Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)

Started May 22, 2012 | Discussions
OldDigiman
Senior MemberPosts: 1,923Gear list
Like?
Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
May 22, 2012

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom? Compare the Panasonic MTF charts (X 14-42 on top, 12-35 on bottom)

MAubrey
Senior MemberPosts: 1,449Gear list
Like?
Re: Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

35mm @2.8 will stop down extremely sharply to 5.6.
--
--Mike

 MAubrey's gear list:MAubrey's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Sony Alpha 7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 Nokton SL II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jhinkey
Senior MemberPosts: 2,203Gear list
Like?
Re: Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

Yes - you really need to compare them at the same f number. The 12-35 will likely get significantly sharper stopped down a bit. Still, it looks very impressive at f/2.8.

The question for many is will the wide angle, f/2.8, and IQ outweigh it's shorter focal length range and price.

Plus, it's still in question what the actual street price will be as well as the degree of weather sealing (i.e., does it just have a mount gasket or is there more sealing in the lens).

John
--

 jhinkey's gear list:jhinkey's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Yohan Pamudji
Senior MemberPosts: 2,857
Like?
Re: Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

OldDigiman wrote:

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom? Compare the Panasonic MTF charts (X 14-42 on top, 12-35 on bottom)

If you need f/2.8 then yes. As long as the IQ of the lens is good-to-very-good it will be worth 3x as much as the pancake zoom to people who need an f/2.8 standard zoom, and early reports point to that being true. You can't take the MTF charts in a vacuum as the only indicator of value.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mister_roboto
Regular MemberPosts: 295
Like?
Re: Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
In reply to Yohan Pamudji, May 22, 2012

There is more to a lens than an f-stop.

As others have said: stopped down- the thing will be tack sharp.

I see a lot of people complaining about the price (not that op is), about how it's "over priced" and that for that cost it should be constant f/2 etc. It's not a consumer lens- it's an enthusiast specialty lens, that's "weather sealed." The 4/3 Olympus f/2 14-35 zoom is $2000+ USD!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AV Janus
Senior MemberPosts: 1,742Gear list
Like?
Re: Is the 12-35 really worth over 3x more? (MFT charts)
In reply to mister_roboto, May 22, 2012

Looking at the samples on SLR Gear test the lens looks more sharp ta f2.8 than on f5.6 on all FL except on 12mm..
I looked at the center of the swirly fabric...
--
Rick Halle wrote:

" Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."

 AV Janus's gear list:AV Janus's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LincolnB
Senior MemberPosts: 3,617Gear list
Like?
according to the charts yes
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

I don't know about your pocketbook but it seems to kick butt at the wide end especially, no question.

 LincolnB's gear list:LincolnB's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Fujifilm X-E1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Danel
Senior MemberPosts: 2,904Gear list
Like?
Look at it like this
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

Latest versions priced at Adorama:

Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 $1886.95

Sony CZ 24-70 f/2.8 $1998.00

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 $2299.00

And, none of those lenses are stabilized (well the Sony is via IBIS I guess)!

The Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 has stabilization. Now, I know it is a smaller lens and thus uses less materials, but it is also priced at $1299.99, which is a relative bargain if you think about it. There, now does everyone feel better?

 Danel's gear list:Danel's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD800 IS Canon PowerShot G15 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vlad S
Senior MemberPosts: 3,024Gear list
Like?
Stop cherry picking
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

OldDigiman wrote:

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom?

I think that many of those questioning the value of the lens make a mistake of picking just one property and comparing it to other available options. Yes, you can find a wider zoom, and a brighter prime, and a bigger range, and a few sharper lenses. But the value of this lens is that it combines a very versatile range, a bright aperture, and O.I.S., and a good image quality. It's a wonderful option if someone wants to minimize lens switching. To many people this combination is worth the price.

Vlad

 Vlad S's gear list:Vlad S's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Yohan Pamudji
Senior MemberPosts: 2,857
Like?
Re: Stop cherry picking
In reply to Vlad S, May 22, 2012

Vlad S wrote:

OldDigiman wrote:

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom?

I think that many of those questioning the value of the lens make a mistake of picking just one property and comparing it to other available options. Yes, you can find a wider zoom, and a brighter prime, and a bigger range, and a few sharper lenses. But the value of this lens is that it combines a very versatile range, a bright aperture, and O.I.S., and a good image quality. It's a wonderful option if someone wants to minimize lens switching. To many people this combination is worth the price.

Exactly my point. Personally I prefer to not pay extra for the convenience of zoom over primes especially when I can get brighter primes that better fit my shooting needs; but for somebody who needs that the combination of f/2.8, convenience and image quality could be a killer combo.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Louis_Dobson
Forum ProPosts: 26,387
Like?
Re: Stop cherry picking
In reply to Vlad S, May 22, 2012

Yes, I agree.

Having started down the prime route, I shall stay there now, but if I were buying from scratch tomorrow this lens and the OM-D would be the first two things in the basket.

Vlad S wrote:

OldDigiman wrote:

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom?

I think that many of those questioning the value of the lens make a mistake of picking just one property and comparing it to other available options. Yes, you can find a wider zoom, and a brighter prime, and a bigger range, and a few sharper lenses. But the value of this lens is that it combines a very versatile range, a bright aperture, and O.I.S., and a good image quality. It's a wonderful option if someone wants to minimize lens switching. To many people this combination is worth the price.

Vlad

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rbattsall
Regular MemberPosts: 376Gear list
Like?
Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's.

I did just that and the Panny to win hands down. Here's the links:

Panny
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic12-35f28x/tloader.htm

Nikon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon24-70f28/tloader.htm

Canon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon24-70f28/tloader.htm

 rbattsall's gear list:rbattsall's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mister_roboto
Regular MemberPosts: 295
Like?
Re: Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's
In reply to rbattsall, May 22, 2012

rbattsall wrote:

Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's.

I did just that and the Panny to win hands down. Here's the links:

Panny
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic12-35f28x/tloader.htm

Nikon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon24-70f28/tloader.htm

Canon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon24-70f28/tloader.htm

Whoa nice! And yes it does.

The Panasonic @ f5.6 35mm looks fantastic!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RoyGBiv
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956
Like?
And don't forget...the 14-42 yields a big fat zero @ f/2.8
In reply to jhinkey, May 22, 2012

jhinkey wrote:

Yes - you really need to compare them at the same f number. The 12-35 will likely get significantly sharper stopped down a bit. Still, it looks very impressive at f/2.8.

Since we're stating the obvious, I figure I'd chip in too and say that you have to consider the fact that you've got absolutely no results from the 14-42mm @ f/2.8, because it is inherently a less capable lens spec. I can't link ot an MTF chart that shows that, but I'm sure you can imagine what it looks like.

-- hide signature --

'I have no responsibilities here whatsoever'

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MadsR
Senior MemberPosts: 2,235Gear list
Like?
If you need the light
In reply to OldDigiman, May 22, 2012

2.8 is 2/3 stop faster in the short end, and at least a full stop faster at 35mm. That would definitely mean something to some people...

 MadsR's gear list:MadsR's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fabgo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,294
Like?
Re: Look at it like this
In reply to Danel, May 22, 2012

Danel wrote:

Latest versions priced at Adorama:

Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 $1886.95

Sony CZ 24-70 f/2.8 $1998.00

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 $2299.00

And, none of those lenses are stabilized (well the Sony is via IBIS I guess)!

The Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 has stabilization. Now, I know it is a smaller lens and thus uses less materials, but it is also priced at $1299.99, which is a relative bargain if you think about it. There, now does everyone feel better?

I don't think this is a valid comparison. The 12-35/2.8 is for all practical purposes equal to a 24-70/5.6 zoom for full frame 35mm. That's the kind of depth-of-field that you get, and there is no speed advantage, as full-frame 35mm has a two-stop ISO advantage (everything else being equal).

In other words you can crank up ISO to 400 on the 35mm, shoot at f/5.6 and get the same noise levels, dynamic range and depth of field as you would shooting the 12-35 at f/2.8, ISO 100.

This lens is wildly overpriced for what it is, and performance, as far as I can tell from the sample images, is mediocre. And who knows what kind of blur problems it has with the Power OIS, like the other X lenses.

The only reason to get this lens is if you are married exclusively to the m4/3 format and use it for two things it's not good at - low light and shallow depth of field.

One further thought - at the wide end it's only 1/2 stop better than the 14-45, which can be had for 1/5 the price of the 12-35/2.8 zoom. And the 14-45 is perfectly sharp wide open. So getting a 25mm or 45mm prime might be a better option if you already own the 14-45.

-- hide signature --

Fabian

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fabgo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,294
Like?
Re: Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's
In reply to rbattsall, May 22, 2012

rbattsall wrote:

Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's.

I did just that and the Panny to win hands down. Here's the links:

Panny
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic12-35f28x/tloader.htm

Nikon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon24-70f28/tloader.htm

Canon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon24-70f28/tloader.htm

As I mentioned above, I don't think comparing at f/2.8 is a valid comparison. The 12-35/2.8 is in practice equivalent to a 24-70/f5.6.

-- hide signature --

Fabian

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 2,731Gear list
Like?
Re: Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's
In reply to fabgo, May 22, 2012

fabgo wrote:

rbattsall wrote:

Compare the SLR Gear tests to Canon and Nikon 24-70mm's.

I did just that and the Panny to win hands down. Here's the links:

Panny
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic12-35f28x/tloader.htm

Nikon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon24-70f28/tloader.htm

Canon
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon24-70f28/tloader.htm

As I mentioned above, I don't think comparing at f/2.8 is a valid comparison. The 12-35/2.8 is in practice equivalent to a 24-70/f5.6.

According to these tests, with the Panasonic at 2.8 and the others at 5.6, the results are comparable. So "hands down" is a bit hyperbolic but still not bad even following the "equivalence" doctrine.

Plus you get lower price, smaller size and 1/3 the weight. Actually it weighs less with a camera attached than the FF lenses alone. If you want a 700g picture taking machine this is the only choice among the three.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Button Pusher
Contributing MemberPosts: 584Gear list
Like?
Re: We need an equivalence forum for all the FF folk
In reply to fabgo, May 22, 2012

Will all you m43 haters please just go back to your big, bulky, heavy systems and spew your equivalence bull in the appropriate forums?

We know you are all up in arms with the strides that m43 cameras and lenses are making that are threatening your manhoods. We realize that FF has more DOF leverage than m43, but you are missing the big point here that m43 was never about maximum DOF capability but rather a system that could provide quality, light weight, and less bulky cameras than the FF behemoths. With good primes and zooms it is delivering on that more every day.

m43 is not the ultimate platform for razor thin DOF capability. Who led you to believe that it EVER claimed to be such? The answer is no one ever did and no one ever will.

Attempting to trash lenses with this endless equivalence line is so old. The horse has already been sent to the glue factory.

When you can make an equivalent size FF camera that with equivalent weight and bulk free lenses, come back and tell us about how cool it was when you managed to warp the laws of physics.

fabgo wrote the same old and tired:

The 12-35/2.8 is for all practical purposes equal to a 24-70/5.6 zoom for full frame 35mm.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tim in upstate NY
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,120Gear list
Like?
+1 Vlad
In reply to Vlad S, May 22, 2012

Vlad S wrote:

OldDigiman wrote:

I know the extra 2mm on the wide end and the constant aperture are cool, but IQ-wise is this lens worth over 3x as much as the pancake zoom?

I think that many of those questioning the value of the lens make a mistake of picking just one property and comparing it to other available options. Yes, you can find a wider zoom, and a brighter prime, and a bigger range, and a few sharper lenses. But the value of this lens is that it combines a very versatile range, a bright aperture, and O.I.S., and a good image quality. It's a wonderful option if someone wants to minimize lens switching. To many people this combination is worth the price.

Vlad

 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads