Previous page Next page

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm F2.8 ASPH Power OIS Preview

May 2012 | By Andy Westlake
Buy on GearShop

Preview based on a pre-production Lumix G X-Vario 12-35mm F2.8 (H-HS12035)

It's almost four years since Panasonic introduced the first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera in the shape of the Lumix DMC-G1, a most unrevolutionary-looking product that ushered in a brave new era of camera system design. In the intervening years we've seen a slew of cameras of this type as all of the major manufacturers (with the curious exception of Canon) have joined the fray. We've also seen a welcome resurgence of compact fast primes along with the development of clever collapsing zooms, as manufacturers have sought to capitalise on the inherent size advantage over SLR designs. But one type of lens highly valued by more-serious photographers has been conspicuous by its absence - the high quality, large aperture zoom. Panasonic has now addressed this with a lens it's labelling H-HS12035 - an optically-stabilized 12-35mm F2.8 in its premium 'X' range.

Unlike Panasonic's previous X lenses, the 12-35mm is not a powerzoom, instead featuring a conventional rotary zoom ring as favoured by stills photographers. It boasts metal-barreled construction, and in a first for Panasonic a degree of environmental sealing, with a rubber seal around the lens mount to prevent dust or water ingress into the camera. But perhaps most striking is its compact size; at less than 3" (75mm) in either diameter or length it's scarcely bigger than a typical 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 kit zoom for APS-C SLRs, and it weighs in at under 12oz (~300g).

Naturally the lens is designed with movie shooting in mind, with a linear stepper motor for near-silent autofocus, and Panasonic's video-optimised 'Power OIS' stabilization system. The optical system features elements crafted from Ultra Extra-Low Dispersion (UED) and Ultra High Refractive (UHR) glass, and uses Panasonic's Nano Surface Coating to minimize internal reflections and flare. The diaphragm uses 7 rounded blades to give a circular aperture for attractive rendition of out-of-focus backgrounds. On paper this all adds up to a tempting specification.

Being a Micro Four Thirds lens, the 12-35mm will work on Olympus cameras just as well as Panasonic's Lumix G models, and it looks like particularly interesting match to the Olympus OM-D E-M5 - one of our favourite cameras of the past year. Of course it's also likely to appeal to users of Panasonic's higher-end bodies, such as the DMC-GH2 and GX1.

Headline features

  • 24-70mm-equivalent focal length; constant F2.8 maximum aperture
  • 'Power OIS' optical image stabilization
  • Nano surface coating for suppression of flare and ghosting
  • 'HD' designation - near silent operation during video shooting
  • Micro Four Thirds mount for Panasonic and Olympus cameras

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm F2.8 ASPH Power OIS specifications

Product Code H-HS12035
Maximum format size Four Thirds
Focal length 12-35mm
35mm equivalent focal length 24-70mm
Diagonal angle of view 84° - 34°
Maximum aperture F2.8
Minimum aperture F22
Lens Construction • 14 elements in 9 groups
• 4 aspherical elements
• 1 UED element
• 1 UHR element
Number of diaphragm blades 7, rounded
Minimum focus • 0.25m / 0.82ft
Maximum magnification • Approx. 0.17x (0.34x 35mm-equivalent)
AF motor type • Linear Stepper Motor
Focus method Internal
Zoom method Extending front
Image stabilization • Power OIS
Filter thread • 58mm
• Does not rotate on focus
Supplied accessories* • Front and rear caps
• H-HS12035 Lens hood
• Lens storage bag
Weight 305g (10.8 oz)
Dimensions 67.6mm diameter x 73.8mm length
(2.7 x 2.9 in)
Lens Mount Micro Four Thirds

* Supplied accessories may differ in each country or area


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2012 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
302
I own it
92
I want it
28
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 106
RJG68
By RJG68 (May 19, 2013)

I have the Panasonic 14-45mm, f/3.5-5.6 lens which I use on a Panasonic G2 & G3 (both purchased for end of production run prices). I'm reasonably satisfied with the lens, but the image quality is noticeably poorer than that of the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7. Also, I've never had anything as wide-angled as a 12mm lens (24mm in 35mm terms), and don't know that it would make that much of a difference to me; and I'd possibly regret the loss of the 10mm on the tele-end (35mm instead of 45mm) – but the f/2.8 across the range is a serous temptation (I dislike using flash).

Would an upgrade to the 12-35mm f/2.8 give me an improvement in image quality comparable to what I get from the 20mm, or am I just wasting my money (since I've seen no bargains anywhere for this lens)?

Your thoughts are appreciated. Thanks. RJ

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (Apr 6, 2013)

I don't understand people fascinated with this lens. It's equivalent to 24-70/5.6 on full frame, but doesn't achieve anywhere close resolution, it offers pretty low value for money.

I still have an old Pentax-FA 24-90mm/3.5-4.5 lens which is almost the same size and weight, covers bigger range, collects significantly more light, and have a lot better resolution on FF too. Did I mention Pentax is several times cheaper? Even using 10 year old technology we should have had the same size and weight 12-45mm/1.7-2.2 m4/3 zoom at 1/3 the price. If they ever make a 1:2 focal reducer, that what one will get using that Pentax lens.

Great achievement, Panasonic made a less capable zoom at much higher price.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Apr 16, 2013)

A F3.5 - 4.5 lens collecting more light than a constant F2.8 lens??
Wow, Pentax has truly been ahead of their time!!

As for comparisons of the two lenses, the pentax has less-than-stellar (read: poor) construction, and yeah no weather sealing.
I would see great use of this lens for general video work, steadicam or lowlight shooting where you want more in focus but gather enough light.

2 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (May 10, 2013)

You've got it a little wrong. The equivalent to this would be a 24-70/2.8 on a full frame. The different crop factors of cameras only effect the depth-of-field, NOT the light gathering capabilities.

For instance, you take a hand-held light meter and you meter a scene and it comes out to be 1/500th of a second at f/2.8. You dial in 1/500th of a second and f/2.8 on your full frame camera as you would a micro 4/3rds camera. You don't do any conversion in your head to make the exposure different for the 4/3rds camera. You dial it in the exact same as you would for any other camera.

Depth-of-field wise it's a little different, but NOT with exposure or light-gathering capabilities.

3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jul 23, 2013)

ksgant - actually he's right in terms of both depth-of-field and 'light gathering abilities.' The key thing to realise is that light gathering ability is not the same as exposure.

Yes a mFT and Full Frame camera will give you the same image brightness at any given shutter speed, f-number and ISO combination (and will receive the same light per-unit-area). But that's because 'ISO' is defined to make it that way. F2.8=F2.8=F2.8 but ISO 100 does not always equal ISO 100.

In its most simple terms, exposure (shutter speed and f-number) tells you how much light you get per unit area. A FF sensor is larger so, for the same exposure, you're actually capturing more light, and the ISO standard dictates how bright an image that light data has to create.

It is true that a 24-70 F5.6 would project the same /total/ amount of light (per image, not per area) as a 12-35 F2.8 on mFT but what that means in terms of ultimate image quality comes down to what camera you mount it on.

2 upvotes
josebaking
By josebaking (Feb 17, 2013)

The 12mm wide angle on this 12-35 is not as wide as the 12mm on the Panasonic LX7.

0 upvotes
straylightrun
By straylightrun (8 months ago)

youdontsay.jpeg

0 upvotes
steveTQP
By steveTQP (Nov 27, 2012)

I too, like my equipment looking "new" as long as possible, but my BIG concern is Sharpness! If this Panny 12-35 is significantly sharper than the kit Oly 12-50 on the Oly OM-D, then this lens is a viable alternative. Otherwise, I would see no advantage to spending the extra $1,000 on this lens over the Oly 12-50.

1 upvote
tanniewu
By tanniewu (Jul 23, 2012)

I think this 12-35/2.8 and the other 35-100/2.8 are two must buy lens, at least until perhaps Oly makes a better 12-35/2.0 at reasonable price.

The larger and constant aperture is very handy in in-door and evening lighting situations. Although the it's not comparable to APS-C and FF DOF, in reality you don't really always need such shallow DOF. When you want that, one can always use 25/1.4 or 45/1.8, and it comes in a lighter and smaller package overall.

1 upvote
nrdlnd
By nrdlnd (Sep 1, 2012)

Hello,
I don't understand this complaining about not the same DOF in APS-C and FF!? The better DOF in 4/3 is an ADVANTAGE in most situations! I think this DOF thing is actually a FUD thing from Canikon & Co! I'm an experienced photographer since abour 40 years and I've even been working commersially. Most of the time is too little DOF the problem. This is actually one of the great advantages with the 4/3 system, the much better DOF (depth of field). It's somewhat limited by the diffraction effect that's seen above about f8.

Sometimes you want less DOF (for me not very often and then and only then is there any advantage with FF). Besides 4/3 is FF as the whole system is engineered around this format. APS-C is not full frame as it is based on another bigger format.

Per

1 upvote
gyang
By gyang (Nov 1, 2012)

just curious, have you ever used a m4/3 in work? and if so, what did your customers think? thanks.

i agree with the part that the smaller cmos makes it practical to use f/2.8 in many situations as it would be too narrow for f/2.8 with a ff in people photography.

0 upvotes
dfswan
By dfswan (Jun 22, 2012)

I always get a kick out all these comments. Yes the lens is a little pricey, but in order to get the 2.8 constant f-stop in a zoom certainly raises the price as it does with any 24mm – 70mm equivalent. I love my 25mm Leica/Lumix 1.4 lens, but I sure would love a zoom with some more speed than the present 3.5-4.0 variety. This is on my wish list for sure.

Yes you do lose some DOF with smaller sensor cameras, but you can’t change physics. You want a lot of DOF the get a full format sensor camera and lug around a large suitcase full of large lenses. I can carry a camera, a 200-600mm (equiv.), a macro, a fast 50mm (equiv.), and a 28-240mm (equiv.) all in a small over the shoulder camera case. My camera and my 300mm are just about the same size as my wife’s Nikon 5100 with its standard 18-55mm lens. That is what M4/3rds is all about!

The real trade off is the lack of color depth with the smaller sensors. Hopefully future technology will fill this gap. (GH3?)

0 upvotes
al_in_philly
By al_in_philly (Jun 6, 2012)

I'm sooooo glad to see this lens come out. Making the jump from 4/3 to M4/3 has been almost painless, but the one thing I miss is the assortment of fast, beautiful, glass that Zuiko had made for their 4/3 bodies. Since picking up an OM-D, 99.9% of my shooting has been with the Pan/Leica 25mm f1.4, keeping the way-too-slow f3.5+ 12-50 zoom around for rainy days and the occaisional macro shot. With my 4/3 e-30, I used the larger Pan/Leica 25mm f1.4 an awful lot, but would switch to a 12-60 f2.8 for walking around outdoors from time to time.

OK, for $1000 I'd like to have the same zoom range and optical quality as what Oly was able to do for that price with their 4/3 12-60 (how Zuiko ever made a lens with a 5:1 zoom range that was as fast and sharp as they did, I'll never understand), but I'll settle for a good, fast, 12-35. I've learned long ago that good glass isn't cheap, and that when you want just the right image, there's nothing like having the right lens.

1 upvote
ebosch
By ebosch (May 25, 2012)

maybe a second, different version of this very same lens but with power zoom (and hence smaller size) ? This way people would not freak out because of the exclusion of the manual focus-zoom ring, and many enthusiast videographers would be delighted.
Imagine a 24-70 2.8 equiv.(yes, I am aware of the DOF equiv. of f5.6) in tiny size, mounted on a GX1 or E-P3. It would be very practical and discreet!

1 upvote
h2k
By h2k (Jul 21, 2012)

I wish for a power-zoom also - and i only shoot stills.

0 upvotes
Ann Chaikin
By Ann Chaikin (May 25, 2012)

Yes it is expensive. But if it has good image quality I could really use it! Where I live overcast and dark is the name of the game. This lens would be my primary walk around lens. I want one... assuming it has good image quality.

0 upvotes
gambale
By gambale (May 23, 2012)

Compared to my Summilux 25 1.4 this looks bad, sorry! Better to have two lenses with good quality.

1 upvote
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 24, 2012)

And the rest of us should give a damn... why exactly?

5 upvotes
SteveNunez
By SteveNunez (May 22, 2012)

Pricing is disappointing......Panasonic has a chance here to lure prosumers to micro four thirds with high quality glass but if priced at near dslr like prices the enticement wanes a bit......sad really!

6 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 24, 2012)

Don't buy it.
As far as DSLR prices go, take a look at high grade Canons' with constant aperture. They cost at least double.

2 upvotes
Bryan M
By Bryan M (Sep 6, 2012)

While the price is high it's a lot lower than what you would pay for the Nikon or Canon 24-70 2.8.

0 upvotes
mcam
By mcam (Sep 22, 2012)

Couldn't agree more. Pana had a great opportunity with the 12-35 f2.8 there, but... Now Fujifilm has come up with a 18-55 f2.8-4 and it's even slightly smaller (65 x 70.4 mm). I hope Oly can soon give us a m43 version 14-54 f2.8-3.5 with a reasonable price tag.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (May 22, 2012)

Sony DT 16-50mm f/2.8 SSM costs $700-$800. Panasonic wants $1300 for the equivalent 12-35, which also costs less to make (less glass, less surfaces to polish)? I am very disappointed they decided to go this high-margin/low-volume way. Especially given the fact that it allows to extract higher profits (compared to high-volume/low-margin way) only for "status" goods, and the X brand lens certainly does not carry any status. Incompetent marketoids.

3 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (May 22, 2012)

I also think a price of $1300 is on the high side, but the Sony 16-50mm doesn't have OIS and has 2 less aspherical lenses than the Pany 12-35mm (it has 4) so can't really assume that the 12-35mm is cheaper to make. If you look at the Canon 17-55mm IS, it costs $1100 now but listed much higher 10 years ago.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (May 22, 2012)

$100 Panasonic kit lens has OIS, so it is not much of a cost.
Sony 16-50/2.8 and Sigma 17-50/2.8 ($650, with stabilization BTW) weigh twice as much, have more lenses inside (16 and 17 vs 14) and bigger lenses, and cost just half. Hence, this Panasonic is awfully overpriced.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
bens9
By bens9 (May 23, 2012)

Advanced new things cost more money not just because it is more expensive to make an individual item...

Kit lens probably sells 100:1 compared to this lens, that means the same millions that went into R&D is split 100 times more on kit.

And if you don't think a lens that is twice as big is not significantly easier to design, you really do live in your own world.

Bottomline is, cost of design is a much greater portion of this lens' price than material and the variable cost of manufacture. If u want value for money, buy a bigger camera.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (May 23, 2012)

"Advanced new things cost more money not just because it is more expensive to make an individual item..."

True, for _Advanced new things_. The lens has nothing new or advanced.

"Kit lens probably sells 100:1 compared to this lens, that means the same millions that went into R&D is split 100 times more on kit."

True, but if they would price it right (should be $500-$600) and offer it as kit variant, it would sell much much better, splitting the fixed costs between much higher number of units. It's a choice, and they made the bad one.
Besides, no R and not much D in that particular product (good old OIS/chip/motors/glass types etc). Most fixed costs for it are in tooling I guess.

1 upvote
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 24, 2012)

So, let me get this straight, you're saying that a high-quality, constant aperture, all (or "much") metal lens similar to, let's say, the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM, which costs about 2,700$ should cost less than 1300$ (which btw is half the price) just because you say so?
Ok, then I want a Hasselblad for 200$. Or else they're shitty.

4 upvotes
mirajai
By mirajai (May 30, 2012)

peevee1, the Power OIS is somewhat new and represents a degree of research and development over the previous Mega OIS. Power OIS is supposedly better at dampening low frequency vibrations.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Aug 6, 2012)

Please don't use the Sony as a reference for an APS-C f/2.8 zoom. It's not very good.. Either look at the economical but decent Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 ($400) or at the stunning Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 ($1400). Somehow I doubt the Panasonic can match the Nikkor though.

0 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (May 22, 2012)

Real full sized images at DCResource, including the first, a landscape at f6.3,
which has me sold on this lens once I go M4/3.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (May 21, 2012)

The city-scape images look extremely sharp (wonder though if they used the lens-hood, as contrast is a bit low on a couple of city images). The portraits, pizza images et al show nice subject separation with good looking bokeh. It will likely be similar to my experience with my only other f2.8 lens, the Sigma 30 2.8, in that you'll need to get fairly close to your subject to blur the background nicely. But this is fine as it's a versatile range of focal lengths for landscape shooters and generalist. Nice job with the preview and samples. Thanks DPR.

