also expect the Nocticron to be amazing as well.
when i look at those specs in size and weigth, i would say they are both similar.
Might want to proof read your posts. 😉 Especially the headlines. 🙂
Looks like a fantastic lens, though! I can’t imagine them pricing it over $1000. It’ll probably be on par with the 75 f/1.8, or a little more.
I’m very disappointed by the size of the lens. It’s actually larger than the Fuji 56mm f1.2 which is designed for a larger sensor!
A shame Panasonic didn’t manage to make it more compact 🙁
Don’t trust the image to be to scale. I don’t think it is.
If you check the dimensions the Panny is larger than the Fuji..I am attributing this to the OIS in the Panny lens (along with it f/1.2 aperture). Also, I expect the Panny to be a much better performer. Definitely.
But i bet the Fuji will be soft at f1.2 with corner edge aberration problems… probably not the 42.5mm 🙂
Probably not. The MTF chart of XF 56/1.2 is quite similar to their highly-regarded XF 23/1.4, thus indicating that 56/1.2 is able to be sharp at wide open too.
@ Yan
I bet you’re wrong.
I’m with you taz, fuji is not going to make a modern 1.2 lens knowing it’s soft wide open knowing which crowd they cater to.
The panasonic \Leica 25mm f1.4 is sharper wide open then the Fuji 35mm f1.4 … So I bet the 42.5mm will be too compare to 56mm. So the DOF advantage is lost there. I’m a owner of a fuji x100s and for people who don’t know anything , let me tell you that 3200 ISO and down the image quality is not better then my Olympus EM-1, It’s the same and different !
Like that’s a fair example.
Put the XE2 with it’s 50mm Equivalent against the E-M1 with the 25mm. I’d bet the Fuji comes out on top of everything, IQ wise.
Nope. The em1 and pl25 is indeed sharper noticeably. And from iso 1600 you can clearly see noise reduction on the fuji raw files, along with blurring, i though I accidentally shot jpegs. Once you end editing the files from both cameras the em1 come out on top. I was expecting blow me away performance from the fuji when I got it, it turns out it’s just fanboy exaggerations and hyping. Can’t people really not tell when a file has been noise reduced? The jpeg files are better from the fuji, but I cant understand people who buy these type of cameras to shoot jpegs, everything else is either equal or better on the em1
“but I cant understand people who buy these type of cameras to shoot jpegs”
If you’d do ‘news’, you’d certainly know why people would buy such cameras to shoot jpegs (often + raws), as turn-around time for this is everything. If you want to ‘compete’ with the smartphone users, you can afford to be a little later with better pictures (better in composition, timing etc, actual image quality isn’t very important for this), but a little is typically in the order of minutes, not hours, so returning home for processing is simply not an option there at all.
Would I use a Fuji for this? If I didn’t already have a camera in a similar form factor, it would certainly be a consideration. Its nicely compact and discrete, great for getting close without disturbing the ‘news’ you are reporting on.
Why not use some random P&S or phone? Because those don’t provide the ergonomics and functionality for many things, and when it comes to more difficult light, also don’t provide the performance.
Another typical use, made a lot easier by cameras with integrated wifi, is immediately sharing pictures taken during events, concerts and the like. Post some nice ‘previews’ during the event, and more properly processed pictures afterwards. Being able to directly post from the event is often on the checklist if you want to get hired for such things. Quality here often matters also for the ‘previews’, but isn’t critical.
With regards to the E-M1 and pp, I agree, the output of carefully converted and processed raws is much better then the jpegs the camera produces, including things like detail and ‘residue’ noise, and the jpegs simply don’t show this device to its full (quality) potential. In that it has become more similar to the canikons.
If I want to send something off right away, I just use my Nokia Lumia 1020 with the camera-grip. I still save the 41Mpix .dng files, and can send out the 8-mpix jpg’s right away from wherever I am.
For my m43 system, all I want is quality (not speed in getting the pictures sent off somewhere).
Tom, cool if that works for you, but it doesn’t for me, besides the ‘issue’ that I do not want to go that route for a number of reasons. I also keep my mobile internet use totally 100% separated from my phone, for the simple reason that being reachable by phone is very very important to me, and I don’t want anything wasting my phone’s battery, rather, I use a *dedicated* phone without camera (meaning I can also take it with me in higher security environments).
But most importantly, the nokias are a nice alternative for a compact camera but not something usable for many hours for shooting 100s of pictures comfortably, and when doing something often, that ‘comfortably’ simply matters a lot.
Wanting to do something every so often posdiblhy maybe, or paying your bills with it really makes for totally different requirements.
I suggest you should try X-E2+35/1.4 or 23/1.4. The output from this Fuji combo makes me keep my E-M5+25/1.4 at home.
The 35mm f1.4 will still be less sharp on a XE-2 and I would really want to like the 23mm , but after trying it i find the bokeh is not what i like, it is too busy for my taste… My voigtlander 17mm 0.95 give me a more creamy pleasant bokeh over the 23mm, sorry !
NOW he mentions the Voigtlander…. HAHA!
First he puts a fixed lens against a Interchangeable Lens Camera, Then he gets called out on it, THEN he mentions a Lens with a better Aperture!
Put a XE2 against a E-M1 with similar lenses on it, and the Fuji will Beat it, hands down. Easily.
As long as you don’t care about the Fuji smearing detail due to noise reduction that can’t be turned off. Sadly no lens is going to help that, through shooting at low iso does help as there is less noise filtering in that case.
And yes, its a very nice camera, but your unrestricted praise for it is hilarious, how are you going to take pictures with such blindness?
He probably works for Fuji 🙂
tiny sensor big useless aperture ring just fanboys will buy this lens shut be called lieca cuz is not leica is a lie and the sensor sizer yes matter is f 2.4 did you guy know about shollow DOF? did u even use a real camera like MF ff aps-c might not the best but way better than m43 and is very stupid to compare to the fuji cuz all fuji products are better and the X trans sensor WAAAAY better than anym43 sensor
“shut be called lieca cuz is not leica is a lie”
Wow you must be rilly smart, yu rite gud!!
Now, now, don’t tease him. He probably gets enough of that riding the short bus to school every day.
Does your mother know you’re doing this and would she be proud if she knew?
If it is approx $1000 (or less obviously), I will buy this in a second.
At least, it is bigger than Fuji F1.2… I can not understand Panasonic’s design philosophy.
Simple: no compromise.
1) “bigger” does not mean “better”
2) Many people prefer “compromise” for better cost-performance ratio.
The question was about design philosophy. Not about cost-performance ratio. One thing though: I suspect that the length and diameter of this lens are required for the optical correction of aberrations, so in this case “bigger” does mean “better” (at least optically).
I thought the whole 4/3 things are about trade-off and compromise, otherwise why go with a smaller sensor. The design philosophy is confusing, or maybe Panasonic is confused about the direction too.
Trade-offs and compromises do not by definition mean the smallest possible regardless of quality, rather, it means finding the best compromise between price, weight, handling, size and performance for a large enough group of users. Stop thinking in absolutes, as it gets you absolutely nowhere.
So iq comes from the sensor and not the lens?
Maybe this is why Olympus decided not to go beyond 1.8; to avoit the comments of people who keep themselves busy with noticimg a difference of a few mm and a few grams on the spec list.
Olympus and Panasonic has never had an absolute goal of all their lenses being small physically. Just look at the lenses out for m43 and 43 already. As companies realizing they need to have a complete line-up of lenses that appeal to various groups of photographers, they will make anything from small cheap pancakes to large heavy zooms and primes (that are still smaller than similarly fast glass on other systems).
Their philosophy is evident not only on lenses, but bodies as well, with both the EM-1 and GH3 being rather large (for m43, but only comparable to fairly small dslr’s).
If all you want is small bodies and lenses, you can go Nikon 1 or Canon M. They have (as opposed to m43) been created for the SOLE purpose of providing that. Personally, I’m not willing to invest in systems that limited, and the quality/flexibility is not up to par in my book, but for some, that may be ok.
I will hold my judgement until reviews come out. However,this Nocticron will be compared not only to Fuji’s 56/1.2, but also to highly admired Nikon 85/1.8g which is just $500.
I have Oly 45/1.8. Therefore my question is : will this Nocticron blow away Oly 45/1.8? Will it worth upgrading?
Depends, right? Do you have IBIS on your camera? If not, the OIS on this might be very useful. Will the Nocticron have weather-sealing (which I doubt) – if it does, that may be a good reason depending on what you shoot. Do you need shallower DoF for portraits? If so, yes. Would a one stop gain advantage help you (i.e. do you shoot a lot in low/available light)?, if so, maybe.
the question would be valid if the noctitron was a 1.8 too.The extra you pay is for the extra stop(well almost) you get. For the sake of lowlight & subject isolation. Not for max performance wideopen(like Nikkor Noct 58mm f/1.2).
hard to get excited when the fuji is supposed to ship in April and we don’t know when the Panny will be ready or the price.
