That's a strange one, karlh.

The first thing I'd do is take a picture with each lens set to the same exposure manually, both set to f8. Plainly they should be very similar, otherwise something is wrong. And try to frame the shots similarly so that the meter is taking its reading from similar areas.

Have you tried the lenses on shutter priority - does the same effect occur?

Both these lenses change effective aperture through their exposure range but the camera should take care of that.

I have a Panasonic LX3 compact with the Leica 5.1mm (24mm equiv) f2 lens. Even in RAW, software lens corrections are applied. The software corrections seem to be a part of the lens spec, as it were.

Leitz say that modern technology is such that the application of software to (obviously) optical correction make this lens possible where optically it would not be.

It's a matter of opinion whether this is a good thing or not but judged on results it works wonderfully well.

I don't pretend to know what any of this means but the exif says

SR result stabilzed
shake reduction unknown (15)
SR half press time .80s

Does anyone understand all this?

Is there any way of making every frame have a different file name whatever directories are made? Or must they repeat in each directory?

There are an awful lot of switches and knobs on these modern cameras. Without constant use it's easy to forget exactly what some of them do.

In a similar way, after 35 years of using Nikons every day for my work, I still wrongly align the Pentax lenses each and every ****** time I go to mount them!

I bought an £8.50 spare battery for my GX20 a month or two ago. It's indistinguishable in performance from my 2 originals.

Funny enough, the only batteries I've ever heard of exploding were originals made by Sony. But I doubt camera makers make their own batteries anyway.

Yes, a thrilling sound. I'd love to hear it from inside the plane. My other favourite sound is the Merlin on the Spitfire on the overrun. (I think that's when you get that throaty roar).

Does the Lanc have Merlins too do you know?

Look, I'm sorry about that and anyway, I'm lying. I've reduced the size in the picture, the lens is actually a great big heavy lumpen brute of a thing. It rattles when you shake it and distorts like a fisheye. Its IQ is bettered by a beer glass over a toilet roll tube and the focussing is lumpy, as if someone has emptied a bucket of sand into it.

Oh, yes, and the autofocus motor shudders and rattles and wheezes as it hunts back and forth for 5 seconds before every shot.

Better?

As edumad says, Quicktime (you'll need Quicktime Pro). It has a menu item to import stills as a movie sequence and does it very simply.

It will output them in many formats but .mp4 is an excellent size and quality compromise.

It's baby, really. Here it is with the kit lens. It's much smaller but feels to weigh a bit more.