Olympus lenses and Panasonic Bodies as a unit

[bluekorn]

Many accomplished photographers use Olympus lenses with Panasonic bodies and vice versa. That should maybe be enough to tell me that there aren't image quality concerns in mixing the two. But the lack of concern about auto correction may derive from expertise in post processing. I want to shoot jpegs and without post processing I'm hoping to get the same image quality that I would get if I weren't mixing logos. Can I use the Olympus 9-18 on the GX8 (soon to come) and hope to get the same image quality that I would get if I were using the 9-18 on a comparable Olympus camera?

My concern with this issue arises when I read review passages like "the verdict" in Photozone. 

"The optical performance, and that's of course the key aspect, is very decent for an ultra-wide zoom lens. It may not be able to touch the stars but it can provide sharp center-to-edge quality images especially in the lower part of its zoom range. Both vignetting and lateral CAs are nothing to worry about from a field perspective. That's also true for the distortion characteristic although that's primarily because of the system's auto-correction approach - the native amount of distortions is actually fairly hefty."

[leuallen]

I shoot the 9-18 on both Oly Em-1 and Pan GH3. I did not notice any difference but then I was shooting organic images where distortion does not show as much and also I was not looking for any. Images were of the same scene shot over a years time.

Larry

[Pete Berry]

Since the advent of the GH-1 6 years ago (now GH-3 & -4)   I've been spared the ritual of lateral CA correction in files from ANY of the many lenses I've used - even my very old adapted Nikkor 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 - at any aperture - both JPG's OOC and RAW. And, miraculously, in both 4K and 1080p video as well - even with the Panny 7-14 in contrasty situations. I mean none at 100%, including 4K frame-capture stills. My m4/3 Oly E-PL1 second body of five years ago did need CA correction with the 7-14 which stayed on it when traveling.

One other thing is the almost never needed with m4/3's is dust spotting, which, along with lat. CA correction, was pretty much a given back in the old Canon days.

Pete

[spidermike]

I have not noticed a difference in most situations when mixing and matching brands. Interestingly the article you quote is looking at the Olympus lens on a Panasonic body so you need to be aware of the different distortions - IIRC both manufacturer bodies correct for pincushion/barrel distortion from lenses of both manufacturers; but Panasonic bodies auto-correct for chromatic aberrations only for Panasonic lenses, while Olympus bodies provide no auto-correction for chromatic aberration at all. Whether this means that Olympus lenses are therefore manufactured to higher optical standards I have no idea.

I have Olympus and Panasonic MFTs and I love the Olympus for its excellent in-body stabilisation, but I prefer the user interface of the Panasonic. But the Olympus has 2 advantages: it means lenses do not have stabilisation built in which makes them smaller and lighter, and you have full access to all the non-stabilised lenses.

Many people say they prefer the slightly warmer tones of Olympus out-of-camera jpegs to those from Panasonic but that is personal choice. One pro I spoke to said that although he felt the same he preferred working with Panasonic raw image.
But there are two other options - if you are willing to put in the time, you can modify the jpeg profile (or even create your own) and have the camera use that. Secondly, if you can set your camera to capture jpeg+raw you have your jpeg but also with the raw you can choose a different profile in post processing. Both of these options make camera brand almost irrelevant from a jpeg point of view though it sounds like the latter of the two ideas is not really a path you want to go down.

[AlterEgo]

but Panasonic bodies auto-correct for chromatic aberrations only for Panasonic lenses, while Olympus bodies provide no auto-correction for chromatic aberration at all.

not correct... E-M1 for example does write lateral CA correction information to raw files... if you want to establish what happens with a particular m43 body + m43 lens combo then do convert to DNG using Adobe DNG converter and check DNG tags where Adobe translates the optics correction info... that simple.

[AlterEgo]

Many accomplished photographers use Olympus lenses with Panasonic bodies and vice versa. That should maybe be enough to tell me that there aren't image quality concerns in mixing the two.

there are issues, reported & discussed many times @ DPReview forum... for example Olympus does rely on their lenses to filter (either glass/plastic or coating) some part of spectrum close to UV and Panasonic instead does that in a whatever is on top of their sensors... so when you put Panasonic lens on Olympus body some ill effects might happen (again - was demonstrated with examples)... search for AndersW postings on that subject

[spidermike]

not correct... E-M1 for example does write lateral CA correction information to raw files... if you want to establish what happens with a particular m43 body + m43 lens combo then do convert to DNG using Adobe DNG converter and check DNG tags where Adobe translates the optics correction info... that simple.

Now you mention it, I recall a comment about the E-M1 writing it to the file but IIRC it is the only Olympus MFT camera to do so.

[AlterEgo]

Now you mention it, I recall a comment about the E-M1 writing it to the file but IIRC it is the only Olympus MFT camera to do so.

it has to be actually tested, E-M5II or E-M10 (or whatever else Olympus put out after E-M1) might do it as well...

[spidermike]

or just search the internet....

[Pete Berry]

.... but Panasonic bodies auto-correct for chromatic aberrations only for Panasonic lenses, while Olympus bodies provide no auto-correction for chromatic aberration at all. Whether this means that Olympus lenses are therefore manufactured to higher optical standards I have no idea.

This is simply not true, at least for the GH3 and GH4 which I have used with a couple of old Nikkor fast primes as I noted above, as well as a 480mm/6.0 apo refractor scope and a 1500mm/10.0 Maksutov-Cassegraine scope. No CA of any sort with these old and odd birds, just like my stable of Panny 7-14, 14-45, 4/3 P-L 14-150, 100-300, and 25/1.4.

Below a Nikkor 50/1.4 @ f/1.4 "fence test" full image at 50% size from the GH4, straight OOC except for the size reduction. No CA to be seen here or on the 100% image - particularly in the backlit gaps between the boards. BTW, the softness and low contrast are gone by f/2.0.

[AlterEgo]

No CA to be seen here or on the 100% imag

there is a difference between "no CA to be seen" and camera's firmware provided lateral (no longitudal) CA correction data for a non m43 lens in raw file, isn't it... so why don't you do the test like above and check what is in DNG tag "WarpRectilinear" = that will tell you if camera's firmware provided the data for geometric distortion and lateral CA corrections in raw file

[b_rubenstein]

All Olympus bodies using the TruePic VII processor, which started with the E-M1 and includes all later cameras, automatically corrects for CA regardless of lens brand. I use Olympus, Panasonic and Sigma lenses with An E-M1, E-M5 and E-M10 and can clearly see the difference between the E-M5 and the other bodies when shooting JPGs.

[Pete Berry]

there is a difference between "no CA to be seen" and camera's firmware provided lateral (no longitudal) CA correction data for a non m43 lens in raw file, isn't it... so why don't you do the test like above and check what is in DNG tag "WarpRectilinear" = that will tell you if camera's firmware provided the data for geometric distortion and lateral CA corrections in raw file

Suffice it to say that I've been free of ANY CA correction on files I routinely print to A2 size since I've been using Panasonic GH bodies for 5+ years with a variety of legacy lenses and other optical systems. Vide, ergo crede!
My experience is similar to b_rubenstein's, posted above this post, with the E-M1 and subsequent Oly bodies.

Pete

[bluekorn]

Thank you all for your generous and very helpful responses. I've decided that I can go forward mixing and matching Panasonic and Olympus bodies and lenses in any combination without fearing that I've spent a lot of money on a mistake. I'm looking forward to receiving a gx8 body in a few weeks and will decide on lenses before the end of the month looking particularly at the reduced prices at Olympus for a few more days. Thanks again.
Peter

[Telecaster]

I've decided that I can go forward mixing and matching Panasonic and Olympus bodies and lenses in any combination without fearing that I've spent a lot of money on a mistake.

Based on my own experiences the only combo I'd be wary of is an Olympus OM-D camera and the Panasonic 20/1.7 lens. Sometimes with this combo I've seen banding in monotonal areas of photos (this has been reported on various fora too) so the lens now stays with my GX7 body.

-Dave-

[AlterEgo]

Suffice it to say

are you afraid to test or doesn't know how to check the tag values ? you have the raw files handy, it is a 1 min exercise 

[Pete Berry]

are you afraid to test or doesn't know how to check the tag values ? you have the raw files handy, it is a 1 min exercise  

Look, my friend (or nemesis?!), I know it's difficult for you to accept that Panny corrects all JPG aand RAW files with all lenses & other optics for CA of all sorts- including 8.3MP 4K video frames whizzing by at 30fps - but I'd sooner believe in pixies scattering their special pixel dust on my files than these old relics I sometimes shoot with generating no CA at all in Panasonic GH* files! Not to mention my 4/3 legacy adapted Pana-Leica 14-150mm "bag of slow primes" with the Achilles heel of lat CA as shown below in an old Photozone lens test. I've never seen a smidgen of it.

With my current state of mind, if that whatchamacallit DNG tag said "no correction" I'd have to go with the above fairy explanation. And that would pretty much freak me out, I'm afraid.

Maybe if (and when) I'm done with therapy I'll give it a go...

[Internaut]

At the moment, my go-everywhere camera is the Panasonic GM1, and my main camera is the E-P5.  I have various Olympus lenses, plus Panasonic 14, 20 and 12-32 lenses.  Thoughts:

- You have to be hyper-critical (as many photographers are) to spot the difference in terms of the image that comes out if the camera.
- I find the rattlesnake noise, when using Panasonc lenses on the Olympus body, utmost annoying.
- I'm of the entirely unscientific view that the Panasonic body plays nicer with Olympus lenses, compared to how the Olympus body plays with Panasonic lenses.

In fact, I bought the GM1 to get the best use out of the two Panasonic primes, and ended up with a gem of a short zoom.  It's a limited little camera that never fails to make me smile. 

[AlterEgo]

Look, my friend (or nemesis?!), I know it's difficult for you to accept that Panny corrects all JPG aand RAW files with all lenses & other optics for CA of all sorts- including 8.3MP 4K video frames whizzing by at 30fps - but I'd sooner believe in pixies scattering their special pixel dust on my files than these old relics I sometimes shoot with generating no CA at all in Panasonic GH* files! Not to mention my 4/3 legacy adapted Pana-Leica 14-150mm "bag of slow primes" with the Achilles heel of lat CA as shown below in an old Photozone lens test. I've never seen a smidgen of it.

With my current state of mind, if that whatchamacallit DNG tag said "no correction" I'd have to go with the above fairy explanation.

my question is very narrow - you do state that Panasonic (camera's firmware) writes CA /lateral/ correction information to raw files for lenses are neither m43 nor 43 mount - like your old Nikkors, do you not ? it is not about what you see or what you do not see - it is a simple question, do conversion, check the tag  you have the raw files handy... I am just curious how does firmware understand which lens (neither m43 nor 43) is mounted, because as you know they all have different optical parameters and lateral CA correction is simply 3 different corrections for geometric distortion (for "RGB" planes) instead of just one (so geometric distortion and lateral CA are being corrected together)... so are you willing to do the test ?

[Kiwi Paul]

- I find the rattlesnake noise, when using Panasonc lenses on the Olympus body, utmost annoying.
- I'm of the entirely unscientific view that the Panasonic body plays nicer with Olympus lenses, compared to how the Olympus body plays with Panasonic lenses. 

I have 2 E-M5 bodies and 6 Panasonic lenses (7-14, 12-35, 35-100, 100-300, 14-140 and 25) and have had no issues at all, even the Pany 25 1.4 behaves perfectly on both bodies and that is reputedly notorious for rattlesnaking on Oly bodies.


Paul