Comparing Pana 12-35mm zoom to some primes

Started Feb 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
pinnacle
Senior MemberPosts: 2,432Gear list
Like?
Re: The 12-35 f2.8 is good but...
In reply to RealPancho, Feb 16, 2013

RealPancho wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

RealPancho wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

RealPancho wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

RealPancho wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

RealPancho wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

It doesn't give us the "Wow!" that the older Olympus 14-35 f2.0 SHG gives you when you compare it to primes. I am hoping that Olympus will provide a similar lens that takes us to that level.

...and...uh...just remind us...what's the price tag on that baby?

If you are serious about perfection, that lens is about as close as it gets. And yes, it has a hefty price tag. However, if you have owned one, you are aware of how special it is.

For now I'll stay with my Oly 12mm, Panny 20 f1.7, Panny/Leica 25, and the Oly 45mm to cover those focal lengths and have the advantage of the speed and better bokeh properties

There is that - bokeh

those lenses offer. Collectively they are more expensive and bulky than the 12-35 but, that is my compromise to have the better overall IQ for now.

It looks to me like your only getting marginally better IQ from the 12mm, and same or worse from the others. But I definitely respect your choice. It just doesn't work for me.

The only lens that may be a tad "worse" is the 25mm and the 25mm has something in the way of "character" which is hard to define but if you have one you will likely use it on solo treks on ocassion just because of the special rendering properties. Just which of those lenses are you suggesting is not better than the 12-35 at a matched focal length?

From the tests I've seen, the 20 and the 25.

I already gave you the 25 as not testing as well and how it well it actually performs in real world use...but ask a group of people who own one and there will be the real test. Now for the 20mm....where are the test results showing the side by side superiority of the 12-35? I have not seen any direct comparisons of the two by a known testing/review authority. Can you give me the reference that you are referring to please?

Dan

Dan

Dan

-- hide signature --

Life is good.

-- hide signature --

Frank

-- hide signature --

Life is good.

-- hide signature --

Frank

-- hide signature --

Life is good.

http://www.photozone.de/m43

-- hide signature --

Frank

After looking over various sites that test lenses, I am reversing my statement suggesting that the 25mm may not test well in comparison with the 12--35 at 25mm.

Okay - if that makes you happy.

It does indeed appear that the 25 would likely test out better than the 12-35 Just as it does in the Photozone tests

So now it appears that the Olympus 12mm, the Panny 20, the Panny/Leica 25 and the Olympus 45mm would all best the 12-35 Panny in comparison tests.

The 12-35 is, at least according to Photozone, decidedly better than the 20. They don't show results for the 12-35 at 25mm, so you kind of have to look at the ones at 12 and 35 and sort of average them. I mentioned this earlier.

I already referred you back to the test earlier. And as another forum member also tried to tell you, there is a disclaimer on the review site telling you that comparing lenses in the left and right columns should not be done because of the differences in the sensor resolution of the bodies used to test the lenses. You conveniently ignored my pointing that out to you in a previous post.

It was indeed very convenient. It also doesn't matter (see below).

Of course it doesn't matter...to you. If you actually acknowledged that you made a mistake, that would be well...a mistake.

That does not mean that the 12-35 is not a reasonably good lens.

It is not. It is an exceptionally good lens.

Olympus SHG lenses are exceptionally good lenses. The Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 is a reasonably good lens.

The 12-35 performs better than every other m4/3 wide-normal zoom yet available, making it an exception, thereby making it "exceptional."

Check your dictionary and you'll find that reasonable corresponds with words like "moderate," "sufficient," and "fair," all of which are rather tepid descriptions for a lens that is so "EXCEPTIONAL." Sorry, but I didn't give these words their definitions. I just know what they are.

You just spin things in whatever manner you need to in order to try and make it fit your agenda now don't you? That was a whole lot of  nonsense and any third grader would see through it.

I dare you to put a 14-35 f2 SHG on the same body as the Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 and compare those results.

But....do you DOUBLE DOG dare me?

Well now...it would kind of screw up your "exceptional" blah-blah now wouldn't?

They will make your head spin.

I doubt that: my head is not that easily spun.

You have demonstrated the art of "spin" all through this thread...It took very little set it on end.

And yes, the Olympus costs twice as much as the Pansonic and is twice the weight and twice as big and has a full f-stop aperture advantage...However, it is a close match to the focal length range of the Panny and the Olympus will demonstrate clearly what an "exceptional" lens' IQ looks like.

I would imagine if you compare images coming out of the m4/3 camera and 4/3 or m4/3 lens of your choice to those from a Hasselblad, Mamiya, or even an M9, you would see a clear difference there, as well.

Huh? Huh? Did you actually re-read that nonsense before you clicked the post icon?

It just means that it doesn't quite reach the overall IQ levels of the lenses I listed above.

Yes, it does.

But then it is still at least an f stop slower than all of the other lenses (2 stops in the case of the Panny/Leica) and won't have quite as nice bokeh as the others as well.

This is mostly true. Faster, yes. Bokeh is better at the longer end. But then, I'm not really expecting bokeh out of any wider angle lens.

You would expect bokeh out of the Olympus 12mm f2 and you would be able to see it because of the larger aperture available. You will not want to compare the bokeh of the Panny/Leica 25 to the Panny 12-35f2.8 at the same focal length and aperture settings. The Panny/Leica is well known for exceptional bokeh properties.

Dan

-- hide signature --

Life is good.

-- hide signature --

Frank


-- hide signature --

Life is good.

It seems to me that you're pretty sensitive about this issue. I'm sorry I ruffled your feathers. But none of this matters, really, because in the first place, as you pointed out in another post, we all choose one set of working methods or another, and there's no need to try to impose that methodology on others, and in the second place this is all just splitting hairs and sawing BBs. The differences between the 12-35 and every m4/3 prime in that range are, at least according to every account I have read and every set of actual images I've seen, minimal. Whichever is better isn't better by enough to matter, at least to me. The convenience of the zoom is another matter.

-- hide signature --

Frank

And now to divert from the point of the thread (comparing the 12-35 f2.8 to primes), you state that I "need to impose that methodology on others." I already agreed that individuals need to make their own choices based on their unique criteria. I'm just an advocate for making an informed decision and making choices knowing what the compromises are relative to the topic of this thread.

Some people choose primes. Some people choose zooms. Some people own both and trade off depending on how they feel when they wake up that day.

Best to you in whatever you decide to do in your photographic walk.

Dan

-- hide signature --

Life is good.

 pinnacle's gear list:pinnacle's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-M1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +6 more
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