Panasonic 12-35/2.8 - available end of June, £1,000

Started Apr 5, 2012 | Discussions
mfbernstein
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,518
Like?
Re: Not everyone is so DOF obsessed
In reply to Michael Kaufman, Apr 5, 2012

Michael Kaufman wrote:

mfbernstein wrote:

Wrong. DoF can't be matched on 4/3. Even allowing a 1 stop difference, a 28-70/2.8 and FF camera can be had for significantly less than the price of a 14-35/2 lens.

Maybe, but I'm guessing that the FF camera + 28-70/2.8 will be a much larger package then the MFT one.

If you're going to use the 14-35/2, size better not be important to you...

The 12-35/2.8 on the other hand looks fairly reasonable.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mfbernstein
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,518
Like?
Re: Weather sealed? Probably
In reply to DVSteve, Apr 5, 2012

DVSteve wrote:

Has there been any official confirmation about weather sealing yet?

Officially, no comment one way or the other. But there are indications that it is.

http://www.43rumors.com/new-panasonic-12-35mm-x-lens-alreayd-gets-dissembled/

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
richarddd
Senior MemberPosts: 2,497Gear list
Like?
Re: Not everyone is so DOF obsessed
In reply to TrapperJohn, Apr 5, 2012

For almost everything I shoot, I want deep DOF.

With a m43, you can get more DOF without having to stop down as much as on an APS-C or FF. This means more light on the sensor, which is helpful for holding down noise.

I'm happy to give up shallow DOF for smaller size and lighter weight.

TrapperJohn wrote:

It's one factor amongst many. For everything other than shallow DOF, F2.8=F2.8.

Shallow DOF is expensive to match on 4/3, true... though not as expensive as buying a FF setup...

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mfbernstein
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,518
Like?
Size
In reply to Len_Gee, Apr 5, 2012

Len_Gee wrote:

Do you have link or show how big the lens is?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/11/PanasonicConceptLenses

The mockups show it being not terribly large: 58mm filter size, so probably ~85mm long. My estimate would be overall size slightly smaller than the Olympus (4/3)14-54.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mfbernstein
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,518
Like?
Re: Panasonic 12-35/2.8 - available end of June, £1,000
In reply to Klarno, Apr 5, 2012

Klarno wrote:

The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 has an RRP of £1,210. The Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 has an RRP of £1,356. In real life they sell for less than the RRP.

If the 12-35 ends up having a £1000 RRP, that seems fair.

I'd say most regard the Nikon and Canon 17-55/2.8 lenses as substantially overpriced. There's a reason they don't sell well (particularly the Nikon) compared to the 3rd party alternatives.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tim in upstate NY
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,120Gear list
Like?
High end lenses = $$$$$
In reply to Wormsmeat, Apr 5, 2012

Wormsmeat wrote:

...this M43 pricing is becoming a concern to me.

I also think the EM5 is way overpriced. But it seems to be selling so maybe I'm in a minority.

. . . After having owned a collection of Canon L lenses in the past, $1000 for a fast f/2.8 zoom isn't that much of a problem for me. From the mockup photos, it looks like these two Panny fast zooms are remarkably compact in comparison to what you'd get in comparison for a full frame or APS DSLR. It must have required a lot of original design and engineering to achieve this and Panny isn't likely to sell them at bargain prices IMO.

 Tim in upstate NY's gear list:Tim in upstate NY's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Xellz
Regular MemberPosts: 371
Like?
Re: Panasonic 12-35/2.8 - available end of June, £1,000
In reply to tommiejeep, Apr 5, 2012

Where did i mention f2.8 on m4/3 is razor thin? Try to re-read my post. f2.8 is good enough for most uses. Even 35mm f2.8 at about 1.5m away from subject has only 15cm total dof. That's barely enough to get head in focus. People just should stop making claims like "actually it's 24-70 f5.6" it is not.

tommiejeep wrote:

f2.8 is not even close to 'razor thin' particularly on m43. I stop down anytime I need to but if I want subject isolation.... it is not just about light . I'd rather be able to start at f2.8 than f4+ .
--
Anticipate the Light and wing it when you get it wrong

Tom
http://taja.smugmug.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mfbernstein
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,518
Like?
Autofocus, wide
In reply to Landscapephoto99, Apr 5, 2012

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

Would it be much better than the Oly 14-54 II for m43rds? I guess it will be smaller and does have the constant f2.8, but will it be worth twice the price?

AF on the 14-54II is well over second for S-AF on m4/3. C-AF isn't supported at all. A native lens like the 12-35 will focus 3-5x faster.

Then there's the wide end. The Panasonic goes to 12mm, which is substantially more interesting for landscapes. The 14-54 is also a bit weak at the 14mm end. Presumably the 12-35 (designed 9 years later) won't have that problem.

Size should be close going by the mockups they've shown. The 14-54II does have the advantage of substantially shorter minimum focus distance.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 2,740Gear list
Like?
Re: Panasonic 12-35/2.8 - available end of June, £1,000
In reply to Xellz, Apr 5, 2012

Xellz wrote:

Where did i mention f2.8 on m4/3 is razor thin? Try to re-read my post. f2.8 is good enough for most uses. Even 35mm f2.8 at about 1.5m away from subject has only 15cm total dof. That's barely enough to get head in focus. People just should stop making claims like "actually it's 24-70 f5.6" it is not.

Nevertheless it's rather a shame when the most accurate AF is coupled with not very thin DoF lenses. Or to look at it from a different angle, very thin DoF lenses are hampered by not very accurate AF systems...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
richarddd
Senior MemberPosts: 2,497Gear list
Like?
Re: High end lenses = $$$$$
In reply to Tim in upstate NY, Apr 5, 2012

$1,000 is one thing. £1,000 is about $1,600 at current exchange rates, although pricing is often less in the US than in the UK.

Add in the 35-100/2.8, which is not likely to be cheaper, and it's a chunk of change.

Tim in upstate NY wrote:

. . . After having owned a collection of Canon L lenses in the past, $1000 for a fast f/2.8 zoom isn't that much of a problem for me. From the mockup photos, it looks like these two Panny fast zooms are remarkably compact in comparison to what you'd get in comparison for a full frame or APS DSLR. It must have required a lot of original design and engineering to achieve this and Panny isn't likely to sell them at bargain prices IMO.

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 2,740Gear list
Like?
Re: Awesome, can't wait!
In reply to Andy C Knight, Apr 5, 2012

Andy C Knight wrote:

Aleo Veuliah wrote:

If that is possible to save the cost I would remove any IBIS or OIS, really don't use it a lot, and I am still used to the times when there was no image stabilization, no AF, and ISO 400

(sometimes I pushed the film but lot's of nice grain)

You should have tried the Konica 3200 film... bet you would have hated the grain then!

There is a point in wanting the option for a non IS version of a lens. There are an IS and a non-IS version of the Canon 70-200/4, and one of them has more optical elements than the other...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeremy_T
Senior MemberPosts: 1,224Gear list
Like?
Re: Autofocus, wide
In reply to mfbernstein, Apr 5, 2012

mfbernstein wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

Would it be much better than the Oly 14-54 II for m43rds? I guess it will be smaller and does have the constant f2.8, but will it be worth twice the price?

AF on the 14-54II is well over second for S-AF on m4/3. C-AF isn't supported at all. A native lens like the 12-35 will focus 3-5x faster.

My experience with the 14-54mm mkii differs. I find it to be relatively slow, but under a second generally (in reasonable light on an E-PM1, that is; indoors on a Pen, and all bets are off). It's roughly similar to the original Pen kit zoom or the 20 f/1.7, though as you say there's no CAF.

Still, that's not great, and the thing is pretty bulky, and as I mentioned f/2.8 is not all that fast on M4/3, so I generally don't use it much.

I'm sure the Panasonic will be better for dedicated M4/3 shooters, I just find its price annoying and out of line with what it should deliver. I brought up the 14-54 mkii mainly because I think it was priced and positioned appropriately for what it did on Four Thirds. Even the much lauded 12-60mm f/2.8-4 had a launch MSRP of 600 GBP, so it's difficult for me to understand what the 12-35 here will bring to the table that demands a 2x premium.

I feel like Olympus "got it" with respect to how they needed to manage equivalency and build out the product line for Four Thirds, but that just doesn't seem to have carried over to M4/3. Here we pay more for less. I don't know how much longer they can get away with that, really, before the competition starts to take them down a peg.

 Jeremy_T's gear list:Jeremy_T's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jogger
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,320Gear list
Like?
Re: Not everyone is so DOF obsessed
In reply to richarddd, Apr 5, 2012

richarddd wrote:

For almost everything I shoot, I want deep DOF.

I guess that works for you. But, this this (and the 35-100) are event/PJ cameras. They will be used at weddings, new conferences, sports even, etc, etc.. the people shoot FF f2.8 zooms are shooting wide open for the most part. Even if stopped down to f4 on FF, the f2.8 on m43 cannot even come close in DOF control.

Can you imagine a wedding photo turning in their FF f2.8 zooms for these "equivilent" m43 lenses? I dont think so... because theyre not equivilent at all.

With a m43, you can get more DOF without having to stop down as much as on an APS-C or FF. This means more light on the sensor, which is helpful for holding down noise.

I'm happy to give up shallow DOF for smaller size and lighter weight.

TrapperJohn wrote:

It's one factor amongst many. For everything other than shallow DOF, F2.8=F2.8.

Shallow DOF is expensive to match on 4/3, true... though not as expensive as buying a FF setup...

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Xellz
Regular MemberPosts: 371
Like?
Re: Panasonic 12-35/2.8 - available end of June, £1,000
In reply to tt321, Apr 5, 2012

tt321 wrote:

Xellz wrote:

Where did i mention f2.8 on m4/3 is razor thin? Try to re-read my post. f2.8 is good enough for most uses. Even 35mm f2.8 at about 1.5m away from subject has only 15cm total dof. That's barely enough to get head in focus. People just should stop making claims like "actually it's 24-70 f5.6" it is not.

Nevertheless it's rather a shame when the most accurate AF is coupled with not very thin DoF lenses. Or to look at it from a different angle, very thin DoF lenses are hampered by not very accurate AF systems...

Not really a shame, it's totally expected and not that many people like really thin dof. At least i didn't meet any normal person, who is far from photography and who would like how really thin dof looks like. At least people expect subject to be in focus. Though 35-100 will have quite nice control over dof and should satisfy even razor thin dof addicted people

Anyway, m4/3 still has options for really thin dof with oly 45mm or even pana-leica 25mm if you get close enough. I'm just wondering, did people even consider when buying camera with smaller sensor, that DoF will be different?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bilgy_no1
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,862
Like?
As expected (and compared to 14-54 and 12-60 it's crazy)
In reply to mfbernstein, Apr 5, 2012

Whatever happened to the good old days of the great value HG lenses of the 4/3 system???

mfbernstein wrote:

via 43rumors from Amateur Photographer (who has since removed the comments about the 12-35mm).

The good news is that we've only got a few more months to wait. The bad news is that the prices are going to be a step up compared to the 'high grade' line of 4/3 lenses. Heck, Canon's 24-70/2.8 is about the same price.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tim in upstate NY
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,120Gear list
Like?
Re: High end lenses = $$$$$
In reply to richarddd, Apr 5, 2012

richarddd wrote:

$1,000 is one thing. £1,000 is about $1,600 at current exchange rates, although pricing is often less in the US than in the UK.

Add in the 35-100/2.8, which is not likely to be cheaper, and it's a chunk of change.

. . . The Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II is $2500 and the non-stabilized 24-70mm f/2.8L II is $2300. Panasonic's two fast zooms are considerably less expensive and more compact while giving up only DOF control in comparison. This comparison is only valid though if the Panny zooms can match the IQ and build quality of the Canon L's which remains to be seen of course.

 Tim in upstate NY's gear list:Tim in upstate NY's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Crimguy
Contributing MemberPosts: 503Gear list
Like?
Re: High end lenses = $$$$$
In reply to richarddd, Apr 5, 2012

I'm not one to endorse things that are needlessly expensive, but provided it's weather-sealed with high quality optics and decent build quality (plastic everywhere at that price point would be frightening), $1000 is not very much for top-tier 2.8 glass. Compare the prices of competing products:

$1399 - EF 24-70 f/2.8 L (1st gen)
$2299 - EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II (a ripoff, I know)
$1800 - Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8
$1899 - Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8
$2599 - Zuiko 14-35 f/2.0D
$10,995 - Noctilux 0.95/50 (Just had to throw it in there!)

The trick I suppose is to convince us, the consumer, that the dinky, lightweight lens Panasonic puts in our hands is somehow on the same value scale as the above products. The above lenses ooze quality when you hold them, have buttery smooth operation, and fantastic optics (I've only held the nikon and Olympus, but own the Canon and a Noctilux f/1).

If it's really really good, I'll buy one and it'll be glued to my camera most of the time. Lenses are a long term investment, unlike digital camera bodies.

 Crimguy's gear list:Crimguy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tomnorth
Regular MemberPosts: 309Gear list
Like?
Looking forward to some good f/2.8 glass for m4/3
In reply to mfbernstein, Apr 5, 2012

I am really looking forward to this. I will definitely invest in some good f/2.8 glass for my GX1. Thanks for the tip.

 tomnorth's gear list:tomnorth's gear list
Nikon D700 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Xellz
Regular MemberPosts: 371
Like?
Re: Not everyone is so DOF obsessed
In reply to Jogger, Apr 5, 2012

I guess they shot wide open quite often not only because of DoF...

Physically it is f2.8 and only eq. FF dof is different, everything else is quite similar, necessary design, size relative to sensor, light gathering ability and don't think it's more easy to produce it.

p.s.

A review of sigma 30mm f2.8 is rather handy. DoF of f2.8 at 30mm http://www.superflexible.com/photography/sigma30mmp2.htm Do you see that only one eye is in focus?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Paul Meakin
Forum MemberPosts: 83
Like?
Re: High end lenses = $$$$$
In reply to richarddd, Apr 5, 2012

Yep, the EM-5 is £1000 here in the UK without the 12-50mm, £1150 with. I don't know if Panasonic follow the same pricing model, though.

richarddd wrote:

$1,000 is one thing. £1,000 is about $1,600 at current exchange rates, although pricing is often less in the US than in the UK.

Tim in upstate NY wrote:

. . . After having owned a collection of Canon L lenses in the past, $1000 for a fast f/2.8 zoom isn't that much of a problem for me. From the mockup photos, it looks like these two Panny fast zooms are remarkably compact in comparison to what you'd get in comparison for a full frame or APS DSLR. It must have required a lot of original design and engineering to achieve this and Panny isn't likely to sell them at bargain prices IMO.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads