Robin Wong's 12-200 review is out

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
tomhongkong Veteran Member • Posts: 3,797
Re: Robin Wong's 12-200 review is out
1

magnesus3 wrote:

tomhongkong wrote:

Well, each to his own, of course, but for me the 200mm end is more important than 12mm. There are already zooms starting at 12mm, including the 12-100, but nothing which gives the range, and is WR, to get out to 200. Cropping the 12-100 will just not give a satisfactory result for me. (and the 40-150 or 50-200 mean either lens changes in atrocious conditions, or two bodies which is not practical)

Unfortunately most of the test data is quite disappointing for this lens at 200. There are very few quantitative tests yet. Ephotozine is about the best we have so far, but that says that its test at 200 (dismal) is not really representative of the lens in practical use (without giving us an example of what they mean). It is even hard to find decent sample shots at 200, they are either short range shots or very dark subjects or out of focus. The chimneys in the Ephotozine sample actually look quite good if given some PP. Other test sites suggest stopping down to f8 to get anything approaching acceptable quality.

Maybe I am being pushed to an RX10iv! I will wait a couple of weeks by when there should be better results available.

tom

One thing to consider with RX10IV is that the zoom is electronic I think - you can't just rotate the barel and go from wide to tele in half a second like on the 12-200.

Are you sure cropping 12-100 won't be enough for you? Have you tried on some sample photos?

I don't really want to buy the RX.  The disadvantage which you mention is one reason.  There are others so I probably won't.

I am very disappointed by the reported quality of 12-200 but will wait to see once more people have access to it (Olympus in HK say it will not be here until next week). I'll go into the showroom and try it myself and compare with 14-150.

My experience with cropping is not very positive.  I was all set to get 12-100, but held off because I tried cropping my 35-100/2.8 to 200mm equivalent, and didn't get particularly good results, certainly not enough to justify the cost and size of a 12-100.  35-100 is at least as good as 12-100 so results should be similar.

I'll report on findings if there is anything interesting.

tom

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow