Size comparison image on courtesy of ePhotozine.
We have the lucky choice between two great pancake zooms. But which one should you buy? Here are two new reviews to get an idea about their strenghts and weaknesses:
Tyson Robichaud (Click here) tested the Panasonic 12-32mm lens and writes:
I would buy this lens over any of the other 14-42 or 14-45mm kit lenses, including the new Olympus 14-42 pancake zoom. Why? Firstly because it gives us a 24mm equivalent versus the 28mm equivalent on the wide end. The Lumix lens is sharp, it has nice contrast and saturation while maintaining an absolutely minuscule profile.
Photographyblog (Click here) tested the Olympus 14-42mm pancake and writes:
Whilst we’re more than happy with the Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 EZ‘s fast and reliable auto-focusing, the very slim manual focusing ring makes this method much more frustrating. Build quality is surprisingly good considering this is a humble kit lens – even the lens mount is made of metal rather than plastic.
44 Responses
Well 12 mm is a serious gain over 14.
Yes, it’s much more difficult to correct for distortion than 14mm, also.
if you don’t shoot straight lines (and there are pretty few in nature) you won’t even notice the distortion.
The Photography Blog review of the Olympus does not sound very enthusiastic. Only 3 out of 5 for image quality.
Many, who had chance to handle it, have commented that the IQ is nearly identical to the non-pancake 14-42 kit lens. What is IMO achievement anyway.
One can’t expect a pancake *kit* *zoom* to perform on the same level as 12-40 or 12-35.
The only problem with the 14-42mm EZ is that it automatically extends when you turn the camera on, like the Panasonic PZ 14-42mm. So, when you swap lenses, you’re forced to turn the camera OFF to make it retract.
Yes, you’re supposed to shut down the camera to change lenses, but I rarely do.
I had a PZ 14-42mm briefly and aside from it’s shutter shock issues with my GX1 and rather unimpressive image quality, the auto-expand and retract thing was a total PITA.
This is why the 12-32mm is so nice, you can keep it on the camera, extend it and retract it at will. The 12mm end is great to have for such a tiny lens, too!
The Panasonic reviews are better. 24-64mm may be an odd range (long end at least) but it covers a lot of walk around applications. Combine with an olympus 45 1.8 and you have a neat little kit. With the new 15 1.7 pana Leica you’d have two fast primes and a solid zoom to cover ballpark 85% of shooting applications.
I’m waiting for a GM-2 to resolve a few of the lesser qualities of the GM1 and I’ll pick up the little zoom with the kit.
Panasonic 12-32
Panasonic 15
Olympus 45
What do you think will be improved in the GM-2?
I hope it will get a control wheel in place of the af selector dial.
A Control Wheel, like every other Panasonic, and a 4-way controller would be great. The AF selector would be fine in the Q-Menu.
Of course, a hot shoe would be a nice addition too…
but let’s not go there… 😉
They should also add a tilting viewfinder and a bigger battery.
And an EVF hump and DSLR grip and lasers and…
My GX7 has that.
Great feature! Very useful!
I miss a grip and a thumb dial like the pentax Q, the hot-shoe, the direct iso button. The on/off button on the Q is better than the dial on the GM1, wich sometime turns on when i put the gm1 in a bag. Software wise, i prefer Q ergonomic, more photo centric than the GM1 (On Q, quick access to HDR, on GM1, you must be in jpg and dig in the menu, or put hdr on the custom mode) I miss the in camera raw on the Q. And if Panasonic can auto-correct the distortion at 12mm on jpeg, i’ll be happy 🙂
If the flash synch is one of the “lesser qualities” you’re thinking of, then it won’t be resolved without making the camera significantly bigger. It’s a direct consequence of the much smaller shutter assembly, that was developed specifically to make the camera smaller.
Why all the obsession with manual focus on standard kit lenses?
Exactly.
I was shooting with the 20mm yesterday and the reason I used it was for auto-focus. When I want to focus manually, I’ll dig out a manual lens.
I agree 🙂 – seems some are just ultra purists and to them AF and IS is just not needed –
When I mention how nice it is to see the new Panasonic Prime 45.5 F1.2 with IS – I always get feedback that if I need IS then there is something wrong with me 🙂
I like to highlight that the Panasonic GX7 and the OMD’s have IBIS which is to me awesome as most all of the Primes do not have IS and IBIS adds to the ability of the kit –
I have used FF and APS-C gear for years and have had many primes with no IS – but I must say that I am getting much better results now with primes with no IS but bodies with IBIS –
Yes one typically is not using manual focus with a kit lens
12-32 is better.
However, you need a Panasonic camera with a firmware upgrade to manually focus it, since there is no focus ring.
primes all the way here. not many , just one or two.
while both lens have a good review but its seems like those lens only give better choice over the kittens , still can not be a game changer or radical both in aperture and the range of variety FL.,
I would buy a lens that can cover great and most useful focal length with a FAST APERTURE,.
is there manufacture that can make a radical zoom like 12-70mm F1.8 or F2 constant aperture,.with excellent IQ and maybe is as big as nikon 24-70mm ,i would gladly to pay around $2500-3000.
with this kind of lens ,.i can just leave my 12, 17, 25, 45, 60, 75 mm at home and also the 12-40mm
You mean like this?
http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lenses/slr/zuiko-lens-ed-14-35mm-f2-0-swd.html
Agreed (partly). 12-70 may be a bit steep, but the old 12-60 at constant f/2 or at least 2.8 would be nice. That is why I am eying the Samsung 16-50/2-2.8.
the samsung 16-50 ,.is an APS-C that has the equivalent of 24-75 ,.the olympus 12-40mm has better range at the long end which is 24-80,.
my point is , the range from 24-140mm,.with an F1.8 or F2 aperture it would be great,.no , ITS.Phenomenal,..considering no one has ever made such a lens with faster aperture,.
Unfortunately, photography and photographic gear is always a game of compromises. You cannot have a pancake 12-70mm f1.8, the fact that these lenses are as compact and good as they are (the 12-32 at least) is already a miracle, asking for more is just naive. Complaining about these pancake lenses for being something they’re not aimed at is ridiculous, specially when you’re clearly not the targeted consumer for them. There’re already enough lenses for demanding consumers like you, such as the 12-40 2.8 or the 4/3 glass. Also, we should be glad that these lenses perform better than tiny cats, it is a well known fact that kittens make for VERY soft lenses.
have a look at the ~12-60 f/2.0-3.9 lens of the new canon G1X MK2. it is fixed but pretty small. i am sure if engineered well, it could be brought to similar size with an mFT mount, even if it was double as long it would still be smaller than the old 14-45 while having a much wider zoom range and being faster at the same time!
Yes, that was my reaction to the G1XII’ lens when it was announced, it foretells m4/3’s potential to achieve the same or close, unfortunately the canon lens is right next to the sensor, as with many other fixed lens cameras, that’s why it can be so tiny, then again, as you said, even if it ends up being a little bigger on m4/3 it’ll still be smaller than what’s available, imagine pany’s 12-35 but without OIS for a minute, something along those lines.
i don’t think OIS really adds so much bulk to the overall lens. have a look at all the minuscule lenses in various compact panasonic cameras which all have stabilized lenses (FX-series etc).
the problem is that hardly any lens is retractable. even primes could probably be made much smaller if they could retract when not in use.
i am also sure that pancakes are not exhausted to the last degree. Pentax had some great pancakes that covered full-frame, there was even a 70//2.4, if this could be “scaled down” to mFT, there should be a pretty compact tele-lenses possible.
i only hope that panasonic finally realized what “micro” stands for in “microfourthirds”, it is not about DSLR-huge cameras, but rather cameras like the GM1 with lenses like 12-32. this whole concept should be pushed forward with even smaller and faster lenses. when sony starts scaling down their A7 to RX1 size, i cannot see any big (or small) advantage mFT really should have by then.
i think we forget that ,43 lens have 7-14 ZD ,.as well as the M43 7-14 Lumix ,.look at the size of comparison between those lens,.the DSLR design is always more bigger than mirror less camera despite both of them has the same sensor,..
I just imagine ,.the 12-70 F1.8 it could be as is big as the 12-60 F2.8-4 ZD,.or might be as is big as 24-70 F2.8 nikon..
If the lens exist it would cover- replace a lots of prime lens,.;
– F2/12mm MZD
-F2.5/14mm Lumix
-F1.8/15 PL Lumix
-F1.8/17mm MZD
– F2.8/19mm sigma
– F1.7/20mm Lumix
– F1.8/25mm MZD and possible the F1.4/25 PL Lumix
– F1.8/45mm MZD & F2.8/45 Macro PL
– F2.8/60mm MZD macro
-and probably the the Legendary F1.8/75mm ,.
and also include the pro zoom both Olympus and Lumix,.12-35mm & !2-40,.,.and i personally don’t need the 35-100,.because the Range 12-70 equivalent 24-140mm is more than enough ,.and it would be great for WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY,.
The problem is ,.none of the panasonic or Olympus would dare to make this lens,.coz,.it will ruin the selling of their lens above,.
I would expect the filter size to be larger than 77mm for such a lens.
It should be amazing on a Panasonic GM1 body.
More slow pancake zooms… woohoo!
The 14-42 ? sure, besides the size it’s pretty much the same as always, another boring kit zoom…But the 12-32 ? now that’s something completely different, yes it is just as slow but it makes up for that by havinga 24mm eq fl wide end AND OIS (and not being forced to wait for the camera to extend the barrel), oh, did I mention that it performs well above any other consumer kit lens? I whish Oly had revised their wide end policy and offered a 12-42 pancake but as of now the pany pancake zoom is the best casual day-to-day alternative to both m4/3 standard fast zooms.
I’d rather have a 12″ omelette than a 45mm pancake
I wouldn’t mind having the 12-32 Panny myself, if it wasn’t for the added expense of the OIS, I have never been able to understand Panasonics past determination to stick with it and to leave it so late to adopt IBIS.
I’ve heard that it has to do with cooling while recording video.
I can tell you the GM1 gets hot, even without shooting video. I see no way of adding IBIS without making it GF size at least. Part of the reason I bought this over the GX7 was so I could get the lens. It is a real jewel, but looks a little silly on the GH3.
The Panasonic GX7 has IBIS and it works really well – I would assume just as good as the 3 axis from Olympus like the one in the Olympus OMD10 –
So I expect that Panasonic will introduce more modes with IBIS in the future – I think possibly the next update to the GM1 will have IBIS – I hope – unless the body is just to small – in that case I would say make it a tad larger to fit IBIS – it can afford to be a tiny bit larger – and maybe they will add a small EVF like the one in the LF1 – not that I think that such a small camera needs a EVF but still always nice to have – and also include a tilt-lcd –
With few more small lenses like the 12-32 kit the GM1 or GM2 could really nock out a lot of Sony RX100m2 sales 🙂
At current street prices (here in Germany) 12-32mm is cheaper than the pancake 14-42mm (€350 vs €400). If you are overpaying – then not very much.
Also. At first I thought in-lens IS was something extremely sophisticated. But most lens diagrams show it as a single moving element, almost as if independent from the rest of the lens. That leads me to think that IS adds only marginal *cost* to the lens – the bigger difference in *price* is pure marketing/sales gimmick.
For me the 12-32 is a real great lens. It was part of the deal with the GM1…
Having the 14-42 Pancake from Pana as well: the 12-32 is a big improvement: for Photo. For video the power zoom is a different story…
The Panasonic 12-32 is one of the best kit zooms I have used – surprisingly sharp –
the real plus is that it is so small – and it has IS
I hope this is a trend of more ultra small lenses for the GM1 and future small bodies –
I wish Panasonic would create auto lens caps like the ones Olympus have on the OMD10 and Stylus1 –
I have not heard anyone complain about the new 12-32 – it is a a kit lens and a budget lens and meant to be small – so not to be compared to something super expensive and a prime –
I am just glad Panasonic is creating more options for us – Wish that the upgrade to the GM1 would have IBIS – so we could also some of the creations from Olympus – ( with no IS )
Very excited about the 12-32. I will most likely get it. If there is great light wouldn’t the difference with the 2.8 zooms be minuscule? Also if the light is poor (nightshots), wouldn’t you want something brighter than 2.8?
Well, its only 3.5 vs 2.8 at the wide focal length. As you zoom in more, you eventually get f5.6 vs f2.8, which is a 2 stop difference, which is quite a lot. F2.8 is usually the minimum aperture you want for nighttime shots. Yes, brighter is better but f2.8 is sufficiently bright for indoor shots with poor lighting.
I have the 25mm 1.4, and obviously this makes a huge difference. The way I see it f 5.6 is fine during the day outside. But for background blur/night shots the faster primes are essential. The cost of the 25mm and the 12-32 is the same as one panasonic 12-35.