The Lumix 12-35mm Vs. Combo Oly 9-18mm & 14-54mm 4/3

I currently use the combination of the Oly 9-18mm and 14-54mm II on a GH2. The advantage of the 9-18mm is being super wide, small and light. The disadvantage is the limited zoom, slow F Stop schedule and no OIS for GH2. The 14-54mm with adapter remains on my camera most of the time though. The advantage here is better IQ than 9-18mm in my view, good range coverage, fast aperture schedule and weather sealed. The compromise here is slower AF (and noisy), no continuous AF in video mode, 14mm not being wide enough and it is relatively big and heavy.

Looking at the 12-35mm I see obvious Pro's and Con's should I replace the combo with this. I ask myself will I really miss the 9mm of the Oly. Will I really miss the 54mm? I choose the GH2 for being the best hybrid and am looking forward to having the GH3 soon. The 12-35mm will be a boon for me regarding video (Especially using ETC when needed). I also own the Pana/Leica 45mm Macro and 100-300mm.

I am just organizing some of my thoughts here, but would like to hear some feedback>

there is a huge difference in FOV and depth expansion between the 9mm and 12mm focal lenghts.



It's like comparing apples and oranges.



Tedolph

I am interested in this thread because I too have my eyes set on the Lumix. I have the Oly 14-54mm also and I use it a lot. The only disadvantage for the Oly is that when I go street shooting I take it off because of the slow AF. My Lumix 14-140mm is sharper but the Oly has creamier bokeh and has faster aperture. The bokeh on the Lumix up close looks like little single cells with thread squirming. It is also much more clinical looking. I wonder if the Lumix 12-35mm bokeh spheres look like? I used the Oly on a fashion shoot and it worked out very well when the model can hold the pose.

I also do video and the Oly is a workhorse when I am pushed for time. The disadvantage is the the fly by wire focus and it's a little slow for low-light. But still I use it a lot.

The Lumix 12-35mm disadvantage iis the short zoom which is really helpful to have the longer range on the Oly, but it is wider so it is a split. For video, the Lumix aperture clicks when zooming is a big turn off, but the Oly has that also when you go through the whole zoom range. The Oly is not parafocal while the Lumix is, I have read. I still have to asses the Lumix bokeh and if it has a clinical look. If the Lumix didn't have the aperture shifts while zooming, I would highly recommend it. But if you are low on cash, then the Oly is a great investment until the Lumix comes down more in price.

Dionis said:

Dionis wrote:

I currently use the combination of the Oly 9-18mm and 14-54mm II on a GH2. The advantage of the 9-18mm is being super wide, small and light. The disadvantage is the limited zoom, slow F Stop schedule and no OIS for GH2. The 14-54mm with adapter remains on my camera most of the time though. The advantage here is better IQ than 9-18mm in my view, good range coverage, fast aperture schedule and weather sealed. The compromise here is slower AF (and noisy), no continuous AF in video mode, 14mm not being wide enough and it is relatively big and heavy.

Looking at the 12-35mm I see obvious Pro's and Con's should I replace the combo with this. I ask myself will I really miss the 9mm of the Oly. Will I really miss the 54mm? I choose the GH2 for being the best hybrid and am looking forward to having the GH3 soon. The 12-35mm will be a boon for me regarding video (Especially using ETC when needed). I also own the Pana/Leica 45mm Macro and 100-300mm.

I am just organizing some of my thoughts here, but would like to hear some feedback>

Click to expand...

If you want to get the 12-35, to me it's only logical to use that to replace the 14-54. The rest of your lenses and their purposes will be unaffected.

The 14-54 has been my go-to lens since I first bought into regular 4/3 in 2005. For my purposes I do not see the 12-35 as a replacement - the range is just not right for me. I would have to team it with the 35-100 and would be changing lenses so often I would need to carry a second body. On the other hand, I can see the 35-100 as a longer companion to the 14-54.


But that's just me, and I don't do video.

For the OP, I cannot see the 12-35 replacing both both lenses, possibly not either. But if you can live without less range at one end or the other it could work.

Gato

Operating instructions say refocus after zooming. I confirmed this with my copy.

goodgoings said:

goodgoings wrote:

The Oly is not parafocal while the Lumix is, I have read. I still have to asses the Lumix bokeh and if it has a clinical look. If the Lumix didn't have the aperture shifts while zooming, I would highly recommend it. But if you are low on cash, then the Oly is a great investment until the Lumix comes down more in price.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your insight and experience. I have used the 14-54mm with good results for almost a year now. At the time the Lumix 12-35mm was not even rumored I think. It was a logical move for me to get it when my Oly 12-60's aperture broke. Since I already had the adapter and the 14-54mm II being the most compatible non native m43 lens, I bought it

I did not consider the parafocal factor of the 12-35mm. That leans me more in the 12-35mm direction. I was thinking of offsetting the cost of the 12-35mm (currently available for $1050 with free shipping) by selling both Oly 9-18mm and 14-54mm. BUT Sir Tedolf is correct in that 9mm to 12mm is something I would indeed miss. I may keep the 9-18mm along with the 12-35mm.

Bobo Hodls said:

If you want to get the 12-35, to me it's only logical to use that to replace the 14-54. The rest of your lenses and their purposes will be unaffected.

Click to expand...

I am considering this very thing. A GH3 with Oly 9-18mm, Lumix 12-35mm, Pana 45mm and 100-300mm. Of course, I like the majority of the M43 users are hoping for a fast telephoto zoom (Perhaps a weather sealed revised 100-300mm F4? or better)

axlotl said:

axlotl wrote:

Operating instructions say refocus after zooming. I confirmed this with my copy.

Click to expand...

Bummer

Gato Amarillo said:

Gato Amarillo wrote:

For my purposes I do not see the 12-35 as a replacement - the range is just not right for me. I would have to team it with the 35-100 and would be changing lenses so often I would need to carry a second body. On the other hand, I can see the 35-100 as a longer companion to the 14-54.

For the OP, I cannot see the 12-35 replacing both both lenses, possibly not either. But if you can live without less range at one end or the other it could work.

Click to expand...

This is so true. I mostly use the 14-35mm range on the Oly, but there are times when I go to the long end. The Lumix 12-35mm would cost time when I need to change lenses. Also, don't forget the Oly has great macro. Don't know about the 12-35mm. The 12mm end on the Lumix is a big selling point, if you don't already have this focal lens. For video I could use the wider focal length, but for photos, less so. I guess it really depends on each person's needs.


Not parafocal? +1 bummer.

- I would make the switch. You'll get a nice small lens that's stabilized, and is very sharp. I found I'm using my 9-18mm much less, since I got the 12-50mm. Yes, 9mm is a world apart - but I make do with the 12mm most of the time. Now if you had the OMD - I would have suggested holding on: what you got works, and Oly will surely one day announce a high grade fast standard zoom, once they had their fun making primes.

Laszlo13 said:

Laszlo13 wrote:

- I would make the switch. You'll get a nice small lens that's stabilized, and is very sharp. I found I'm using my 9-18mm much less, since I got the 12-50mm. Yes, 9mm is a world apart - but I make do with the 12mm most of the time. Now if you had the OMD - I would have suggested holding on: what you got works, and Oly will surely one day announce a high grade fast standard zoom, once they had their fun making primes.

Click to expand...

Agreed, concerning the 9-18mm being a specialized beast when you have 12mm and higher covered. The 9mm does get little usage but when it is used it produces unique (non standard perspective) images. If I could I would trade the 9-18mm for the pricey Pany 7-14mm.

Speaking of primes I think Oly (and Pany) are having too much fun producing them at the expense of making more versatile lenses. The 12-35mm and 35-100mm are a good sign of things to come though for the system I hope.