If you already own the Lumix 12-60mm, regardless of whether it was bought in a camera bundle or separately, my advice would be to keep it and invest in a few good fast aperture primes, as they’ll give you what neither the Lumix nor Pana-Leica can: a very pleasant bokeh, good subject separation, and the possibility to keep your ISO values down in low-light situations. sharpness is very good centre and edge from f/5.6 to f/11, good at f/16 and fair at f/22. Centre and edge have become much more even as we move to the longest telephoto setting. Any chance you've used a 12-35mm f/2.8 II? Don't know if I just got a bad copy, but i've not been impressed with mine. It can detect the eyes / face at a 2x faster recognition cycle speed and human / animal at a 5x faster recognition cycle speed. These subjects can be detected even they appear in approximately half the size. *Comparison between before and after updating the firmware.

How about an inexpensive kit lens with a broader zoom range (a field of view that corresponds with 24-120 mm on full-frame) that is extra-well sealed against dust and splashwater? Such a lens was not yet available for micro-43 cameras. As for the corners, the results at 12mm are once again very close, even when the two lenses are set to their respective fastest apertures. From 25mm the Pana-Leica becomes a little sharper than the Lumix and this trend continues up to 40mm and 60mm. On the other hand, I also thought of taking other zooms, with smaller and larger ranges, such as the Leica 8-18 mm and the Zuiko 40-150 mm zooms, making a set with the Leica 12-60 mm, thus completing a greater coverage of landscapes and portraits. it's my understanding that the new leica 12-60 has all sorts of tweaks to the focus motor and other lens systems to make it better suited to video use, for just one example.One handy feature is the minimum focus distance of just 25cm at the telephoto end. This gives 0.54x equivalent magnification, meaning that the lens can fill the frame with a subject measuring 6.4×4.8cm. It can be useful for shooting close-up images of subjects such as flowers and insects. Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph Power OIS: Build and handling Then comes bad handling and wrong shutter speed or such that ruins photo by bad technique and decision. I also have the Oly 60mm macro, the Oly 9-18mm wide angle tele, and the Pana-Leica 25mm f1.4 (plus the compact Pana 12-32 and 35-100 kit lenses that I use exclusively on my little GF7 for situations where the GX9 is too prominent or bulky) At first I was tempted by the Leica, but then I thought about what I wrote above. I won't say I'll never trade up, but I do not see a rational justification for it. It will be a matter of "lens lust," not need.

In fact, Panasonic's MTF charts show the 12-60 to be substantially sharper than the 12-32, especially at 12mm. Panasonic ranks the 14-140 behind the 12-60 and 12-32 at the wide end, but not far off the 12-32. For landscape assuming you are shooting at the wide end and narrow apertures, both lens will perform "identically" if. you go by the numbers. CA and resolution across the center to the edges are very similar according to opticallimits.com. See below:But I do a lot of printing on all kind material and in common editing I do lots of pixel peeping and the mind has required to be rewired years ago that what you see in 15x magnification ratios doesn't matter when all is good enough. Perhaps, would it be better to use the Zuiko 12-100 mm lens with another Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III camera? I also think about buying a second micro 4/3 body, a little bigger and with a better handgrip than the DC-GX9 Lumix. I find I like mine very much and that it is my most-used lens for M4/3. But I use full frame for my most critical photography...and I didn't take long to learn how to work around this lens's weaknesses. If your lens performs like mine, you will probably end up learning to avoid using the long end for scenic photography...which is unfortunate given that Panasonic also makes a tiny and very cheap 12-32, a good sample of which gives comparable results to one of these. AF (tested on a Panasonic GX80) appears not only to be very quiet, but also lightning fast (from infinity to one and half meters in 50 ms is matched by no other brand) and very accurate (repeatability below 5%). Individually, those are already really top performances, but that speed, silence and accuracy are combined in one lens is really very exceptional in the price class of under 1000 euros.{insertgrid ID = 289} Panasonic Lumix G 12-60 mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH POWER OIS @ 60 mm f/11The shortest focal distance amounts to 20 cm (wide angle) to 25 cm (telephoto), and the image scale is about 0.27, which due to the crop factor corresponds with a magnification of 0.54 full-frame equivalent. Vignetting

Sharpness at 12mm is outstanding centrally, from open aperture through to f/5.6. It is excellent at f/8 and f/11 and still very good at f/16, falling to only fair at f/22. The edges are not quite the same high standard, very good from f/3.5 to f/8, good at f/11 and fair at f/16 and f/22. It is possible to format the SD Memory Card from the camera menu on the live view display of LUMIX Tether while the camera is connected with the PC.Since many of our readers have been asking whether it makes sense to upgrade to the Pana-Leica version from the Lumix lens, we decided to compile a full comparison to show the differences in build quality, sharpness, bokeh, stabilisation and more between them. Let’s get started! I'm not sure of Lenstip's accuracy, but the review didn't look bad, considering they haven't tested any MFT non-premium (i.e. not fast, heavy, or expensive) kit zoom that has performed better. This is the best performing one they've tested, but they haven't tested many. Hi Doug, the Fuji 100-400mm is a stellar lens. I shot it and the Leica in a caparison test awhile ago. The Fuji was a tad sharper but not enough to make a difference based on the stunning results I’m getting with the GH5 and the Leica 100-400mm. Additionally, the Fuji is BIG. Much bigger than the Leica 100-400mm. Add to that Fuji’s ongoing AF issues with things like Birds in Flight and as good as this lens is, it’s just not an option for action or going small, light and mobile. On our recent Brown Bear Invitational Photo Tour in Alaska, one of our NE Explorers had the new Fuji X-T2 with the Fuji 100-400mm zoom. On a couple of days we shot flying puffins together and he never did get anything, with the Fuji system, he considered sharp. He had a Nikon D5300 and a 70-300mm zoom he took out on our second try and got quite a few results he was happy with. I’ve heard great things about the XT-2 so I was interested in seeing how it would do in an action situation. Unfortunately we were both disappointed. Special Thank You to Natural Exposures Explorer Fred Kurtz for sharing a great collection of images he shot with the Olympus 12-100m zoom. Conclusion