12-35 unimpressive as a landscape lens

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shirozina
Regular MemberPosts: 302
Like?
Re: Why bother?
In reply to String, Jan 24, 2013

String wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

String wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

String wrote:

Why bother purchasing a constant f2.8 if you're only shooting at f8 with it anyway? Seems kinda obvious to me but whatever...

because higher quality lenses perform better at all apertures in my experience.

And primes perform better than zooms in my experiance so why bother with a zoom? The 12-35 is a pretty easy range to cover with primes for landscape use in the m43 world.

You really need an explanation of the advantages of zooms over primes?

I'm just confused as to why you are not happy with the 12-35. You seem to be looking for great image quality in a lens and feel that the kit lens is better... But unwilling to go to 2-3 primes and use your feet for a few steps? You have to decide if you want the best image quality or convenience.

Im perfectly happy with the images out of the 12-35 however I'm also using (almost exclusively) at f4 or wider.

I was expecting more from an expensive lens - is it too much to ask that the optical performance  is at least equal to the kit lens in this area?

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