Thinking of swapping from MFT to full DSLR - Advice?

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
marike6 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,088
Panasonic f2.8 zooms not equivalent to pro-grade FF f2.8 lenses

PC Wheeler wrote:

Been there, done that and now back to m4/3. Re prices: They are not that far out of line. Compare the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 and 35-100 f/2.8 to the Canon 24-70L f/2.8 and 70-200L f/2.8 in terms of cost. And if you switch, build up your muscles to tote the extra weight

The two Panasonic f2.8 zooms vs FF equivalents is about the worst comparison in favor of m43 you could make.  The Canon 70-200 and 24-70 2.8 lenses, aside from the DOF discussion below, are designed to cover a FF sensor.  As such they use more glass, and are more difficult to design and more expensive to produce.

The pro-grade lenses from Canon and Nikon are built like tanks with all metal barrels, robust metal tripod collars, distance scales and locking lens hoods.  A pro grade lens like the EF 70-200 2.8 (or Nikon equivalent) will last a lifetime as there is virtually no plastic anywhere on the lens.

There is simply no comparison in terms of build quality between pro-grade FF lenses and the two Panasonic zooms.  And I think it was a huge mistake for Panasonic to price the two f2.8 zooms as if they were FF lenses.  They could be selling many, many more of them if they had taken into account the fact that they are made for the smaller m43 detector.  APS-C lenses are never as expensive as FF lenses, so why should m43 lenses be priced as if they are FF lenses?  The answer is they shouldn't.  It's only because Panasonic is the only game in town for f2.8 m43 zooms that they dared price these two lenses so high.

The only advantage of m43 lenses is size.  There are many, many more choices at lower prices with faster max apertures with EF and F mount FF and APS-C lenses.  There are some very good primes in m43, but most of the better ones are overpriced see 12 f2, 75 1.8, 25 0.95. 17 1.8.  Or $959 USD for the 7-14 f4 ultra wide zoom (the wonderful Tokina 11-16 2.8 for APS-C is $599 and the Canon EF 17-40 f4 L is $699).  It's weird as APS-C lenses are priced significantly less than FF lenses.  You would think that m43 would have a similar pricing practice, but this is not the case at all.  In truth there is a price to pay for miniaturization of m43 optics.  Is it worth it?  Only you can decide.

This lens is simply not equivalent to the EF 70-200 2.8 L IS below in terms of build quality.  Not even close.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow