Today's lens of choice is the Nocticron on the GM1

What lens would you use on the GM1?

#LUMIXlounge #LUMIXgm1 #scbp #nocticron #photography

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

About Giulio Sciorio

Since 2009, Hybrid Photography pioneer Giulio Sciorio has been blending still + motion & sound with his photography. Giulio is a Lumix Luminary, commercial photographer and founder of - the resource for everything Hybrid. A portfolio of Giulio’s hybrid work can be found at

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

17 Responses to Today's lens of choice is the Nocticron on the GM1

  1. Ananda Sim January 28, 2014 at 7:55 am #

    Oh, you could go to town with the idea using any huge lens. It probably with seek with my DSLR Zuiko 7-14 but I could try it. We won't mention the 35-100 f/2 or the 300mm f/2.8 Zuikos either :)

  2. Caterina Izobs January 28, 2014 at 8:45 am #

    yes i could"get the huge lens"

  3. Stuart Schultz January 28, 2014 at 9:40 am #

    G I don't know if you paid for that 42.5, but for the rest of us average people it is way over priced!  I can buy the equivalent Fuji for $500 less, and even a "real" Zeiss is $300 less!
    You better tell Pana-Olym they need to check themselves. One of the reasons I moved to MFT was the availability of good primes at a value, at the time the Pan-Leica 25mm was the high end.  Look at the Oly 12mm, how many people own that?  No they own the Pan 14mm, because it is a superior value.  By using primes, I was able to offset the lack of low light performance of the MFT sensor.  But the reason that the rest of America is not making this migration is because over the past 2 years Pan-Olym are pricing themselves out of the market place….
    Looks like I might have to make a move to Sony of Fuji….

  4. Anthony Falsarella January 28, 2014 at 10:32 am #

    A quality lens as the reviews are telling me it is, it is definitely a lens I am saving for. I want it! There is nothing close to it for m4/3 without having to use an adapter. I may not have it tomorrow, but I am determined to get it if it is the only piece of photo gear I acquire this year.

    • DomDdom January 29, 2014 at 11:39 pm #

      Actually, Voitlander not only has a native m4/3 mount 42.5mm lens, but it’s faster at f0.95 and costs $600 less to boot. Granted its a manual focus lens, but so too would be most all of the other lenses needing an adapter.

      If anything, Panasonic has sold me on buying the Voigtlander. I wanted this lens badly until pricing came out. As mentioned above, Fuji’s 56mm f/1.2 came in at $600 less too, and as silly an argument as it may be, the current Fuji APS-C sensors are better high ISO performers over the Sony and Panasonic m4/3 sensors.

      PanOly have a great system going, but they do need to be more realistic with pricing when their competitors are starting to fill out their systems, with high end, lower cost optics.

  5. Nadine Smoske January 31, 2014 at 4:39 am #

    +Stuart Schultz could not agree more!!! The Luminaries have been sharing their knowledge/know how and been enthusiastic about the hardware. Time has come to share on the "discounts" similar to Will Crocket's deal with the Panasonic…

  6. Giulio Sciorio January 31, 2014 at 10:30 am #

    +Stuart Schultz I hear what you're saying but I don't think the Nocticron is overpriced at all. Why does M43 have to be a bargain system? There's room for high end and Panasonic is carving a high end niche in the system. This is good news, it shows that there's demand enough to produce such high end glass and that there are pros wanting high end glass.

    Regarding Fuji, nice stuff for stills only yet the future is video.

    • DomDdom February 19, 2014 at 2:10 am #

      So the Fuji 56/1.2 isn’t high end? I’m not saying Pana shouldn’t continue to bring quality lenses to market, they’re just pricing many system users out of it. Not to say pros don’t use this system, but far, far fewer pros are going to plunk down for this when they can get a higher performing sensor (various full frams included) and an 85/1.2 (the Canon) for very close to the same price, assuming they’re shopping for a system from scratch. Before we get into the size debate, most working pros will count size and weight far less important than overall image quality. Of course this system can be a professional set of tools, but let’s be honest, that is not the bread and butter for micro 4/3. Video, sure, it’s a great budget video setup, but for a vast majority of professional work, this is not anywhere near the first choice for working photogs.

      I love this system, but it’s a system of compromise, and these optics are just forcing me to look to spend this kind of money elsewhere when I can trade more weight for better IQ, high ISO performance and the ability to work with a shallower dof which is one of two reasons to buy a lens this fast.

      • Giulio Sciorio February 19, 2014 at 10:33 am #

        I didn’t say the Fuji is not high end. I’ve never used it. For many enthusiasts they want everything for nothing and when it comes to optics it just don’t workout. No one is shooting video with Fuji and no Canon 85/1.2 is going to autofocus or have IS for video like the Nocticron or any Lumix lens for that matter.

        Most working pros are going to drag their feet before getting into video, they have been which is why there are not many pro still photographers shooting video. Like I said many times before the future of photography is video. As soon as the mirror comes out you have a video camera and as soon as a pro embraces this new way of thinking it becomes very obvious that the best system for shooting video, and more importantly hybrid, is Lumix.

        • DomDdom February 21, 2014 at 1:24 pm #

          I don’t think it’s fair to say that enthusiasts want everything for nothing, and honestly that comes across as conceited and disengaged with the actual market. Yes, there are squeaky wheels on the internet that want an f/0.95 optic to fit in their front pocket and cost $50, but every normal, level headed enthusiast, pro, hybrid, semi pro, shooter knows this to be ridiculous. Furthermore, when there are very real, very comparable alternatives competing at about 60% of the cost that the Nocti is, that isn’t unrealistic to hope a comparable lens used on a smaller format couldn’t be comparably priced. Is there a market for a $1600 micro 4/3 lens? Sure. How big is that market? My guess is small, and certainly smaller than it would be if they competed on price vs their direct competitors. If this lens was $899 or $999, I think we’d see this as a HUGE win for the system as you’d see the enthusiasts who were able to plunk down the cash for the Oly 75/1.8 or similar, also buy this lens without a second thought. As is, it will be reserved for those with very deep pockets, or those, like you, who’ve chosen to use this system as you have.

          For those with deep pockets, I think they’ll be looking to shop around a little bit, or at least some of them will.

          For those, like yourself who are able to justify the cost for work, also have some compelling options. I’d also be interested to see how many perspective buyers would go with this over the Voigtlander 42.5/0.95 or even the Oly 45 or PL 45. At best, this lens is a niche product, and while I’m not against this at all, I’m merely stating that it’s release was ill timed when you look at the possible alternatives from a variety of angles. If it becomes a huge seller, I’ll gladly recant, but I just don’t see it being that, and perhaps Panasonic never intended it to be, and that’s fine as well.

          You mention IS for video, and I will admit that I’m not using video for professional applications at this point, but handholding video without a steady rig, which is where IS would come in handy most I’d imagine, does not scream professional video shooter to me. A pro video shooter is going to be investing in and setting up, even a minimal rig in which IS, VR, OIS, IBIS is going to be largely negated, even counter productive in that it will look for motion where there is none potentially causing a jumping effect.

          You seem to feel (or at least it comes across) that your opinion on video is the end all be all, and I’m not saying that video isn’t a very real part of professional image making moving forward, but to say that “the future” of photography is video, to me, is incomplete. Even if we see all cameras in the future recording remarkably high res video from which we pull still frames, we’re still pulling and using still frames. Yes, magazines, print ads and editorial work may be going digital, viewed on screens, but those are still frames, regardless of how they’re captured. 4K resolution for video is completely overkill for 99.9% of the population who don’t have the ability to even view this with any realistic benefit, let alone have the system to support it, and while I’m sure this will become more the norm, the same people pushing 4k now will be looking at 8k, 16k, et al down the road and the conversation continues in kind. Back to still frames though… There is and will always be a demand for single frames whether they’re pulled from video or captured otherwise, just as there will be demand for video. To say that one or the other will ultimately be the only future for both is just silly to me.

          I get where you’re coming from, and I appreciate that you’ve built this site based on your hybrid view, but pushing it on those who don’t share your view entirely seems wrong to me, just speaking honestly as a reader and fellow pro-tog. I fully feel that hybrid is a very large portion of the market, and I completely agree that it has a large future in the photographic realm, but to say it is “the future” suggests that there is no room for other, alternative applications, and I just fundamentally disagree that to look to the future of professional photography, one needs to be, or will need to be shooting video.

      • Shaun King May 29, 2014 at 5:03 pm #

        What are you talking about? I don’t understand the complaint in that last paragraph. Which one of your clients is complaining about your micro four thirds image quality? your lack of high ISO performance, and your deeper depth of field?

  7. Anthony Falsarella January 31, 2014 at 11:22 am #

    +Giulio Sciorio I fully agree with your comment.

