-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
bluelemmy
Senior Member
I sold my Olympus 12mm f2 because the 12-35 is just as sharp. I am keeping my Olympus 45mm because it is such a useful lens and also a little sharper than the 12-35mm.
My copy of the 12-35mm zoom is as sharp as I would ever need (though I am not a fetishist in these technical matters). If you have one that could be judged as soft, there is something wrong.
The 12-35 is much, much sharper and more contrasty than my 12-42 compact X or my previous Panasonic kit zooms.
--
David
http://www.dthorpe.net
My copy of the 12-35mm zoom is as sharp as I would ever need (though I am not a fetishist in these technical matters). If you have one that could be judged as soft, there is something wrong.
The 12-35 is much, much sharper and more contrasty than my 12-42 compact X or my previous Panasonic kit zooms.
--
David
http://www.dthorpe.net
forpetessake
Veteran Member
No, really, what's the point of all soft/sharp posts if the only argument is "I think", "I feel", or look at those postage stamp pictures.
If one wants an objective information, (s)he should look at a well performed comparison and testing, that can actually produce some objective results. I don't have the lens, otherwise I would have tested it, but looking at the Panasonic official MTF (which should be taken with a grain of salt)
one can notice that it's not a bad lens as the 20 l/mm contrast is pretty good; but it suffers from astigmatism on the short end, its edge performance isn't great on the long end; and it's maximum resolution is probably not very high -- there is no 60 l/mm curves (compare to Olympus SHG and HG lenses) and it looks like the lens actually wouldn't make it to 60 anyway.
If one wants an objective information, (s)he should look at a well performed comparison and testing, that can actually produce some objective results. I don't have the lens, otherwise I would have tested it, but looking at the Panasonic official MTF (which should be taken with a grain of salt)
one can notice that it's not a bad lens as the 20 l/mm contrast is pretty good; but it suffers from astigmatism on the short end, its edge performance isn't great on the long end; and it's maximum resolution is probably not very high -- there is no 60 l/mm curves (compare to Olympus SHG and HG lenses) and it looks like the lens actually wouldn't make it to 60 anyway.
forpetessake
Veteran Member
The forum is about cameras and lenses, so don't even try going "ad hominum" with me, I don't care about such posts.
For the sake of the inquisitive minds here is an old but good article:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
S
sunhorse
Guest
Thank you for sharing these wonderful images. I was already inclined to get the 12-35, but after seeing these and went out and bought one right away.
--
Ramesh
--
Ramesh
grapher
Senior Member
These are the official Panasonic-charts, so they will have tested more than one lens, and surely they would not publish the worst results.
papillon_65
Forum Pro
So why aren't you using a Canon G10 then and you still haven't told me how your copy of the 12-35mm is? I've given you my opinion when using it, lets hear your extensive experience of it.....
--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
papillon_65
Forum Pro
I have no shots of Pershing square, I've never even been there, but that was very funny, thanks for the laugh
. Are you even in the right thread???? --
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
According to the LensRentals blog, lens manufacturer MTF charts are generally theoretical, based on optical design and software simulation, rather than tests of a representative sample of finished lenses.
For what its worth, LensRentals did Imatest resolution tests of the 12-35, all the available Oly & Pany primes, and quite a few zooms. They found the 12-35 the sharpest zoom (the 7-14 is close), but the primes (save the poor Oly 17) are sharper still. I compiled their results and linked to their blog postings here: http://www.mu-43.com/f38/sharpest-mft-lenses-32108/index2.html
For what its worth, LensRentals did Imatest resolution tests of the 12-35, all the available Oly & Pany primes, and quite a few zooms. They found the 12-35 the sharpest zoom (the 7-14 is close), but the primes (save the poor Oly 17) are sharper still. I compiled their results and linked to their blog postings here: http://www.mu-43.com/f38/sharpest-mft-lenses-32108/index2.html
papillon_65
Forum Pro
Taken from SLR gearNo, really, what's the point of all soft/sharp posts if the only argument is "I think", "I feel", or look at those postage stamp pictures.
If one wants an objective information, (s)he should look at a well performed comparison and testing, that can actually produce some objective results. I don't have the lens, otherwise I would have tested it, but looking at the Panasonic official MTF (which should be taken with a grain of salt)
one can notice that it's not a bad lens as the 20 l/mm contrast is pretty good; but it suffers from astigmatism on the short end, its edge performance isn't great on the long end; and it's maximum resolution is probably not very high -- there is no 60 l/mm curves (compare to Olympus SHG and HG lenses) and it looks like the lens actually wouldn't make it to 60 anyway.
Sharpness
The Panasonic 12-35mm ƒ 2.8 offers very sharp results, consistent across all focal lengths. The lens offers almost tack-sharp performance when used wide open at ƒ 2.8, with only a bit of softness in the extreme corners; stopping down to ƒ 4 provides solid edge-to-edge sharpness. In fact, ƒ 4 seems to be the optimal aperture for this lens, as results actually degrade very slightly when the lens is stopped down further than that. This is all very relative, though - results are still extremely sharp from ƒ 5.6 through to ƒ 11, with diffraction limiting only becoming practically visible at ƒ 16. At ƒ 22, we noted some light softness across the frame.
and their conclusion
Conclusion
There's not much to add to this review that the numbers don't already show - the pre-production version of the Panasonic 12-35mm ƒ 2.8 that we tested showed excellent performance across the board. In addition, it boasts image stabilization and a splash- / dust-proof design: there is a lot to like here, making it an attractive upgrade for GX-1 users. The only unknown will be the price, which we're sure can't be cheap for a lens this good.
So what is it about my user experience and their review that you don't understand?
--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
papillon_65
Forum Pro
No problem Ramesh, enjoy your lens, it's excellent, as the vast majority of actual owners will tell you
. --
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
--I have no shots of Pershing square, I've never even been there, but that was very funny, thanks for the laugh
--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
Viva la evolución!
bluelemmy
Senior Member
Everything in your post accords exactly with my own experience of this lens.
I have already sold my 12mm Olympus since the zoom is just as good. My 25mm f1.4 is nice but under normal, non test conditions, no sharper than the zoom. In all cases the 12-35 is as sharp as I need for the pix I sell.
When the 35-100 comes out I will have my perfect outfit, 7-14/ 12-35/ 35-100/ 100-300, Olympus 45mm and Sigma 105mm macro.
I'll keep the 45mm Olympus because it is such a lovely portrait lens, especially used wide open and the macro 'cos it's a macro.
If anyone finds the 12-35 not up to their standards, they will have wait for some radical new glass or design to come about. The 12-35 is about as good as anyone can do at the moment.
--
David
http://www.dthorpe.net
Gediminas 8
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,133
- Reaction score
- 66
Not a lens I ever considered buying for my (future) m43 system, but these samples of yours make me want one.
As always, superb eye for composition.
The black image is stunning.
--
A travel gallery of my country and some others:
http://www.pbase.com/lithuania
As always, superb eye for composition.
The black image is stunning.
--
A travel gallery of my country and some others:
http://www.pbase.com/lithuania
papillon_65
Forum Pro
Thanks, I am going to be shooting extensively with this lens in a weeks time in France, this lens and the 7-14mm, and I have no worries whatsoever that it will deliver.
--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
papillon_65
Forum Pro
It's amazing how the people that own this lens generally rate it highly and people who don't, pan it. Funny that....
--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
I posted this a few weeks ago: comparing my 12-35 to the 14mm prime, 14-140, and 20 pancake: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=42121961
If the OP's lens isn't sharp, he got a bad copy.
If the OP's lens isn't sharp, he got a bad copy.
bgalb
Senior Member
+1. For my purposes, the 12-35 can replace all of the primes in it's zoom range; 12, 14, 17, 20, 25, 30. I keep only two primes near that range; the panny 25 f1.4 and a 40mm f1.8 Hexanon. The 25 for very low light and the 40 just for the heck of it.
zxaar
Senior Member
give me G10 i will take most of them for you. One that require shallow DOf would be an issue but other than that there is nothing in those photos that one can not do with simple camera.
Here you go with G10
http://500px.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=G10
--
::> Knowledge is mother of efficiency.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum