Tatouzou • Senior Member • Posts: 2,080
12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
13
This is an update to my 2018 review.
I now have been using the 12-60 for over a year, and the 14-140 for over 2 years, on GX8 as well as G7 and GM5.
My experience is that, when viewed on a full HD screen, across their common range, there is little visible difference in percieved sharpness.
But a closer examination tells a different story.
Watching close (2/3 feet from the screen) on my 4K OLED TV, the borders are obviously weaker when shooting far away landscapes with the 14-140.
Watching at pixel size (100%) on my computer full HD screen, the 12-60 is obviously much sharper, as well in the center, where its acutance and rendering is close to that of the 20mm f1.7, as in the corners, which are slightly soft fully open but quite sharp stopped down 1 stop.
OOC JPEGs show also a better contrast of the 12-60 when shooting long distance landscapes.
The 12-60 is also sharper across the frame than the 12-32 across their common range.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Pentax K-3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Pentax smc DA 17-70mm F4.0 AL (IF) SDM +24 more
Zoom lens • Micro Four Thirds
Announced: Feb 24, 2016
(unknown member) • Forum Pro • Posts: 19,317
Re: 12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
My finding as well. its the sharpest zoom i have tested. I bought it as my studio lens last year and it hasn't let me down. and it has less lens distortion correction wide (12mm) open than any other zoom.
Don
-- hide signature --
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool
of the losers." - Socrates
Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
//www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1
Tech Head • Regular Member • Posts: 195
Re: 12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
Tatouzou wrote:
This is an update to my 2018 review.
I now have been using the 12-60 for over a year, and the 14-140 for over 2 years, on GX8 as well as G7 and GM5.
My experience is that, when viewed on a full HD screen, across their common range, there is little visible difference in percieved sharpness.
But a closer examination tells a different story.
Watching close (2/3 feet from the screen) on my 4K OLED TV, the borders are obviously weaker when shooting far away landscapes with the 14-140.
Watching at pixel size (100%) on my computer full HD screen, the 12-60 is obviously much sharper, as well in the center, where its acutance and rendering is close to that of the 20mm f1.7, as in the corners, which are slightly soft fully open but quite sharp stopped down 1 stop.
OOC JPEGs show also a better contrast of the 12-60 when shooting long distance landscapes.
The 12-60 is also sharper across the frame than the 12-32 across their common range.
I bought the 12-60 f/3.5-5.6 because Panasonic claims it is their sharpest of the non-premium kit lenses, as per their own MTF charts.
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.
I was considering the 12-32 and 14-140 because reviews on this forum have always praised them, while most reviews call the 12-60 lackluster. But I never got past Panasonic's own MTF charts. Based on your review (since it agrees with Panasonic's MTF charts), I'll probably pass on those lenses, since I already have the 12-60.
I can verify that the 12-60 is blisteringly sharp at 12mm, especially in the center. It falls off a bit in the corners
alcelc • Forum Pro • Posts: 18,417
Very interesting result
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
Would you mind to post some samples on 12-60 vs 14-140?
I have quite good impression on 14-140. If 12-60 could have that good result, it would be a good reason for me to buy one (I had de-kitted it when purchased G85!) since 12-35 is always slightly short for me...
-- hide signature --
Albert
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic G85 +11 more
spike29 • Senior Member • Posts: 2,470
Re: 12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
1
Sounds logic, the 12-60 and 14-140 has around the same build size and way they expand. Probably the same elements quality , enlargement 5x vs 10. So distortions wil hunt the 14-140mm more. And distortions are deminishing iq sharpnes.
The 12-32mm is a older lens design.
You can turn this around and say: That 10x zoom is quite sharp comparing with the 12-60...😉
-- hide signature --
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky with........)
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
eques • Veteran Member • Posts: 4,041
Another View - LensTip
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
Quotes from the LensTip review:
"The best results are observed at the shortest focal length where the lens presents a truly brilliant level. With the increase of the focal length the performance decreases. That effect is not only connected to optical properties but it is also a consequence of a decreasing fastness of the tested instrument and its limitations due to diffraction. ...
The situation is not so rosy any longer. In fact we don’t have any reservations only when it comes to the shortest focal length. In the 35-60 mm range the lens has problems with producing fully useful images not only at the maximum relative aperture but also on stopping down. ..."
There might be some sample variation and LensTip might not have got one of the best samples, but this sounds different.
I myself experienced a lot of sample variation with the 45-150 (2 lemons!) and the PL 12-60 (1lemon).
Peter
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus 12-100mm F4.0
SkiHound • Veteran Member • Posts: 3,932
Re: 12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
1
I bought the 14-140 as a travel lens and have been happy with it. When I bought a GX9 it came with the 12-60 kit lens. I was going to sell it without taking it out of the wrapping. I'd read the Lens Tip test mentioned by another person responding to this thread and just didn't think there was any reason to keep. But curiosity... I put it on one day and jut started shooting things like tree bark and things with a lot of texture at different apertures and focal lengths. I was pretty impressed with it and opted to keep it. I don't really do pixel peeping dives into 100+% edge comparisons, but my impression in use is that my copy is slightly better and has a bit more micro contrast than the 14-140. Again, there could be copy to copy variation.
uniball • Veteran Member • Posts: 3,027
Re: Another View - LensTip
In reply to eques • Mar 9, 2020
3
I’ve been through 2 copies of the 12-60. Neither I would call acceptable. Still have the second copy.
I took a pass on buying a 14-140 as owner opinions were all over the place.
These let lenses suffer from a lot of copy variance. Posts like this have to be viewed as applying only to the copies tested not the the lens in general.
108 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,309
Re: 12-60, 12-32 and 14-140 side by side: the 12-60 is very sharp!
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
I usually shoot primes but looking for a "holiday" zoom for convenience . Had an good pana 14-45 but gave it to my bro . I have tried since a 12-60 3.5 in store and was disappointed . Lots of copy variations with this lens I suppose . The 14-140 looks good and versatile , I usually shoot max 120 mm so it should be ok . But opinions as one post put it , are " all over the place" . So...( acceptable ) sharpness is an issue as it's impossible to recover . For micro contrast ,colours and such I think these lenses all need a good pp treatment anyway to get nice results . This was shot with 14-45 and needed pp for contrast and " clarity" . If I can get that with 14-140 it's fine
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10
eques • Veteran Member • Posts: 4,041
Re: Another View - LensTip
In reply to uniball • Mar 9, 2020
uniball wrote:
I’ve been through 2 copies of the 12-60. Neither I would call acceptable. Still have the second copy.
I took a pass on buying a 14-140 as owner opinions were all over the place.
These let lenses suffer from a lot of copy variance. Posts like this have to be viewed as applying only to the copies tested not the the lens in general.
Agree.
And after the 2 disappointing Panasonic 45-150, I was lucky with my Olympus 4/40-150; after returning the PL12-60 I got the O 12-100, which is great, but, of course, big and heavy compared to the PL.
Peter
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus 12-100mm F4.0
spike29 • Senior Member • Posts: 2,470
Re: Another View - LensTip
In reply to eques • Mar 9, 2020
eques wrote:
Quotes from the LensTip review:
"The best results are observed at the shortest focal length where the lens presents a truly brilliant level. With the increase of the focal length the performance decreases. That effect is not only connected to optical properties but it is also a consequence of a decreasing fastness of the tested instrument and its limitations due to diffraction. ...
The situation is not so rosy any longer. In fact we don’t have any reservations only when it comes to the shortest focal length. In the 35-60 mm range the lens has problems with producing fully useful images not only at the maximum relative aperture but also on stopping down. ..."
There might be some sample variation and LensTip might not have got one of the best samples, but this sounds different.
I myself experienced a lot of sample variation with the 45-150 (2 lemons!) and the PL 12-60 (1lemon).
I sold my lumix 12-60 and bought a PL12-60mm just for the f2.8-4.0 and the better zoom feel, buildquility. Parfocal for video.
Is it sharper then the lumix? Well yes and no, it's more balanced in the hole range. And the micro contrast rendering is nicer.
3 lemons! Do you test them firmly in a testchart setup?
I did a small test and it looked ok.
Peter
-- hide signature --
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky
with........)
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Very acceptable
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
4
I have all three. the 12-32mm is only used when weight/space are top priority, when it goes on GM5/GF7 body, otherwise G80 body.
The 12-60mm has an excellent range for use in cities. The 14-140mm for general walkabout. I take both on tours and use whichever suits that days subject matter. UWA on a second body if needed. Both lenses have very acceptable IQ, with low weight, size and price. Although they are not the fastest lenses, if using on a body with Dual-IS the IS allows quite low shutter speeds - so ISO can be kept down.
12-60mm images //www.flickr.com/photos/dieselgolfer/albums/72157676548292814
14-140mm images //www.flickr.com/photos/dieselgolfer/albums/72157659779708109
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS40 (TZ60) Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 +13 more
Smaug01 • Veteran Member • Posts: 6,480
I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
In reply to Tatouzou • Mar 9, 2020
5
I didn't have the benefit of such a comparison when I bought it, but I have no regrets.
I even scanned some 35 mm negatives with it and they are pretty much indistinguishable from the ones I scanned with the dedicated 30/3.5 macro.
It's a fantastic lens, even without the benefit of OIS on my Olympus body.
-- hide signature --
-Jeremy
*********
"Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength."
Pentax MX-1 Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS30 Ricoh GR III Nikon D610 +36 more
plantdoc • Veteran Member • Posts: 4,298
Re: Another View - LensTip
In reply to uniball • Mar 9, 2020
Agreed about copy variance. My 12-60 is very good to 50mm and then the right edge of the frame gets progressively worse going towards 60mm. Unfortunately stopping down provides only slight improvement.
Greg
alan brown • Contributing Member • Posts: 802
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
In reply to Smaug01 • Mar 10, 2020
2
I just looked at the LensTip test of the 12-60mm 3.5-5.6 and it sure didn't look good. Optical Limits test of this lens shows the lens to be much better in terms of sharpness. Geez, I hate sample variation. And I'm glad I didn't see the LensTip test before I got my 12-60 because I would not have purchased it. Mine is very good all the way to the corners especially in the wide to medium focal lengths. Buying photo equipment is too often a minefield.
-- hide signature --
alan brown
Tech Head • Regular Member • Posts: 195
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
2
alan brown wrote:
I just looked at the LensTip test of the 12-60mm 3.5-5.6 and it sure didn't look good. Optical Limits test of this lens shows the lens to be much better in terms of sharpness. Geez, I hate sample variation. And I'm glad I didn't see the LensTip test before I got my 12-60 because I would not have purchased it. Mine is very good all the way to the corners especially in the wide to medium focal lengths. Buying photo equipment is too often a minefield.
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.
My opinion, based on all the reviews and my own usage, is that this is, in fact, the best non-premium kit zoom in the system. Probably better than the 12-32 and 14-45 (which are probably the second and third best). I don't think those lenses would perform any better on Lenstip's tests.
Harold66 • Forum Pro • Posts: 12,002
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
1
Well , well every single post in this thread comforts me in the idea that having a zoom for standard focal lengths is not often a reasonable compromise. It is probably true for other systems as well, but considering the size and weight of many m4/3 single focal lengths , i think people are much better off opting for three primes to cover most of the zoom range.
in the case of the 12-60mm for instance , a trio made of the zuiko 2/12mm , pana 1.7/20mm and sigma 1.4/56mm will provide MUCH BETTER results every time’ that’s a huge price to pay for the convenience of a zoom
I only have two zooms . One for wide angle and one for telephoto when it is often not possible to move closer or farther to your subject
Harold
-- hide signature --
FOLLOW me on IG @ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler
Sigma DP2 Merrill Ricoh GR II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Fujifilm GFX 50S II Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II +5 more
(unknown member) • Forum Pro • Posts: 19,317
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
In reply to Harold66 • Mar 10, 2020
Harold66 wrote:
Well , well every single post in this thread comforts me in the idea that having a zoom for standard focal lengths is not often a reasonable compromise. It is probably true for other systems as well, but considering the size and weight of many m4/3 single focal lengths , i think people are much better off opting for three primes to cover most of the zoom range.
