I have been shooting with this lens for 4 years using 3 different cameras. My experience is that it is a very good lens especially for the price. I have taken thousands of photos with it and it performed well in all cases. I shoot raw so their is no problem with any corrections needed. I would highly recommend it.
Thanks for sharing. It's not a bad lens at all, especially if you shoot RAW, but I feel, that the incompatibility with in camera corrections is a disappointment. But, that's only my opinion😀
4 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Hello Matti! I want to know why you can't access auto-caption on some videos?
That's a tough one, but for MFT I'd probably like a 17mm F1.4 and for the S series fullframe I'd like a 35mm F2. Both because there are no such lenses in the Lumix line up and I like that focal length.
@@mattisulanto Excellent choice! The closest thing to that now is the Sigma 16mm F1.4 which you did a wonderful review of! Still a nice Pana-Leica 17mm would be special! Okay, go ahead and request it :)
Matti, would you be able to recommend a lens for shooting video of fast moving objects (lots of panning) with a power zoom for Lumix cameras? I do plane spotting I’m having a difficult time with getting useable video that is sharp and in focus, and without any jerking.
I haven't used the mark II version, but I used the first version long time ago and that was a pleasant surprise back then. Both the Lumix and Tamron are about the same size.
Stabilisation. A telephoto lens is defined as one above standard focal length, on MFT that is one above ~25mm. An Olympus back will allow you to chose body or lens stabilisation. On those lens-IS seems to work better than body-IS above super-telephoto, say ~60mm and up. The E-M5ii is far better at handling unstabilised super-tele than say the GX7 or E-PL7, a long lens certainly performs better with some form of stabilisation. So is the G9 but it doesn't give you the option to chose, so I can't test that. Dual-IS knocks spots off it, imo Olympus have shot themselves in the foot by not implementing their Sync-IS with all the Panasonic OIS lenses; their cameras can use the Panasonic OIS so they could do so; it is a joint system, the lenses are supposed to be fully interchangeable. The Panasonic 14-140 offers Dual2 on the G9. No 10X super-zoom will have the best performance but it doesn't have many faults.
I thought in-camera corrections were only possible when the lens was made by the same company that made the camera. As you say, lenses like this aren't for pixel peepers.
It looks like a poor choice if you compare it with the Panasonic options (with IS and wheater sealing and image correction). And those options are in the same price range.
I have no experience with this lens (not a choise for my small gf7), but check this review - th-cam.com/video/bKuysHpw1OQ/w-d-xo.html ... General opinion about ibis telephoto seems to be not so true. Can you try to proces the raws with a app that is ignoring geometry/ optical corrections stored in raw file? According to reviews in general, such visible (not fully) corrected distoration points on low resolution in general - > additional corrections make it just worse (edges of panl 15 mm etc.). I do not mean pixel peeping, I am just currios.
How IBIS works is not a matter of opinion, it's a fact that IBIS is not optimal for telephoto lenses, but of course we can have an opinion on how effective we think it is. I.e. I can say it's mediocre and you can say it's pretty good. With the Tamron, there are no embedded corrections in any file.
@@dmitryrublev4934 Here is a pretty good summary: www.dxomark.com/tamron-14-150mm-f-3-5-5-8-di-iii-micro-four-thirds-mount-lens-review-accessibly-priced-addition-to-the-range/
Excellent video 😮!
Finally a fresh review of the Tamron! Thanks!
Thanks!
I have been shooting with this lens for 4 years using 3 different cameras. My experience is that it is a very good lens especially for the price. I have taken thousands of photos with it and it performed well in all cases. I shoot raw so their is no problem with any corrections needed. I would highly recommend it.
Thanks for sharing. It's not a bad lens at all, especially if you shoot RAW, but I feel, that the incompatibility with in camera corrections is a disappointment. But, that's only my opinion😀
Hello Matti! I want to know why you can't access auto-caption on some videos?
I'm wondering the same, but I don't know what do about it. I have to find out how to make it work with every video.
@@mattisulanto Thanks! The summary is good, but I stay at Pana 14-140.
If you were able to request, as a Lumix ambassador, the next lens for Lumix what would it be and why?
That's a tough one, but for MFT I'd probably like a 17mm F1.4 and for the S series fullframe I'd like a 35mm F2. Both because there are no such lenses in the Lumix line up and I like that focal length.
@@mattisulanto Excellent choice! The closest thing to that now is the Sigma 16mm F1.4 which you did a wonderful review of! Still a nice Pana-Leica 17mm would be special! Okay, go ahead and request it :)
I think this is a great lens if you can get it used, however, I still prefer my current 14-140 Lumix lens, with weather proofing, etc.
Thanks for sharing.
The lumix 14-140 is one of my favorite ! Why not making a review about it ?
Agreed 14-140ii is sharp end to end, small and compact... Love it!
Matti, would you be able to recommend a lens for shooting video of fast moving objects (lots of panning) with a power zoom for Lumix cameras? I do plane spotting I’m having a difficult time with getting useable video that is sharp and in focus, and without any jerking.
I'm not sure if I can recommend a lens for that, because I don't shoot that kind of stuff.
Great review!
Thank you!
The Lumix 14-140mm has to be better? It is about the same size too, isn't it?
I haven't used the mark II version, but I used the first version long time ago and that was a pleasant surprise back then. Both the Lumix and Tamron are about the same size.
Stabilisation. A telephoto lens is defined as one above standard focal length, on MFT that is one above ~25mm. An Olympus back will allow you to chose body or lens stabilisation. On those lens-IS seems to work better than body-IS above super-telephoto, say ~60mm and up. The E-M5ii is far better at handling unstabilised super-tele than say the GX7 or E-PL7, a long lens certainly performs better with some form of stabilisation. So is the G9 but it doesn't give you the option to chose, so I can't test that. Dual-IS knocks spots off it, imo Olympus have shot themselves in the foot by not implementing their Sync-IS with all the Panasonic OIS lenses; their cameras can use the Panasonic OIS so they could do so; it is a joint system, the lenses are supposed to be fully interchangeable. The Panasonic 14-140 offers Dual2 on the G9. No 10X super-zoom will have the best performance but it doesn't have many faults.
Thanks for sharing.
I thought in-camera corrections were only possible when the lens was made by the same company that made the camera. As you say, lenses like this aren't for pixel peepers.
The corrections are possible also for third party lenses.
It looks like a poor choice if you compare it with the Panasonic options (with IS and wheater sealing and image correction). And those options are in the same price range.
The Lumix lens has better specifications, for sure.
I have no experience with this lens (not a choise for my small gf7), but check this review - th-cam.com/video/bKuysHpw1OQ/w-d-xo.html ... General opinion about ibis telephoto seems to be not so true. Can you try to proces the raws with a app that is ignoring geometry/ optical corrections stored in raw file? According to reviews in general, such visible (not fully) corrected distoration points on low resolution in general - > additional corrections make it just worse (edges of panl 15 mm etc.). I do not mean pixel peeping, I am just currios.
How IBIS works is not a matter of opinion, it's a fact that IBIS is not optimal for telephoto lenses, but of course we can have an opinion on how effective we think it is. I.e. I can say it's mediocre and you can say it's pretty good.
With the Tamron, there are no embedded corrections in any file.
add subtitles
I'd like to, but for some reason they don't work in this video.
@@mattisulanto can I get a brief summary of this lens from you?
@@dmitryrublev4934 Here is a pretty good summary: www.dxomark.com/tamron-14-150mm-f-3-5-5-8-di-iii-micro-four-thirds-mount-lens-review-accessibly-priced-addition-to-the-range/