The size difference becomes more clear if you look at the specs:
Panasonic:14 pieces in 11 groups
Fuji: 11 pieces in 8 groups
So Panas seems to be more complicated built. What is more important to me (the size is still fine, the difference to the Fuji is very small and you can’t expect a 1.2 aperture lens to be as small as the 45/1.8) is the minimum focus distance of 50cm compared to 70 on the Fuji. I think it’s a great lens, although I like my Voigtländers very much (even smaller minimum focus distance).
Personally I no longer believe in the number of elements or fancy glass. Nikon 85/1.8g is just $499 and has only 9 elements and 9 groups without ED glass, and without aspherical glass, but is able to deliver exceptional performance and thus get highly rated by photozone, dxomark, lenstip, etc.
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-AF-S-85mm-f-1.8G-review-An-awesome-prime-that-doesn-t-cost-the-earth/Nikon-AF-S-85mm-f-1.8G-versus-competition
Well NO !
Problem is that you are talking about FF lens. m43 lens needs to have a higher resolving power then FF equivalent lens. 4 times that’s it. FF camera has higher pixel count so it’s compensated a bit but still m43 lens needs to be a better lens to shine.
Yes, its a great lens, but its “only” 1.8 and therefore easier to manufacture. This is an advantage of FF, in that you don’t need a larger aperture to get shallow DOF. But a 85mm/1.2 for FF is expensive and heavy (Canon’s is 2000$ and about 1kg).
So you get a equally fast lens with the same FOV at a much lower weight and a focusing distance of 50cm compared to 95cm,
albeit at a less shallow DOF. So wanting extremes on different sensors is always expensive, in prize or weight (consider a 70-200 on FF). The question is whether you need it.
I guess that using Nocticron with Oly body will create more severe purple fringe problem than with Pana body since the software correction algorithm between Pana body and Nocticron will work properly as designed.
I think it is great to have options in m43 portrait teles!. The Oly 45/1.8 is a winner on “bang for the buck”. Comparing image quality with the Panaleica 25/1.4 (aside different focal length) my experience was Oly being sharper but Panaleica being more beautiful image rendering. Probably the overall results from this new lens will be more beautiful and that´s why it is more expensive. After all sharpness is just one aspect of image quality.
Nothing said so far about weather sealing or not!
This is an important feature regarding the fact, that all camereras to be favorably used with this lens are weathersealed as well ( GH3, EM 1, EM 5 ) It doesn’t make sense to use a weather sealed camera with a non protected lens which will probably be priched at estimated 1200 € or even more. Weather protection means investment protection
+1. I have some good lenses, but since I did not buy the pro zooms (more primes), I don’t have any weather sealed lenses for my GH3. Would LOVE for this to be weathersealed so I at least have ONE that I can comfortably carry around in less than ideal situations
It will be interesting to see how they price it as the Canon 85/1.2 II is currently about £1700 and contains an amazing amount of glass (weight is over a kilo) and excellent build quality (for example the moving bits of glass use roller-bearings to keep the alignment perfect) plus is super-sharp in the centre wide-open. Makes £1300+ a tough ask, but will they worry about that?
I have one of the Canon lenses and would be interested in the Panasonic as a lighter weight option, (I have a GH3 so wouldn’t be a stupid size match), but the price and performance would have to make sense (it would especially have to out-perform the 35-100 at 42.5 for shared apertures). I suspect £895 is about my upper limit… so I might have to wait a while…
It’s also odd they discontinued the 150/2.8 development, presumably as they thought they wouldn’t sell enough at the price they would have to ask, but it’s not like m43 is buried in good long glass (or has any for that matter, alas), but they are (presumably) launching this… maybe they think it’ll sell a lot of the video crowd? (Which is actually 2MP imaging, so absolute sharpness doesn’t matter so much, hmmm…)
I will pay up to 250 EUR – such is the value of a 2.4/85 mm lens of excellent quality.
This one is a little smaller? I see, take my thousands then. (Hint: this is sarcastic). The question is: when are they going to pull the plug on M43?
You don’t seem to get it. The f-stop and therefore light intensity/unit area is sensor-independent, DOF of course corresponds to 2.4 (4cm DOF at 1.5m distance, shallow enough for me).
Don’t bother.
There’s always people who don’t understand equivalence floating around.
“light intensity/unit area” — correct.