  8. Shelley Tucci February 1, 2014 at 5:51 pm #


  9. Shelley Tucci February 6, 2014 at 3:24 pm #


  10. alswandog February 21, 2014 at 11:32 am #

    So you’re saying the justification for high priced still lenses is the future is video? Um. OK. I’ll wager the reason most pro still photographers haven’t “moved over” to video is that they want to shoot stills! Just my guess. I’m not convinced you’re correct about the future here. How do I frame that video and hang it? Or put it in my photobook? Which is still something many folks want. M43 is disappointing and I put all my eggs in that basket when I moved from Nikon to Panasonic. I agree with the folks here who are saying these new lenses are over priced. But of course, there will be folks who have committed themselves to the format and will spend the money. Doesn’t mean it’s the future or that they are right.

    • Giulio Sciorio February 21, 2014 at 11:40 am #

      No not at all. The Nocticron is more expensive because it is designed to perform equally well for still and video vs a lens that’s designed for one or the other. The smart working pro is looking at video/hybrid products to grow their business. That’s the thing though – if a pro is in business. Many pros got into the business to make more still photos. I did, but times change and if a business is going to be in business then it’s a game of commerce.

      Frames are becoming large panel screens, photobooks are iPads and wallet prints are now iPhones.

      You def bring up some good points about the pulse of photography. I don’t think that prints or still photography is going to die, just become more nice over time. Like a fine vinyl record, which I own many, I see another niche in the future where a pro shoots film, processes it and prints it on their own and they charge properly for it. I can see fine art commissions like this selling in the five figures easy but that’s not where I see the majority of pros heading.

      • DomDdom February 21, 2014 at 12:34 pm #

        While I don’t disagree that video/hybrid photography has become a very real platform for various professional applications, that doesn’t mean it is the pure and total future for all professional photographers. A large majority of my current business is in interior photography for design firms where video is unnecessary and even undesired. An unnecessary cost when their primary need is for print and web based portfolio presentation. Video in these applications can deter from elemental focus and presentation.

        My original issue with the price is based on two factors. First, for the price, there are comparably priced optics which offer similar capabilities, IQ, etc which are usable on larger formats. Video? Sure, we could discus the Zeiss optics or EF or F mount 85mm f/1.2′s or 1.4′s of the landscape.

        Secondly, from a still shooter’s perspective who is invested in, but not tied to the micro 4/3 format for work (I use a full frame setup for that because the UWA and T/S options are not available currently, nor do I feel I can get as much with a 12bit RAW file vs a 14bit RAW File, etc) I feel that it is going to be very important for the overall health of the system, for PanOly to be more realistic with optical pricing when directly competing systems (think the average m4/3 shooter, not a video/stills hybrid pro) are offering comparable optics with comparable IQ (arguably better IQ situationally) for a substantial amount less. I’m thinking the Fuji XT1 + 56mm f/1.2 vs the EM1 or GH3/4 + Nocti here. One could point to the other ~45mm options, and to an extent properly so, but what about those of us that would like an f/1.2 portrait optic? Well, again we then start looking at the Fuji system because it is more aggressively priced. Maybe a cake and eat it situation, but when that cake exists somewhere else, it can justify the gripes to an extent, and if PanOly are okay with losing system shooters because they won’t be as aggressive with comparable offerings, then I guess that is that.

        If we’re talking professional video, sure I give the nod to the GH3/4 Nocti combo, but how many of us are actually looking at this system from this angle? Maybe more than I’m aware, but even with those who are shooting hybrid, the Nocti vs the Oly 45/1.8 or Voigt 42.5/0.95 could very well be far better ROI choices, each offering a pretty serious upside vs the $1600 Nocti.

        I’m not saying my opinion is or in any way should be universal, and i know that you feel the cost is justified from your perspective, I just think your perspective isn’t quite as wide spread as you seem to feel through your comments. More of us invested in this system (any system) are not using the system for professional income, and while a system doesn’t need to cater to their bread and butter all the time, they need to be conscious of their competition, which in this case looks from my perspective to have just kicked the crap out of the m4/3 system from where I stand. So much chatter around the Fuji XT1 and 56/1.2 while I find next to nothing about this Nocti since the initial media blitz.

        Choices are great for all of us, and I really like the idea of the Nocti, but at the current price, I see it as way too expensive when looking at everything else that is currently available for both the m4/3 system, and other competing systems, video (Voigt), still (any of the other 42.5, 45 or in the Fuji’s case 56mm) or hybrid wise.

        I think, had the Fuji not come out at about the same time at $999, the pricing for the PanaLeica might have been a bit easier to justify, but when other companies are able to bring impressive, comparable optics that for lenses this fast do benefit in ways to being used on larger formats for what most users are looking for in a fast portrait optic, it is a problem for Panasonic and the price is going to be very restrictive and ultimately bring about these types of protests and inquiries, that’s all.

Leave a Reply