Just a little look at the out of focus rendering of lights with this lens.

@sohus "I just received it and my lens mount is perfect. Definitely not loose... feels as tight as the Voigtlander."

Yes they fixed it, since the 'Daily Mirror' of filmmaking journalism alerted them too it on the prototype.

Could you do a test shot with ex-tele? I'm curious to see how it holds up.

@jimtreats - thanks, really useful test. Got to get me one of these things!

nice video, @jimtreats

that smooth, round aperture is KILLER! I just bought a Mir1 37mm for the same reason . . . I bet this lens would pair well with it. But Darn You Voigtlander for not keeping the 25mm f0.95 round-apertured. darn you.

Mine arrived today via UPS. Direct from SLRMagic in China.. I'll put a quick video up later of some of my tests that I've done tonight, quickly.

So far though I am happy with it.

There is some twist on the lens mount with the camera, but this is no more really than the Voigtlander 25mm of mine. It's heavy enough that it doesn't feel like it does this as i'm holding the lens to focus. There is no rocking which is what i was most worried about.

It's a lot smaller than I expected. Seems reasonably sharp, though haven't scrutinised the footage out of the camera yet.

Im picking mine up tomorrow from the UPS. Been waiting months for this lens-cant wait

@mrbill I placed an order on 14/1/12 by going to their homepage and accessing the uk site at the bottom of the page, order currently being processed.

@proaudio - that disclaimer was not there the day that I posted the link. They must have gone fast.

How do you like it guys?

PhotoZone review: http://www.photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/685-slrmagic_12_16?start=1 Not very bad considering price. And for video most lenses perform better.

@sohus 2-3 weeks they told me.. oh well!

@footagehead I can confirm the loose bayonet too! Still, I'm pretty happy with it.

I noticed there haven't been examples for the lens' capabilities for a while in this thread, so I'll post some. These aren't special in any way but it's nice to see what the lens can do.

All pictures were shot as RAW-files and processed using Photoshop.

This was shot at T1.6 at nearly the closest focusing distance. You can see that the bokeh-area gets smudgy at the edges and there's a bit of vignetting.

This was shot under comparable conditions as the first and it shows very well the extremely shallow depth of field.

Again, comparable conditions, focusing distance is a little further away this time. Bokeh looks quite nice.

This one was shot at an aperture roughly at 3.5, the DOF is still quite shallow which isn't that surprising since I'm focused in to only like 10cm (from the lens) again.

I especially like this on, that's why i uploaded it at full-res. You should zoom in a 100% to see a lot of detail on the fly. This was shot at an aperture of 1.6 and the closest focusing distance.

@pechente - grrrr that IS frustrating, especially since on the EOSHD blog post and interview with SLR Magic, they state that the lens was designed with cinematic looks and use in mind. Designing a lens that is the opposite of most cine glass builds (focus ring is usually in the front, and geared to standards), is not with cinematic utilization in mind. A disappointment that I can't get a FF gear on the lens to actually pull focus properly, let alone the myriad of issues people are having with a loose bayonet coupling.
I think I will still wait on this for awhile. I want to hear and see more of the 12-35 X lens Panny keeps promising. I bet it'll be slow though. F2.8 as it is rumored is less appealing, but if I can use the lens in film situations, I will get it.
Thanks!