My only nit is I wish Panasonic would dump the rubber knurled focus ring as even brand new lenses collect lint from day one, which you can see clearly on the lens product shots. Call me superficial, it's a bit disconcerting to have my Pany lenses begin to look used the day I open the box.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (May 21, 2012)

It's a pre-production lens, folks. All this talk of soft corners etc is jumping the gun.

0 upvotes
Notnard
By Notnard (May 21, 2012)

Serious money

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-H-HS12035-LUMIX-12-35mm-Series/dp/B00843ERMW/?tag=rumors04-20

0 upvotes
William Koehler
By William Koehler (May 21, 2012)

Sadly, $1000 isn't what it was just a few years ago. Just a few years ago I purchased one of these for maybe a quarter of the current going rate.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/594199-USA/Pentax_21750_Zoom_Telephoto_60_250mm_f_4.html

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (May 21, 2012)

With all the drinking you people do and the fixation on photos of wine and cocktail books (and I seem to recall an earlier fixation on photos of liquor stores), I predict the next set of sample photos will be shot on location at the Betty Ford Center.

6 upvotes
William Koehler
By William Koehler (May 21, 2012)

I greatly prefer their wine to your whine.

5 upvotes
wkay
By wkay (May 21, 2012)

whoopee, mediocre IQ, poor contrast, hi CA, and soft corners.

2 upvotes
Chuck Fralick
By Chuck Fralick (May 21, 2012)

Troll

4 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (May 21, 2012)

yep..troll indeed

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
jalywol
By jalywol (May 21, 2012)

These look very good. Is there any way at all to get a couple of shots in there with the lens on a GH2? It would be greatly appreciated, if possible.

Thanks!

1 upvote
kayone
By kayone (May 21, 2012)

I'm pretty excited, this will go perfectly with my recently purchased OM-D. Weather sealing is a big plus too

1 upvote
Alan Ernst
By Alan Ernst (May 21, 2012)

It is high time Panasonic / Olympus release a top notch standard zoom to rival the optical performance of the best 24 - 70mm lenses out there. So far, I have not been thrilled with any lenses in the Lumix line-up (including the two PZ X's). Corner sharpness of the Olympus 12-50, which otherwise would be a really nice lens, is also disappointing...
I don't mind paying more for a quality product, but it better be an impressive performer: superior corner to corner sharpness at all focal lengths from f2.8 - f16, minimal CA, light fall off and distortion and no vignetting when using filters and filter holders at the wide end.
The sealing must be more than just along the lens mount - some of the Lumix lenses are big dust suckers (45-200; 100-300; 14-140), so they better address this issue or it won't be worth the price!
It would also be nice, if they looked at some consistency in lens threads and had made this a 62mm instead of 58mm diameter (or same as the 35-100mm lens that is planned).

2 upvotes
oluv
By oluv (May 21, 2012)

i am not too impressed with the samples. at 12mm the edges seem quite soft even stopped down to f/4.5
doesn't look like a 1000€ lens to me :(

1 upvote
Caleido
By Caleido (May 21, 2012)

And where do you see a sample picture where the focus is set on an extreme corner or a straight picture of a flat wall?

Don't confuse OOF with softness.

4 upvotes
T3
By T3 (May 21, 2012)

Who really cares about corner sharpness at faster apertures unless you are shooting straight at a flat wall? Corners will naturally be soft in these sample images at faster apertures because they are out of focus due to the shallower DOF.

2 upvotes
headofdestiny
By headofdestiny (May 21, 2012)

F2.8 isn't exactly a fast aperture on m4/3. It is equivalent to shooting f5.6 on a 35mm sensor, and I'd expect corners to be pretty sharp at f5.6 on a 35mm sensor.

1 upvote
redeye47
By redeye47 (May 21, 2012)

2.8 is 2.8. period. You can use faster shutter speed, no matter format size. Yes, you are right as far as depth of field... only.

10 upvotes
Klarno
By Klarno (May 21, 2012)

@headofdestiny: 2.8 is a pretty darn good f/ratio on any zoom, and only very small format zooms have greater f/ratios. Don't confuse optical design with format.

4 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (May 21, 2012)

This release exposes even more Sony's lack of lenses for its NEXs.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
10 upvotes
headofdestiny
By headofdestiny (May 21, 2012)

You do realize that m4/3 had a couple of years head start? Not to mention, this would only be the equivalent to an f3.8 zoom on NEX, which isn't all that exciting.

1 upvote
BJL
By BJL (May 21, 2012)

@headofdestiny: I agree that this lens is roughly comparable to a NEX zoom lens of f/3.8 at the long end ... which makes it well over one stop faster than the long end of any actual NEX zoom lens.

0 upvotes
Klarno
By Klarno (May 21, 2012)

m4/3 may have had a couple years head start, but NEX has what...four zooms (one of which was only recently announced) and four primes? by the same point in time m4/3 had 5 primes and 11 zooms, including ultrawide focal lengths that NEX still doesn't cover.

4 upvotes
coroander
By coroander (May 21, 2012)

Look at the size of Canon's constant aperture 17-55mm f/2.8 (27-88mm EFL) for APS-C and you'll get an idea of why Sony isn't making such a lens for NEX. Canon's constant aperture zoom is more than twice the size and weight of this lens. APS-C sensors are too large for compact systems, the lenses are too big or too slow.

10 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (May 22, 2012)

Sony can use Alpha-mount 16-50/2.8 through adapter. And it is only $780, not $1,300.

0 upvotes
ebosch
By ebosch (May 25, 2012)

yes, but with an adapter that cost 150$ or 300$ with AF, no stabilization, with added considerable bulk and weight, not to mention the ugly form factor when mounted to NEX cameras (which also lose the point of the NEX compactness). I think panasonic can't help but set the price that high.

1 upvote
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (Aug 24, 2012)

Also bear in mind that m43 has 2 manufacturers churning out lenses to just Sony for NEX.

I have no axe to grind as I have both systems.

0 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (May 21, 2012)

Well done Panasonic Lumix, now we have a pro medium range professional lens

6 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (May 21, 2012)

f4 landscape?
f2.8 counter crew:
f2.8 flower?

Is this how one takes pics to show the capabilities of a lens?

Seems you let a 'pancake' tester test a 2.8 Constant Aperture Zoom lens.

Next time please get a photographer, a well rounded photographer, to take the samples.

Thank you.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Juraj Lacko
By Juraj Lacko (May 21, 2012)

And who cares for f22? Once somebody wants to spend extra cash for f2.8 zoom lens then obvioustly wants to know how the lens can perform wide open.

4 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (May 21, 2012)

And I thought I was the only one who thought that the sample photos have customarily fallen short in terms of demonstrating the imaging quality of the equipment being tested. For one thing, the "arty" shots are seldom helpful. And we need a more thought-out choice of parameters. And for heaven's sake, why do we get so many saloon shots? Doesn't anyone go to church?

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (May 21, 2012)

I agree with Juraj. Stopped down to f8-13 every lens shows its best. It is the open aperture when flaws come out (and likewise the widely discussed DoF can be assessed).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
NZ Scott
By NZ Scott (May 21, 2012)

I'm afraid you're wrong in terms of Micro Four Thirds lenses. Most of the big-aperture lenses are at their best around f4 to f5.6. Diffraction is already setting in from f8 to f11.

10 upvotes
Phoque
By Phoque (May 21, 2012)

At the top of the page, one who is so inclined can read: 'Preview'.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (May 21, 2012)

The F4 landscape is an attempt to show performance as wide-open as the lens will go, given the base ISO of the camera used.

I could have shot a gallery at F6.3-F8 but it would have shown nothing useful about the lens. Which is what these shots are for - not for entering in a competition.

3 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (May 21, 2012)

More church shots. Definitely.

0 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (May 21, 2012)

Most people will buy the lens to hopefully enter a competition.

They don't spend $1000+ to see f2.8 on a lens like this.

I respectfully, and as one who has visited this site daily, almost from its inception, standby my 'pancake tester' remark.

Do you think Olympus will follow up with their own 2.8's?

Thank you.

0 upvotes
GodSpeaks
By GodSpeaks (May 21, 2012)

I am so glad that this lens is NOT power zoom.

2 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (May 21, 2012)

True, guess the power zooms are aimed at the consumers, this is a Pro lens or for anyone who is more advanced on photography, and glad it is weather sealed

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (May 21, 2012)

I'd rather have power zoom as long as you could turn it on or off, Power zooming is very valuable for video shooting. It's much smoother than manual zooming. And if you think that "pro" or serious shooters don't shoot video, or would have no desire for a constant f/2.8 lens for video shooting, you are clearly out of touch.

6 upvotes
GodSpeaks
By GodSpeaks (May 22, 2012)

If you are shooting HD then you shouldn't be zooming while shooting anyway. Use the zoom to frame the shot, then start shooting. Don't use AF while shooting video either. NEX has it over micro43 here with peaking. It would be nice if Panasonic added peaking to their cameras.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (May 21, 2012)

Does this mean lens reviews are going to resume soon? So far there's been 1 other lens preview and no reviews since October 2010!

18 upvotes
pc168
By pc168 (May 21, 2012)

The spec and body build are good. But if the rumoured price (€1100) is true, it's way overpriced for a M4/3 lens.

Anyway, I expect the focus ring is merely for manual focus override and it will not rotate during AF.

Last but not least, there is no distance scale, pity.

3 upvotes
Chris Tofalos
By Chris Tofalos (May 21, 2012)

A welcome addition which increases low-light capabilities. As a professional user I can't wait for this and the complimentary 35-100/F2.8 to arrive on the shelves. I'll then be ditching my entire (and heavy) Canon outfit completely.

A 100-300/F4, 200-500/F5.6 and a 2x converter would give me every lens I would ever be likely to need...

1 upvote
Don051348
By Don051348 (Sep 3, 2012)

I'm with you on the 100-300, but make it a 300-500 (I hate when there is overlap in the zoom range). Or offer some larger telephoto primes after the 100-300, though I'm sure the cost would be prohibitive for most folks (including me).

0 upvotes
JasonQR
By JasonQR (May 21, 2012)

Looks like we have some Community fans at DPR http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=streets+ahead

0 upvotes
Nom Chompsky
By Nom Chompsky (May 21, 2012)

Oh man, you totally beat me to it. Is this a thing now? can we really casually create slang? Also "streets ahead" makes no sense at all.

0 upvotes
goshigoo
By goshigoo (May 21, 2012)

Same as 7-14 f/4, you can see the price in JPY is the same:
http://panasonic.jp/dc/lens/lumix_g_vario_7-14.html
http://panasonic.jp/dc/lens/lumix_g_x_vario_12-35.html

0 upvotes
tinternaut
By tinternaut (May 21, 2012)

Do the aperture blades move constantly when connected to Olympus bodies (source of annoyance with my 14 f2.5 and 20 f1.7)?

1 upvote
tt321
By tt321 (May 21, 2012)

Maybe F2.8 is not wide enough to warrant such aperture dances.

0 upvotes
Federico Alberto
By Federico Alberto (May 21, 2012)

Turn off Full-time AF in Setup menu A of your Olympus PEN or OM-D body. That should stop the aperture blades' rattle noise.

1 upvote
Ulfric M Douglas
By Ulfric M Douglas (May 21, 2012)

The size looks great.
What's it for again?
I'd be a bit frustrated taking this on country walks with the 35mm top end, but totally applaud the construction and intent of the thing.
Is life becoming even more frustrating for those wishing to go micro from their zuiko 12-60 workhorses? What to buy? Still not replaceable.
(How can it be called a SHG, that's surely an Olympus Zuiko designation. Go read biofos & Wrotniak and please stop saying SHG folks.)

1 upvote
tinternaut
By tinternaut (May 21, 2012)

We can decide whether it's SHG (or anything like) when comparing to similar lenses from Olympus and Canon 8-).

0 upvotes
MAFAv8r
By MAFAv8r (Oct 18, 2012)

I disagree. I have the 12-60 and the 50-200 and 1.4 teleconvertor. I used Aperture Inspector and found that I constantly shoot at 12-30, 55-60 and 200 and 284. So looking at going to m43 from my E-5 to the OM-D it makes very good sense to have to 60mm Macro, and this lens, rather than a wide range zoom

0 upvotes
armanius
By armanius (May 21, 2012)

Any idea on price point?

0 upvotes
foto2021
By foto2021 (May 21, 2012)

A Spanish review site suggests Euro 1100.00.

0 upvotes
jagge
By jagge (May 21, 2012)

which would be a joke..... A aps-c equivalent can be had for 500 euro.

its not a pro system.

2 upvotes
007peter
By 007peter (May 21, 2012)

Glad I just sold my Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. I will be replace it with this tiny beauty. Small is indeed beautiful

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (May 21, 2012)

Welcome to Phase Two of the Micro Four Thirds Revolution.

Here come the SHG lenses....

7 upvotes
halfmac
By halfmac (May 21, 2012)

Here is my take on this lens: http://www.dslrmagazine.com/images/stories/Pruebas/Panny-9653-12-35-prueba-up/pan_12_35_ani_opt.gif

1 upvote
photo perzon
By photo perzon (May 21, 2012)

Ridiculous monster. Give me a tiny cheap 14mm 2.5 and I'll do the same work.

0 upvotes
GregGory
By GregGory (May 21, 2012)

Yup, a "monster" at 300g /has/ to be ridiculous...

13 upvotes
PDM
By PDM (May 21, 2012)

I think photo person is referring to something like the Samsung 16/2.4 or 20/2.8 - both pancake lens for the NX200. They are small, lightweight (80g), sharp, and cost much less. And they cover a larger APS-C sensor. Panasonic should be able to make similar, yet even smaller for the smaller 4/3 sensor.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (May 21, 2012)

You have a 14mm f2.5 already, so what's the point of your comment?

4 upvotes
jagge
By jagge (May 21, 2012)

the f 2.5 is not a aps-c f2.8 eqivalent at all so he is spot on. Composition wise 12 mm is interesting f2.8 a bit for shutter speed but with relation to dof its utterly uninteresting.

this would have been interesting if it was f1.8 or f 2.0 OR f 3 to 4 and very cheap.

this combo is not very interesting, to much of a compromise

0 upvotes
coroander
By coroander (May 21, 2012)

Great to see it has a metal body, manual zoom ring, and weather sealing.

4 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (May 21, 2012)

I don't see Panasonic actually mentioned weather sealing anywhere.

0 upvotes
mhike
By mhike (May 21, 2012)

Read page two.

0 upvotes
Andy Wilson
By Andy Wilson (May 21, 2012)

Is there likely to be any problem with the weather sealing when used with the OM-D? I realise it is only a rubber gasket seal but I'm presuming Panasonic have only put it together with their own (future) weather sealed bodies in mind.

0 upvotes
Knight Palm
By Knight Palm (May 21, 2012)

Remember they both are using the identical electromechanical lens mount. So it doesn't matter whatever body, as long as complying to the MFT mount.

1 upvote
TEBnewyork
By TEBnewyork (May 21, 2012)

Link to the sample gallery?

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (May 21, 2012)

As it says in the news story - we hope to publish samples in the coming hours.

0 upvotes
TEBnewyork
By TEBnewyork (May 21, 2012)

Ahhh sorry, I was just going by last paragraph of hands on preview. I guess when I wake up :)

0 upvotes
dksko123
By dksko123 (Jun 2, 2012)

God kvalitet Billige Nike Shox R4 Torch,køb billige Nike Air Max 95
http://www.dksko.com/

0 upvotes
dksko123
By dksko123 (Jun 2, 2012)

Frank Lampard var ved at vende 34 år gammel . I den varme - up match mod Belgien for første gang siden 10 oktober 1999 iført England skjorte , har Frank Lampard hidtil på vegne af de tre løver i kamp 90 spil , scorede 23 mål . Chelsea vice - kaptajn sagde , stadig at kæmpe på vegne af England spillede i 2014 VM to år senere , målet er at træde ind i de 100 Field Hall of Fame . Frank Lampard foran dem en masse legendariske rekord , spiller 125 Hilton, David Beckham , 115 , 108 , Bobby - Moore , 106 Bobby - Charlton og 105 Billy - Wright . Inden for 10 spil af Frank Lampard vil være i stand til at skulder ved skulder med legenden .
http://www.dksko.com/

0 upvotes
dksko123
By dksko123 (Jun 2, 2012)

http://www.dksko.com/ Boutique official de Nike Shox R4 Torch Herre til salg
Køb Billige Nike Shox NZ Kvinder salg online( http://www.dksko.com/

0 upvotes
Total comments: 106