For sure, unless you manage to get the DJI version on clearance on Aliexpress (which I luckily did, thanks Ovi) . I think it's worth it - as I have not used my 14 much in recent years - but the 15 seem to be frequent use.
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
Micro 4/3 Advice: m43 lenses with great rendering?
Panolyman
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Wild West Wales
- Name
- Brian
Mmm, I've just checked on Aliexpress and they're offering new at around £130 plus £30 tax, with free shipping.
I just don't fancy dealing with China much. 🤔
hannahntilly
Veteran
- Location
- Surrey, UK
- Name
- Peter
I ordered a DJI 15mm from Aliexpress after Christmas for £148. It arrived within 10 days and no additional import tax was charged. I'm very pleased with it.
sasquatchphotog
Veteran
- Location
- Derbyshire, UK
- Name
- Rich
Any more 15mm 1.7 talk and I'll be ordering one 😅 lingered on a few listings on Aliexpress earlier, but pulled back from the brink by rationalising that it wouldn't arrive before my upcoming trip (12 days to go)
Well, I have to agree with that. You can get a whole lot of photography done with just that one lens. I do have the telephone photo one. I have both the 300 and the zoom lens forget what it is exactly it’s not in front of me at the moment, but You can have a great shoot with just two lenses the 12 to 100 and the zoom telephone photo
- Location
- Seattle
- Name
- Andrew
I too really like the rendering of the 20mm f1.7... objectively, I would say that the bokeh is "better" on the Oly 25mm, smoother and creamier (but keep in mind we're not talking tons of bokeh anyway since the true focal lengths of these lenses are so wide). But the 20mm is more contrasty and a bit sharper than the 25mm, and the color rendition is quite impressive.
- Location
- Seattle
- Name
- Andrew
I found the 17mm f2.8 reminded me a lot of the DA 21mm f3.2 Limited, and vice versa. They have a similar look to their rendering - not always the sharpest, but something I can only term "organic" as it is pleasing and creates very good images. Both not the fastest or sharpest tools in your box, but somehow special, anyway.
- Location
- Seattle
- Name
- Andrew
The 14mm, in my experience, can suffer from some pretty strong sample variation. I had a copy early on in owning Micro 4/3 cameras which disappointed me often. But I saw so many great images taken with this lens that I bought a second copy, and it was fantastic.
Funnily enough that was my experience with the Oly 17mm F1.8.
The same is true for the 17mm 2.8 - I bought a copy and it was pretty much useless - so I returned it. I spent more money for the 1.8 and at least my copy is really nice. For a little while I thought about trying it again - but once I got the Voigtlander 17.5mm I figure that between the 15mm, 17.5mm and Oly 17mm 1.8 - I already have too many good lenses around the same FOV.
"rendering" is a highly subjective reference point so there's no right or wrong answers. It's not just about bokeh - which is subjective enough - but it also mixes in colour reproduction, contrast, vignette , sharpness , clarity etc.
Anyway, of the lenses I actually own , the ones that often make me admire the results are -
15mm PL. ( Contrast and bursting clarity)
Oly 75mm. (Focus transitions with pixie dust magic)
Oly 17/1.2 ( some 3D pop and micro contrast)
PL 8-18. ( Moody Colours, ambience and wide angle accentuations)
Sigma 56/1.4. ( Similar to the 75, find scenes with natural vignetting and the focus transitions can be ethereal , even not wide open)
O100-400 series 1 ( to my surprise , this lens has a definite mood to it when you work it out).
One thing of note - gut feel is that the 15PL and 8-18PL benefit from use on an Olympus body. I don't know if it's imagination, or a quirk of my two lenses, or if there's something going on with lack of in-body correction, but I love the results on my Em5iii in particular.
Also, I used to have a sigma 30/1.4 on a G85 and that combo was great in autumn light, it could somehow capture the texture and overall mood of a scene. So yeah, I'm a bit of a believer that some optical designs somehow pair well with specific sensors. Again, just instinct. Might be rubbish. Off-brand , but I have a Pentax DA 15mm that gives spectacular results on an old K5 , but less beautiful results on a more modern K70. These things do happen in my experience.
From looking at other people's results / samples , the other lenses that I really want are the 9mm PL , O25/1.2 , Oly 90mm macro. I'm not counting the 150-400 Pro as that is built from unobtanium.
The O25/1.8 and 45/1.8 are both lovely little lenses too, but I don't quite see the required "magic" or "rendering". The 25 is a little less clinical than the 45mm though so I might buy the new 25mm / 1.8 WP for its small weathersealed capability.
The 14/2.5 Panny is an interesting one too. There IS something a little less clinical and more organic about that lens that sometimes works quite well, but a bit like the 15PL it doesn't always show its face. I've not yet discovered how to make it work on demand.
Have fun trying them all out. Rendering is about loving the look, it's not related to perfection. Trust your instinctive impressions, not empirical charts. Even something as non optical as lens form factor and use can impact on how you view a lens. It's a hobby founded on emotional response, after all.
Anyway, of the lenses I actually own , the ones that often make me admire the results are -
15mm PL. ( Contrast and bursting clarity)
Oly 75mm. (Focus transitions with pixie dust magic)
Oly 17/1.2 ( some 3D pop and micro contrast)
PL 8-18. ( Moody Colours, ambience and wide angle accentuations)
Sigma 56/1.4. ( Similar to the 75, find scenes with natural vignetting and the focus transitions can be ethereal , even not wide open)
O100-400 series 1 ( to my surprise , this lens has a definite mood to it when you work it out).
One thing of note - gut feel is that the 15PL and 8-18PL benefit from use on an Olympus body. I don't know if it's imagination, or a quirk of my two lenses, or if there's something going on with lack of in-body correction, but I love the results on my Em5iii in particular.
Also, I used to have a sigma 30/1.4 on a G85 and that combo was great in autumn light, it could somehow capture the texture and overall mood of a scene. So yeah, I'm a bit of a believer that some optical designs somehow pair well with specific sensors. Again, just instinct. Might be rubbish. Off-brand , but I have a Pentax DA 15mm that gives spectacular results on an old K5 , but less beautiful results on a more modern K70. These things do happen in my experience.
From looking at other people's results / samples , the other lenses that I really want are the 9mm PL , O25/1.2 , Oly 90mm macro. I'm not counting the 150-400 Pro as that is built from unobtanium.
The O25/1.8 and 45/1.8 are both lovely little lenses too, but I don't quite see the required "magic" or "rendering". The 25 is a little less clinical than the 45mm though so I might buy the new 25mm / 1.8 WP for its small weathersealed capability.
The 14/2.5 Panny is an interesting one too. There IS something a little less clinical and more organic about that lens that sometimes works quite well, but a bit like the 15PL it doesn't always show its face. I've not yet discovered how to make it work on demand.
Have fun trying them all out. Rendering is about loving the look, it's not related to perfection. Trust your instinctive impressions, not empirical charts. Even something as non optical as lens form factor and use can impact on how you view a lens. It's a hobby founded on emotional response, after all.
Last edited:
- Location
- FT Worth, TX
Your list is nearly the same as mine. I have not tried the Sigma 56/1.4 but I consistently hear great things about that lens. I need to try one some day.
My additions would be any of the Voigtlanders. Pick your favorite FOV and start from there. I have tried all of the f.95 lenses (10.5, 17.5, 25 and 42.5), I kept the 10.5 (one of my favorite focal lengths) and the 17.5 (another favorite FOV). I sold the 25 and 42.5 only because I don't use those focal lengths very often and with the 25 and 45 Olympus lenses I am more than covered in MFT.
I will also add the Laowa 6mm and 10mm, they are both very good, not Voigtlander good but very good none the less. The Laowa 17/1.8 is ridiculously cheap and pretty darn good as well so that should also be on the list. I have the Laowa 7.5/2 and it is also quite good but I do not use it as much since getting the 6 and 10. Each of the Laowa lenses are small, well built and create wonderful sunstars.
My absolute favorites for rendering would be the Voigtlanders, the Panasonic 15/1.7, PL 8-18, and then the Laowas for the sunstars.
I could go on, like I said, lots of great choices.
- Location
- Massachusetts, USA
The old Lumix 45-200/3.5-5.6 has great rendering. It’s also slow and pretty soft at the long end. It’s OG partner, the Lumix 14-45/3.5-5.6 was quite good.
The Olympus 60/2.8 macro has nice rendering with really nice transitions and, as mentioned before, it’s very sharp with a good flat field.
The Olympus 45/1.8 has been in my bag for a long time and has nice rendering, but, while I haven’t used it, the Lumix 45/1.7 looks better.
The Mitakon 25/.95 is a manual focus lens with excellent rendering and is sharp enough stopped down a bit. It has the additional benefit of having that very shallow depth of field if you’re into that.
Last, the Olympus 17/1.8 also has very nice rendering. It has a reputation for not being very sharp. I’ve never found that to be true.
The Olympus 60/2.8 macro has nice rendering with really nice transitions and, as mentioned before, it’s very sharp with a good flat field.
The Olympus 45/1.8 has been in my bag for a long time and has nice rendering, but, while I haven’t used it, the Lumix 45/1.7 looks better.
The Mitakon 25/.95 is a manual focus lens with excellent rendering and is sharp enough stopped down a bit. It has the additional benefit of having that very shallow depth of field if you’re into that.
Last, the Olympus 17/1.8 also has very nice rendering. It has a reputation for not being very sharp. I’ve never found that to be true.
Last edited:
Nosfer42
New Member
Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! And thanks to every one else as well. This really helps in fining the gems!
And I much agree with "Rendering is about loving the look, it's not related to perfection", some of my most memorable Pentax keepers were taken with the fully manual Helios 44/2 and an OLD Meyer Görlitz 50mm f2.9
- Location
- Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
- Name
- John ...
IMO & IME the 8-25 and 12-100 have smoother focus transitions than the f/2.8 12-40 and the f/2.8 40-150.
Under certain circumstances, the f/2.8 40-150 has very "shivery" OoF areas, in that background lines appear duplicated, rather than just OoF. Though I don't own the f/2.8 12-40, I've also seen this effect in some images taken with it.
I am starting to dislike the word "bokeh", as I think that it's overused and too vague in its many meanings.
I own the 8-25, 12-100 and f/2.8 40-150 plus MC-14, among quite a few other lenses.
I highly recommend the Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 25mm f/0.95.
This lens is responsible for me staying in m43 to be very honest, I find it that good!
This lens is responsible for me staying in m43 to be very honest, I find it that good!