in the case of the 12-60mm for instance , a trio made of the zuiko 2/12mm , pana 1.7/20mm and sigma 1.4/56mm will provide MUCH BETTER results every time’ that’s a huge price to pay for the convenience of a zoom
that is totally incorrect. my 12 60 3.5 which i shoot at f5.6 in the studio is just as sharp as my 25 1.8 and the sigma 60 its also sharper in the corners than the 12 100 pro for $300 au new and 6months testing it against lots of lens it won hands down.
I only have two zooms . One for wide angle and one for telephoto when it is often not possible to move closer or farther to your subject
Harold
-- hide signature --
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers." - Socrates
Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
//www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d,
k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1
Harold66 • Forum Pro • Posts: 12,002
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
I doubt very much the first part of your asssertion. Unless you meant that at the 25mm at f5.6 your zoom performs as well as the 25mm at F5.6. This is entirely possible but that’s not telling me much now is it ?;-)
as far as the comparison with ANOTHER zoom , this is irrelevant to my point as i was specifically talking about primes vs zooms here and not comparing the respective merits of zooms
H
-- hide signature --
FOLLOW me on IG
@ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler
Sigma DP2 Merrill Ricoh GR II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Fujifilm GFX 50S II Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II +5 more
spike29 • Senior Member • Posts: 2,470
Re: I went with the 12-60 as my "walk-around lens"
In reply to Harold66 • Mar 10, 2020
3
Harold66 wrote:
Well , well every single post in this thread comforts me in the idea that having a zoom for standard focal lengths is not often a reasonable compromise. It is probably true for other systems as well, but considering the size and weight of many m4/3 single focal lengths ,
True as in a racecar is cornering much better then a average road car but christ your back hurts (among other things) riding that stiff racecar in the holiday's and day time trips around. 😊
(good)Primes are always better in absolute sharpnes vs a good zoom, moving parts creates compromises and distortionflaws.
i think people are much better off opting for three primes to cover most of the zoom range.
I did it other way around, get the zooms for a reasonable good image quility and lots of comfort/versatile setup and then the prime for some specialty function, in my case aperture bigger hole. A 15mm f1.7.
in the case of the 12-60mm for instance , a trio made of the zuiko 2/12mm , pana 1.7/20mm and sigma 1.4/56mm will provide MUCH BETTER results every time’ that’s a huge price to pay for the convenience of a zoom
I only have two zooms . One for wide angle and one for telephoto when it is often not possible to move closer or farther to your subject
Harold
I think it all depents on your core use of the kit.
"Track" use or "dayly" use so to speek.
I am for the dayly use kit because i shoot for recreation.
-- hide signature --
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want
more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky with........)
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads
You may also like
Latest sample galleries
Latest in-depth reviews
Affordable ultra-wide lenses for Fujifilm GFX cameras are hard to find. How does the Venus Optics Laowa 19mm F2.8 Zero-D GFX perform? We tested it.
The third Great Joy 1.8x anamorphic lens actually covers a full frame sensor, so becomes useful to stills as well as video photographers, and it nicely complements the existing focal lengths to make the beginnings of a good, low-cost, anamorphic set.
DxO's latest flagship editing suite has Adobe-beating noise reduction in its Elite version, without the costly subscription. Should you cancel Creative Cloud and jump ship?
As part of our ongoing review of the EOS R6 Mark II we've shot our studio scene and rolling shutter tests, and added analysis of image quality and video performance.
Earlier this year, DJI released the Mini 3 Pro. While it boasted quite a few advanced features, it was accompanied by a hefty price tag. DJI has pared down this offering a bit with their latest sub-250g release, the Mini 3. Is it worth the investment?
Latest buying guides
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens.
What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.