------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+++++++++++++++ PROCESSING +++++++++++++++++
As stated by many other reviewers, the processing of claims that one, a 1000 - has absolutely objective justice. The housing is made entirely of metal and feels very valuable. Only the lens is made of plastic, but no less quality. In addition, metal would have driven further here the weight into the air.
Processing >>> 5/5 stars
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
++++++++++++++++ HANDLING ++++++++++++++++++
The focus ring can be well known, pull back and reveals a manual removal scale. Here, the AF motor is disconnected and you can focus manually. However, is not converted in the camera to MF and the camera still responds as in the AF mode that the focus magnifier is not automatically switched on and the function of the AEL button remains the same. How's that for the E-M1 and if no Fokuspeaking is then automatically switched on, I can not say because I have tested it only on the E-M5. Perhaps yes someone knows the accurate leave a comment.
The handling of the E-M5 is already borderline and not recommended for long shoots without auxiliary handle. I use even a leather lower shell that the handle aggravated something I then pretty well get along and can hold the camera securely.
Handling (E-M5) >>> 4/5 stars
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+++++++++++++++ Imaging performance ++++++++++++++++
Sharpness absolutely outstanding and on a level with many lenses. Ranging from 12-25mm lens is best, followed by the sharpness slightly decreases. The optimum focus is achieved already at full aperture, stopping down brings nothing more. The only exception is in 40mm because you just have to stop down to achieve the optimum sharpness.
The definition is also absolutely great. Did it compared to which it is absolutely on par in terms of sharpness with the new M.Zuiko 25mm.
Chromatic aberration was corrected very well. In the E-M5 which are not yet eliminated by the camera, but I was able to make only slight CAs extremely high contrast edges. Even the M.Zuiko 25mm shows as more CAs.
Vignette is corrected by default when MFT lenses and me not misbehaving. Only at open aperture can very slight vignetting can be seen in certain situation, but only if you really take a closer very accurate. So overall very very inconspicuous.
Distortion is also corrected by default and has not really interest me accordingly. According to some tests occurs quite strong distortion of the uncorrected RAW files especially at 12mm, but what I do not care. I have noticed in any case no blurred image edges or similar negative effects resulting from the correction.
Imaging performance >>> 5/5 stars
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
++++++++++++++++ CONCLUSION +++++++++++++++++++
To say that I'm excited would be a bit exaggerated, but the objective would have to be much cheaper. I simply get what I have expected for the price a PRO lens, with PRO-processing and PRO-imaging performance.
With the weight and the size I'm pretty good handle on the E-M5. However, I recommend that before try in retail once.
Price performance >>> 3.5 / 5 stars
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+++++++++++++++ Minimum Focusing Distance / Macro potential ++++++++++++++++
I only 20cm minimum focusing distance is the really short and you can really get close properly. I once measured roughly on what kind of magnification to get and am at a profit of about 1: 3.1 come what yes is true by definition, already as a macro (
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
++++++++++++ Short compared to the Panasonic 12-35mm f / 2.8 ++++++++++++
I have the Pana 12-35mm already tested some time ago, which is why the following is from my memory, and various tests.
The Pana is the Oly 12-35mm 12-40mm absolutely equal of sharpness, but is a little different. The Focus takes over the entire focal length range from barely and is the zoom range more visible as the Oly 12-40mm. However, one must 12-35mm throughout simply dim to reach the Pana to the optimum sharpness. In addition, the Oly 12-40mm is slightly sharper at all focal lengths in the corners.
Moreover, the CAs should be slightly better corrected when Oly 12-40mm and the bokeh is supposed to be a little quieter.
Visually, both take so much. For Panasonic cameras I would the Pana 12-35mm, because of the built-in image stabilizer. With an Olympus camera you are spoiled for choice. The Pana 12-35mm is 80g lighter and a bit smaller. The Oly 12-40mm has it even the assignable L-Fn button, the shorter minimum focusing distance (20cm vs. 25cm) and also looks somehow voiced from the Olympus cameras as the Pana. Moreover, the CAs of the Olympus lenses are eliminated with the new cameras.
The Panasonic 12-35mm still seems very attractive for Olympus cameras, because you get it loud Preissuchmachine already 834 EUR. When Used Price are both back on par between 720-780 EUR (after observing some ebay auctions), which is surprising since the Pana 12-35mm significantly longer on the market.
