Not bad for such <US$100 pancake design lens of only 70g in weight as long as I can handle it gently 
A recent SOOC JPG from G85:
Itās a great little lens. I think the quality of the image it renders is incredible for its size, weight, and cost.
Yes, it is.
However this lens must be used with extra care otherwise it might misbehave specially under low lighting condition.
Can you elaborate on the potential misbehaviour Albert?
Iāve never been a fan of the 12-32 but it does have its uses, especially on the GM5. When I do use it I like to be able to maximise its strengths and minimise its shortcomings - but I donāt use it often enough to gain the necessary experience first hand.
Under good to reasonable lighting condition, this lens works very normally and TBH, exceeds my expectation on a low cost kit class lens.
I got one with GX85. When early testing were promising, 2 later occasions had disappointed me.
First occasion was shooting the aftermath of a superstorm. It was in day time outdoor, over casting still, windy from time to time. A number of fallen tree shots, as well as the environment, appeared in water color painting like. My wife was shooting with 14-140 on GX7 without problem.
The next occasion was shooting a Lantern Show a few days later. During late afternoon, outputs were as expected without problem. When it became dark (it was an outdoor venue with little lighting), many false AF confirmation and even mis-focus output.
I had used 14-45 for similar events many years previously, never find similar problem.
I was so frustrated and so replaced it with 12-35 f/2.8ā¦
The 12-32 was therefore idle until I upgrade to G85. The increased weight of G85 forced me to rethink the 12-35 f/2.8. 230g saved in weight (12-32 vs 12-35) is material to me.
Having used 12-32 a lot more in last 3 years, still found resolving power issue of this lens (under certain lighting condition). Interesting false AF confirmation has not been appeared on G85 or GX850 so far (?). By the end, I think this is not a full round player as good as the 14-45, 14-42PZ or 12-35.
However 14-45 or 14-42PZ are too narrow to me, and 12-35 is heavier and larger.
I now have 2 12-32 (another was the kit lens with GX850). Both exhibit similar weakness (the new one is slightly better). IMHO this might not be the best lens if very fine detail will be important to the shot and the lighting is not good.
Have I been spoiled by the 14-45 and ask too much on a US$100 kit class lens?
My 2 cents.
1 Like
Many thanks, thatās exactly what I was hoping you would say as it more or less echoes my limited experience of the lens, and probably the reason I had so many disappointments when I did use it.
I first used the 12-32 with a new GM5 back in the day and had used my preferred 14-45 on other bodies; as you know the 14-45 isnāt perfect either but it has exceptional abilities at all but the extreme 45mm end and was a firm favourite of mine. I tried and rejected the later 14-42 kit lenses (apart from the PZ 14-42 of course) and used the 14-45 on both Panasonic and Olympus bodies to good effect; many of my favourite images were made with that lens, often from the original G1 it came with:
Panasonic G1+14-45 @ 14mm, 1/500 @ f/9, ISO 100
Holden Wood Reservoir, almost exactly 13 years ago (to the day!)
Fast forward to present day and my return to micro 4/3ā¦ I agree completely that the 14mm end of these old kit zooms is limiting - which is why my āproperā zoom is an Olympus 12-45 (lovely lens) - but I wanted something smaller/lighter and preferably with OIS to use on the G100. A few days ago I was looking for a decent used PZ 14-42 (which are a bit thin on the ground) and spotted a dirt cheap 14-45 in exceptionally good condition so I bought it. It will be delivered today and Iām really looking forward to it. I loved my original copy (came with a G1) even though the rubber grip eventually perished and I ended up with it wrapped in grip tape.
Interestingly the G100 is almost exactly the same overall size and weight as the original G1 that started it all, which if nothing else demonstrates how much the Gx series has changed over the years:
It will be interesting to see haw the venerable 14-45 behaves with a modern camera and 20MP sensor 
Later:
It arrived, and itās lovely. It came with the proper caps, hood and even the carrying bag Iād forgotten was originally supplied and it looks like new. Firmware was 1.1 so that places it mid 2009 (1.2 was November 09) and it looks and feels right at home on the G100.
Light was terrible today but I needed to buy some groceries and took the opportunity to test it, and it exceeded my expectations. Itās very, very good, almost as good as my Olympus 12-45/4 and to my surprise is good right up to 45mm - unlike my original back in the day.
Just one example that caught a moment of (almost) interesting light:
G100+14-45 @ 20mm, 1/250 @ f/5.6, ISO 200
It seems to love the 20MP sensor even more than the 12MP sensor it was designed for. Bargain
2 Likes
Not own the 12-45 f/4 but from DXOMarkās reviews, I had compared the 12-100 f/4, 12-45 f/4, the PL 12-60 f/2.8-4 and the P 12-60 f/3.5-4.5, it seems that while the 12-100 is doing very close to PL 12-60, and both are better (marginally) than P 12-60, the 12-45 should be the winner of the pack.
Unfortunately nothing from DXOMark on 14-45 for direct comparison.
Your info is very useful. 14-45 is an outstanding lens.
Indeed I never worry on M43 lensesā performance on 20Mp sensor.
Enjoy your toy.
Another fabulous little gem from Panasonic. I bought one as a ājust in caseā lens for my G9, and now on my G100ās. Yeah, plural. Itās so small and light you donāt even realize you have it in your bag.
3 Likes
Nice shots. Thank you for sharing.
However, do you have a hood on it? I took the advice and found contrast could be improved and flare could be reduced too for my SOOC JPGs.
No, no I donāt. Never really even thought about it to be honest. I donāt like putting hoods on lenses with external focusing elements, but I had a quick look & noted that the 12-32 is internal focusing. So now youāve got me interested Are you using a step up ring, or screwing the hood directly into the 37mm filter thread? I shall now consult the eBay and see whatās available.
Itās about the only thing Iām not keen on the little Lumix 20mm f1.7. Which is another fabulous little lens for small bodies like the GX850 & G100ās etc. If I fit a hood to that Iām always a bit concerned about bumping the hood and damaging the focus mechanism.
No it wonāt so should have a peace of mind.
Try this, e.g. the 14-45 which is using external focusing. During AF, touch the focusing section (gently of course), it will stop the focusing. If not doing it everyday, it wonāt damage the lens.
A lens hood indeed is very useful. It can become part of the formula to protect the lens from bumping, add finger print, sort of shade for rain and snow. Some members value the usefulness of a hood over UV/protective filter. I swap lenses by feeling, so a hood can avoid a lot of finger print to the front element.
The only shortage, it will increase the overall size of the setup. I have a tiny lens pouch from JJC for this lens, the hood makes the pouch too small. 
I am using a JJC hood for 12-32.
Oh, donāt get me wrong, Iāve got hoods on all my lenses with internal focus mechanisms. Big fan of them myself, I really do like them. Anyway, Iāve gone and ordered one for the 12-32, should be here by the end of the week or early next week. Keen to give it a try, & see if I notice the difference
1 Like
So this turned up yesterday in the mailbox. Complete with a little lens cap to suit. Seems very nicely made. Quite impressed. Havenāt had a chance to try it out as yet, miserable gloomy weather, and darkness falls early as weāre about in winter here.
1 Like
Use it gently, specially attention on the extension direction of the lens on the early ownership period, this could be a very portable lens of reasonably good IQ for its class.
My 1st one is already 7 years old, still in excellent condition.
Enjoy it,