Well, your mother certainly gave you a fitting name there.
The 42mm has OIS and the not needed aperture ring. It’s going to have more elements due to the OIS. The OIS will be useful for video shooters. For everyone else, The OIS is not really needed. If you have to have OIS for stills at 85mm, you have some issues you need to work on.
Sure it’s nice to have, but this lens would be smaller and cheaper without it.
Let’s not even talk about the aperture ring. One lens out of the whole line up with one. Fuji has one prime lens in the line up with out one and it’s a PITA.
Wrong again buddy. OIS doesn’t add elements, it’s incorporated into the design. You don’t add OIS to a lens you include it into the design
No, I’m not wrong at all. I never said the added OIS. If it would have been designed without it. It would have been smaller, with less elements. Period. You can’t argue that.
Well, I happen to shoot video with my GH3, so OIS is very welcome. Even for very low level photography, it can come in handy.
Yea, for video OIS is king. For stills keep it above 1/100 for anything moving anyway.
Flowing water moves, yet shutter speeds of 1/2 or even longer can be very desirable to ‘smooth’ it out.
1/100 doesn’t make for ‘safe’ exposures with a 300mm lens
For proper panning effects, it may well be desirable to lower the shutter speed.
Agree that IS is first of all useful for static subjects, but its a bit more complicated then that.
I think there is a general law to observe: the faster the lens, the less the size advantage of mFT lenses over APS-C and 35mm. Look at the coming Oly 40-150/2.8 or the 12-40 just out. The latter is not significantly smaller than the coming Sony FE 24-70/4, although it’s just one stop faster (theoretically, that is according to basic optical laws, it should be 2), but at the same time one stop worse regarding shallow DoF. Maybe this has to do with the fact known to optical engineers that resolution cannot be scaled down easily because of the wavelength range of visible light, so the lens formula gets more complicated.
I don’t wanna start talking about the 35-100/2.0 which I once had, which was a great lens but larger and heavier than the 70-200/2.8s from either Canon or Nikon. Or the 14-35/2.0 – again, a superb lens optically, but size and weight were bordering on the ridiculous.
Anyway, fast lenses for mFT don’t make sense. For mFT, I stick with what it’s good at: Slow zooms like the kit lenses and moderately fast primes such as the Oly 45/1.8. Pana and Oly shouldn’t try to hammer mFT into something it will never be.
Currently a corresponding m43 lens will always be smaller and lighter, due to the smaller sensor diagonal. Sony tries to circumvent this a little bit by having their mount diameter smaller than the sensor diagonal, requiring special micro lenses at the sensor borders. People always seek the perfect system and want options. This Pansasonic lens as well as the Voigtländer lenses give you the option of shallow DOF (not as extreme as for FF, but enough for most).
The Panasonic 35-100 is great and much smaller than the 70-200 of Nikon or Canon (its as fast, only DOF is larger).
I don’t agree. I want one system, not multiple. I have slow zooms and decently fast primes (~f1.8) that are very nice and small for when that is what I want. Then I want faster glass for certain occasions. Panasonic has realized that if all they want to do is to keep this a system for soccer-moms, they are dooming it, as it won’t have any name-recognition next to Nikon and Canon. With good Leica branded lenses, as well as Olympus which still is regarded as good quality, and products to match, they appeal to more people.
I don’t agree with your comparison either, you seem obsessed with DoF. Speed-wise the m4 glass is all faster than the ones you compare with, and that is important to negate the fact that the m43 sensor is smaller than the competition. If m43 only had slow zooms, I wouldn’t touch the system with a 10-foot pole, as it wouldn’t be able to take (what I consider) decent pictures in moderately low level light situations.
Exactly. It’s good to have options. Usually you don’t need this extreme shallow DoF, if so, use the superb Voigtländer lenses (or SLR Magic primes). After seeing the pictures taken by Lindsay Dobson with the 35-100 or Ming Thein with the 12-40, I see the big advantage in lightweight and fast zooms. And according to many reviews, there is hardly a better zoom as the Olympus 12-40 (what would be the prize and
weight of a corresponding FF 24-80, focusing to 20cm at all focal lengths, splash and freeze proof, with VR and sharp from center to border at all apertures, the MTF alone is amazing). I don’t sell landscape-pics and don’t print larger than A3 and I don’t do astro-photography, so I don’t need full-frame (I had a Nikon system and found that for what I do m43, esp. the EM1 is all I need). Comparisons at 100% are ridiculous if you just produce web-sized prints and if 99% of your photos stay on your disk and are never printed at all. As a professional, I would use two systems, FF and m43, as an amateur, m43 is more than enough.
Tom, you are one of the biggest idiots here, and it’s a tough race. Stop giving “advice” please…
I think there is something to your “general law”. But the wavelength of light has nothing to go with it; that only matters when diffraction is the limiting factor. A fast m43 lens is far from diffraction limited. And you cannot do anything against diffraction with more elements. It’s aberrations you are thinking of. Minimizing those tends to require more surfaces.
If the price is good and it’s sharp in the center wide open as well as sharp across the entire frame stopped down a bit (hopefully similar to the 75/1.8 Oly) then this will be an excellent addition to my 75/1.8.
I wish more m43 primes were as sharp across the entire frame like the 75/1.8 . . .
probably, the Fuji lens is optically better and cheaper.
I guess if Fuji improves its AF a bit better , at least EM5 level, then a lot of people move out of tiny m43 land.
I think Oly is fine as a whole but its camera division will be terminated by Oly’s new CEO,who is actually from Medical division of Olympus.
And Pana has 5percent rule, which is if any of its business divisions cannot reach 5 percent profit level in 5 years, it will be terminated.
so I am kind of afraid Pana also going out of camera market.
after all, camera business is not attractive to a huge electronic giant like Panasonic or even huger Samsung.
I kind have feeling Samsung,Sony, Pana , Canon all quit it in a few years ,all these 4 companies have more profitable business group or divisions.
Canon is a video company and it is more interested and investing more money into video, 3D-printer and IPS cell business.
Pana is more interested in video , environment and infra business.
derek, derek. When will you tire of trolling on this forum? Nobody takes you seriously, so you are just wasting your breath.
Maybe you should spend your time on something productive, rather than amount to nothing when all is said and done.
Fuji 56mm 7 Blades filter threads 62mm for APS-C VS PL 42.5mm 9 Blades filter threads 67mm for M43… Can’t wait to see the bokeh and the sharpness difference wide open of these 2 lenses !
sorry but if f number is the same , there is no contest but the Fuji has better bokeh, it is as simple as that.
the Fuji lens is f1.2 and the Pana(I do not call it Leica since it is not a real Leica designed lens)lens is also f1.2, so there is no contest , but the Fuji will be a much better lens in terms of bokeh and sheer resolving power.
and I think the Fuji is also better corrected lens optically than the electronic correction dependent Pana lens.
BTW, I am not a Fuji user but I am probably selling my Panasonic and Sony for it soon, and as for video , I shoot 5D3 and my general tripod based still cameras are D800E and A7R but I think I will sell the Sony,which has too many annoying reliability related issues.
I think if Oly decides to continue its camera business ,Oly should design a FF version of EM1 with Sony 24.3 mp sensor(or even better new Toshiba 24.7mp FF chip) , the 36.3 mp sensor has too many usability issues , it is too slow and it does not accept electronic first curtain shutter design, so the 36.3mp sensor is not very versatile, and definitely not good for the mythical FF OM-D.
Come on ! Bokeh is not only about f stop . the number of blades change the quality of the bokeh. I’de rather have 1 more stop DOF with creamy hokey then 1 stop narrower DOF with a busy harsh bokeh ! like the fuji 23mm f1.4
If you make the same 42.5mm f1.2 with the same image quality for a FF you gonna get a 85mm lens twice as big and pricey ! Or you do like Sony and cut corner with software adjustment and get small lens for FF.
You’re making a joke of yourselve, but you don’t even notice 🙂
one more thing, Oly is , of course, a medical company , 95 percent of its income come from it.
and like I said , its new CEO is from its medical group and he wants to quit cameras altogether.
when KM decided to sell its camera division to Sony,the CEO of it was also from its medical division and wanted to terminate it.
bla bla bla zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Derek if you really read things instead of putting 2 + 2 together and making 5. The CEO has said “The camera division is important in supporting the medical division as many of there hi tec instruments involve cameras”.
My best guess for pricing would be $1199 US. More than the Fuji, but justified (somewhat) by the inclusion of OS. We’ll see.
Price announced: £1399 So that’s about 1600-1700 EUR…
source? and not buying it. I doubt Pana would be that stupid, since probably 75% of everyone that could consider this lens would find that too much.
see here: http://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-dg-nocticron-42-5mm-f-1-2-asph-lens-23722
Thanks, the dutch site says 1499 euro, which is high, but at least not 1600-1700. It will be interesting to see what the dollar price will be announced as. No way I’m paying $1500 or more. At that point, I can probably find some deals/nicely used Oly 45mm 1.8 + a pana 35-100 pro 2.8, which may be a more versatile option…
According to the Dutch site digifotopro.nl (http://www.digifotopro.nl/content/panasonic-introduceert-leica-dg-nocticron-425mm-f-12-ois) the MRSP will be 1499 euro (in the Netherlands?) and for sale (whatever that means) from march.
Let’s hope it will be a bit cheaper. Worst case, I probably need to hang tight until it drops 200-300.
Unboxing video online now:
http://cameras.reviewed.com/features/hands-on-with-the-leica-dg-nocticron-45mm-f12-gallery
M43 is seems to have become even more confused.
I have bought into the system for the size/weight/cost advantage – I want a camera that I can fit in my coat pocket I don’t mind a the loss of a little IQ for size, weight and cost. So I choose the Panasonic Lumix 20mm 1.7 over PL 25.
It seems to me like the format is making itself redundant by Panasonic/Olympus trying to chase profits at the “premium end” of the consumer market. I was expecting (perhaps wrongly) that m43 would be able to leverage the 2x crop factor to make smaller , cheaper high quality primes?
Camera prices like the New OMD-EM1 cost as much as their APS-C equivalents and are the same size (if not bigger) than (Nikon/Canon/Samsung/NEX/Fuji). Fuji has come out and rained on the m43 parade with X-Trans and NEX has always had the edge in IQ due to Sony sensor design.
It seems a bit pointless to fight APC-C equivalent in the “ultimate image quality” “ultimate aperture” stakes when you start off from a point where your sensor area is much smaller and you start with 1-2 stops disadvantage in terms of aperture. So now m43 are making premium F1.2 lenses (at high costs for consumers) just to keep level with slower APC-C lenses. One step forward, two steps back. At these costs you might as well just go full frame? Now that Sony has made the A7, at not much more cost and about the same size as the OMD-EM1 you can…
Olympus had a hit with the OMD and it seems to me they have trying to play the same card to get themselves out of their precarious financial position. Seems like I backed the wrong horse.
Sorry to sound suspicious, but your post doesn’t sound like a 43 owner…
Why do you care anyway? They make lenses and cameras that seem to suit your (simpler) needs. Is it bothering you that they also try to cater to us that want to stay with one system but have some higher quality/versatility options? For sure, as you say, the profit margins are also better there, which helps them financially to cater to your needs.
Olympus is making a 25mm 1.8, which will probably suit you more than the panaleica 1.4
To add on; Have you seen how many lenses Sony has for their FF mirror-less cameras? It’s utterly pathetic. Maybe in 5 years, they will have a decent selection, but now? no way.
Why do I not “sound” like an m43 user? Because I’m trying to look objectively at the situation? Because I’m pointing out what I think are faults? Because i’m not a cheerleader?
I’m a concerned user. I bought a new GX1 last year for about £600, it now costs less than £200. I also own the EPL-5 (which thankfully has held its price, somewhat thanks to Oly giving away £200 lenses and EVF for free) The Gx7 released in October here was £1000, now its £600. Now to me, that does suggest a problem. i.e. that the market does not want to pay £1000 for a top of the line Panasonic m43 camera because there are better alternatives around at that price. So what I’m pointing out is m43
should be focusing on the £500 price range.
I have spent a lot of money buying into the system. If m43 becomes defunct then the value of my system will plummet before I can sell it off. (I don’t want to be using a defunct format or one that is pointless)
So how much will the new 25mm 1.8 cost? Probably about £500 UK? Sony can make decent glass at those prices. Fuji also have good glass at that price, plus much better IQ.
The newer lenses that have been released are very expensive, this new lens costs over £1000. I understand that this helps Panasonic in the short term, but in the long term the format will suffer, as Panasonic seem to be wasting time/resources competing when they are already 2 steps behind due to having a smaller sensor. The camera bodies cost as much as the A7 which is FF. Samsung will release a FF this year too, i bet it will cost less than the A7.
Hrm, so.. where can we buy an A7 for the current street price of a gx7, and how would a system going out of production make your current equipment stop functioning?
Shame of it is it is still only a badged Leica, a real one might well be worth that money but a Panny sorry not for me, if I wanted that focal length it would be the Voigtlander, manual focus or not and it’s not that much more than half the price.
It is a total BS; for such a price, why don’t you get Nikon D600 + 85 f/1.8?