is 12mm too close to 15mm in focal length?: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (2024)

Hey, guys, I have the GH4 with Pana-Leica 12mm f/1.4 and 25mm f/1.4.

I haven't had a chance to try the 15mm in the camera shop but it seems to me 12mm and 15mm are too close in focal length for it to be worth spending $ on the 15mm when I already have the 12mm?

Thanks!

6

No. 12mm is a lot wider than 15mm.

3

coffeenkfc wrote:

Hey, guys, I have the GH4 with Pana-Leica 12mm f/1.4 and 25mm f/1.4.

I haven't had a chance to try the 15mm in the camera shop but it seems to me 12mm and 15mm are too close in focal length for it to be worth spending $ on the 15mm when I already have the 12mm?

Thanks!

Well deciding on what primes to include in your kit is a matter of taste that one acquires with time. I would say that 12 (24mm) and 25 (50mm) is a pretty good two lens kit. It gives you a true wide and the classic normal length lens. You will hear all kinds of advice about 15 (30) or 17 (35) as better than a 25 (50). I think of a 17 (or the Panasonic odd 15mm) as a great all "a-rounder" being both normal and a moderate wide at the same time. But with the two lenses you have, you don't need it. In the end you will have to decide. Actually if I wereyou and was itching to add a third lens right away I might be tempted to go to the long end with a 45 (90).

1

Thanks for your response.

I guess I was just thinking in terms of what lens lengths I am needing in my toolkit, and how useful a 15mm would be considering I have the 12mm and 25mm already.

At an event shoot the other day I found the 25mm too tight but I'm not sure the 12mm was great considering the distortion (people in the shot were pretty close, this was in a confined space, a train car).

I remember wondering if a 15mm/17mm would have helped. I know there is still (optical) distortion at 15mm/17mm but presumably significantly less than 12mm.

1

coffeenkfc wrote:

Thanks for your response.

I guess I was just thinking in terms of what lens lengths I am needing in my toolkit, and how useful a 15mm would be considering I have the 12mm and 25mm already.

At an event shoot the other day I found the 25mm too tight but I'm not sure the 12mm was great considering the distortion (people in the shot were pretty close, this was in a confined space, a train car).

I remember wondering if a 15mm/17mm would have helped. I know there is still (optical) distortion at 15mm/17mm but presumably significantly less than 12mm.

I don't really know how much "better" the 15 mm would be than the 12, as I've never used one (12mm) for any length of time to know. The best way to find out, would be to actually use both for a while, & see which meets your own expectations better. What got me started down this track originally, was using my Canon FF & 24-105L I noticed that I was subconsciously zooming to 28-30 mm, a lot of the time. Perhaps it just looked a bit more natural without even thinking about it. It's really only you who can figure that out for yourself

1

I have the 15, 20, and 25 f1.4, and I use and appreciate all of them. The difference between 12 and 15 is probably of equal or greater significance than the difference between 15 and 20.

The 15 is a favorite of mine. Consider that the Ricoh GR has a fixed 28mm lens, and the Fuji X100's have a fixed 35mm lens. The 15 (30 FF equivalent) fits right in the middle. I'll often go out with just that lens, and it satisfies any desire for an X100.

I have three zooms that cover 12mm, and I've not felt the urge to buy the prime. It has always seemed a bit overpriced to me, it seems a bit wide for the kind of walk-about use to which I put the 15, in low light the 15 has been fine and otherwise the zooms are fine.

I do think that there is a big gap between your 12 and 25 that cries out for a new purchase. You might consider the Oly 17 f/1.8. Some folks don't hold it in high regard, but it has its fierce defenders. Or the 15. What's the worst that could happen? You end up selling either the 12 or the 15 if you find them redundant. Personally, I don't think they are.

4

JaKing wrote:

No. 12mm is a lot wider than 15mm.

True, but not really relevant to the OP as he already has the 12mm. He can crop the image a little bit to make up for not having the 15mm. In his case, 15mm is too close to 12mm IMHO.

In the other direction, having a 15mm, then getting a 12mm would be useful.

2

This is one of those personal preferencequestions.

For me, 12mm is close enough to 15mm. I use 45mm, 25mm and 12mm a lot. I don't need to fill in the gaps between them very often.

I used to have a 17mm, but didn't use it, sold it, and I don't miss it.

I can suggest a way for you to dip your toe in. The Olympus 15mm body cap. Buy a used one for £50, and you'd get most of your money back if you decided to sell it.

I bought mine to see if I would use it much. I figured that if I did use it, I'd quickly get frustrated with the performance envelope and want to buy a better lens.

I do very occasionally use it when I can't recompose the scene to work with the 12mm or 25mm.

1

coffeenkfc wrote:

Thanks for your response.

I guess I was just thinking in terms of what lens lengths I am needing in my toolkit, and how useful a 15mm would be considering I have the 12mm and 25mm already.

At an event shoot the other day I found the 25mm too tight but I'm not sure the 12mm was great considering the distortion (people in the shot were pretty close, this was in a confined space, a train car).

The 15mm wouldn't have solved that - it would just have 'ignored' the 'distorted' people!!

I remember wondering if a 15mm/17mm would have helped. I know there is still (optical) distortion at 15mm/17mm but presumably significantly less than 12mm.

It depends on what size your final picture is going to be presented. I have regularly used a quarter of m43 blown up to a 16" x 12" (40 x 30cm) print. (Even from a G1!)

So as long as you are aware of potential distortion when you take the shot, you shouldn't need an extra lens for that!

Mike

1

coffeenkfc wrote:

I guess I was just thinking in terms of what lens lengths I am needing in my toolkit, and how useful a 15mm would be considering I have the 12mm and 25mm already.

In terms of focal length they are quite close so perhaps not worthwhile in this situation. However the 15mm is much smaller and lighter than the 12mm which might be a consideration if you are hand holding the camera for longer periods.

1

1

coffeenkfc wrote:

Hey, guys, I have the GH4 with Pana-Leica 12mm f/1.4 and 25mm f/1.4.

I haven't had a chance to try the 15mm in the camera shop but it seems to me 12mm and 15mm are too close in focal length for it to be worth spending $ on the 15mm when I already have the 12mm?

See Also

Mil thickness compared to mm (millimeter) and inches

Thanks!

My 1st prime lens was the 14/2.5 as I really like the 28mm EFL (from my film days). 2nd prime was O25/1.8. I value small and light lenses over ultimate IQ.

About 1.5 years ago, I needed a faster WA lens and was deciding between O12/2.0, PL15/1.7 and O17/1.8. 12mm was a tad too wide for general use and I prefer 14mm FOV over 17mm (a tad too narrow).

So, I ended up with 15/1.7 and it's my most used lens, hands down. I bought a 0.76x wide converter for the 14mm, re-purposing it as a 10.6mm/2.5

The 15/1.7 resides on my GM1 90% of the time - perfect one-camera-one-lens setup.

P.S. camera phone is 30mm EFL

3

coffeenkfc wrote:

I know there is still (optical) distortion at 15mm/17mm but presumably significantly less than 12mm.

It's not optical distortion, it's perspective distortion. Wide angles force you to get closer to a subject, just as teles force (or let) you get farther away. The distance to the subject determines the perspective, the focal length determines the framing at that distance.

2

In your particular situation the 15 seems the best option for a 'tweener, given its undeniable quality. The current 17s may fit the gap better but aren't as good.

My $0.02.

Cheers,

Rick

1

They're pretty close. Not indistinguishable, but not really worth it having both in most cases. 17(,5) is a better middle ground if you must have something between 12 and 25.

Either way, if you wanna compare fields of view, your phone camera is most likely a 15mm equivalent, so draw your own conclusions.

3

1

coffeenkfc wrote:

Hey, guys, I have the GH4 with Pana-Leica 12mm f/1.4 and 25mm f/1.4.

I haven't had a chance to try the 15mm in the camera shop but it seems to me 12mm and 15mm are too close in focal length for it to be worth spending $ on the 15mm when I already have the 12mm?

Thanks!

They are definitely not the same focal length, they provide different fields of view that you can notice when looking at the photos.

Whether or not you SHOULD spend so much money on prime lenses (it's very expensive to buy every prime lens for every focal length) is not for me to say

2

coffeenkfc wrote:At an event shoot the other day I found the 25mm too tight

Agree 25mm on Squarish 4:3 ratio makes it "almost" useless for inside shooting. I only reach for 25mm when I'm outdoor.

but I'm not sure the 12mm was great considering the distortion (people in the shot were pretty close, this was in a confined space, a train car).

Exactly, 12mm can exaggerate facial features. You really need to backup 10 feet away

I remember wondering if a 15mm/17mm would have helped. I know there is still (optical) distortion at 15mm/17mm but presumably significantly less than 12mm.

I ♡ my 15/1.7 more than any m43 lens. But I can tell you that there is some barrel distortion (2%) if you shoot across the dinner table portraits from 2 arm length away. You may want to consider buying a20/1.7 for it is the better portrait lens with little to no barrel distortion from 2 arms length away.

Here are some of my 15/1.7 portrait with 2% barrel distortion FIXED.

1

Hi

For me personally there is a big difference between the 12mm & 15mm FL's. Actually I really notice the difference between the 15, 17, and 20mm FL's in use.

I choose whichever depending on the situation I am likely to encounter. I love the 20mm in restaurants for those across the table shots, although the 17mm & 15mm also work. Both those lenses are better walkaround propositions for me though than the 20mm though.

The 12mm FL is great for photos of buildings. You will really notice the difference over the 15mm with that type of subject matter.

Nikon has announced the Z6III, its third-generation mid-range full-frame mirrorless camera. A new 24MP sensor brings speed to every part of the camera, and all the key features have been upgraded.

The Lumix S9 is Panasonic's newest full-frame mirrorless camera. It allows users to create their own custom looks for out-of-camera colors and is the first full-frame Lumix camera aimed squarely at social media content creators.

The Sony a9 III is the world's first full-frame mirrorless camera to feature a global electronic shutter with simultaneous readout. After extensive testing of this 120 fps sports camera, to see what you gain (and, perhaps, lose).

Fujifilm has announced the X-T50, a mid-range 40MP APS-C mirrorless camera that gains image stabilization, subject recognition AF and a host of high-res video features.

The Fujifilm X100VI is the sixth iteration of Fujifilm's classically-styled large sensor compact. A 40MP X-Trans sensor, in-body stabilization and 6.2K video are the major updates, but do they make the camera better?

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.

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.