12-35 unimpressive as a landscape lens

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
amtberg
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,450
Like?
Re: 12-35 unimpressive as a landscape lens
In reply to mpgxsvcd, Jan 24, 2013

mpgxsvcd wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

mpgxsvcd 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.

The first question I have is do you have a good reason to shoot at F8.0?

I am getting tired of people stopping m4/3s lenses down and then complaining about the mistake they just made.

When I shoot at F2.8, F4, F5.6 the edges show the same resolution drop from the center. F8 'should' sharpen things up at the edges, not be too small to create diffraction softness and render a deep DOF.

All of the m4/3s lenses that are worth buying(ie: not the 14-42mm) achieve their optimal sharpness below F5.0.

Using F8.0 with m4/3s cameras and lenses is never the optimal thing to do for sharpness. You need to research the m4/3s lens characteristics a bit more. Do you shoot professionally with full frame?

All of the stereotypes you are explaining pertain to full frame and not to m4/3s.

Even full frame lenses are generally sharper in the f/4-5.6 range than they are at f/8.

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