12-35 unimpressive as a landscape lens

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
amtberg
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,356
Like?
Re: 12-35 unimpressive as a landscape lens
In reply to Shirozina, Jan 23, 2013

Shirozina wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

With it's high price tag I was expecting much from this lens on my GH3 but the edge resolution is disappointing under 25mm where my 14-45 is better at a fraction of the price. I shoot mainly at F8 and would expect any wide open edge losses to be resolved when stopped down but doing this on the 12-35 does very little. I was about to buy a 35-100 as well but was stopped when I started to read reports and see tests showing a similar so-so edge performance so this may simply be the design compromise of these lenses. On the plus side it has fast AF, weather sealed, fast aperture, a good solid feel and not bad edge resolution at 35mm. Think I'll sell it unless it's simply a bad copy.

With a great deal of these body/lens combinations one MUST begin by insuring LaCA and LoCA are resolved for the finest resolution. But expecting premium DSLR glass results, especially at like apertures, is a little much (and even they can disappoint).

However, if one wants to eke a little more out of an exposure, especially with regard to peeping the corners, a trial of DXO Optics is worth checking out (check their site for your body/lens combinations first). I use it like a plug-in in a well established workflow (that is, you don't have to re-invent your workflow with it unless you want to).

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Little Big Man
.

DXO don't support the GH3 yet nor does Capture 1 (fully). LR does but you can't turn off the embedded distortion and CA correction. Part of the edge resolution problem is that the automatic correction stretches and resamples the edges to achieve geometric accuracy at the expense of resolution.

I find the lens to be a relief to have, missing that zoom range from DSLR days. The DXO support provides an edge up (on the OM-D). But I'll turn to a prime if possible for the finer objective. Yet I'm not expecting to compare/compete with large DSLR presentations (otherwise I'd be using the DSLR still).

Maybe µ4/3 is not ready for your expectations/requirements just yet?

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Little Big Man
.

I though the GH3 was exactly what I wanted - good still and video performance in one easy to carry package. I got the UK 30% cashback deal so went for the 12-35 as well but without the cashback I would have just got the body. The body is IMO worth the £1200 so I got the lens for in reality £200. For video it's more than good enough and I'll have to look for alternatives in stills lenses.

I'm surprised you're finding the lens inadequate, but I'm not a professional landscape photographer.  Can you post an example of the problem?  Maybe you do have a subpar copy?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow