-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
12-50 at B&H, anyone giving it a try?
- Thread starter nrwhitman
- Start date
Joe Franek
Senior Member
the 12mm wide end softness is a big disappointment for me, because that would be the reason to buy this lens -( viz Part 2 of the test). I don't care much about macro or video.
Rightly or wrongly I thought that the idea of this lens was to have a m43 version of the famous Zuiko 12-60!
So I will be concentrating on the Panasonic 14-45, and/or waiting waiting waiting for the new "high quality" Panasonic zooms. Are they coming this year?
Unless I get convinced that the old 12-60 with a converter will be triple A plus.
Joe
Rightly or wrongly I thought that the idea of this lens was to have a m43 version of the famous Zuiko 12-60!
So I will be concentrating on the Panasonic 14-45, and/or waiting waiting waiting for the new "high quality" Panasonic zooms. Are they coming this year?
Unless I get convinced that the old 12-60 with a converter will be triple A plus.
Joe
I would have bought a m4/3 equivalent in quality to the 4/3 12/60 in an heartbeat even if the price was 1k€ for when i hike.
http://www.pekkapotka.com/artikkelit/2011/12/30/olympus-mzuiko-12-50mm-vertailussa.html
but its far from it, so im waiting now to see pany 12-35
TheoC
Leading Member
F 6.3 at 50mm. I think the 50/2 ZD will serve me better at the long end. Or the 45/1.8. I may be wrong but for me these aperture values are an absolute non-starter.
The 12-50mm has a very different purpose than a dedicated short telephoto lens.
For example, if you have the 45mm f/1.8 on your camera, what do you do if you want to take a photo at a wider focal length? Either you change lenses or you don't take the photo.
Louis_Dobson
Forum Pro
A lot of the photography I do is landscape work (for which f6.3 is OK) at the end of a long walk (so a single lens solution is great). It ought, rationally, to juts up my street.
Even so, I find it hard to raise much enthusiasm for such a dog slow lens.
I'll take it if it comes cheap with the OM-D.
Otherwise, no, sorry, too slow.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
Even so, I find it hard to raise much enthusiasm for such a dog slow lens.
I'll take it if it comes cheap with the OM-D.
Otherwise, no, sorry, too slow.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
herebefore
Senior Member
This, like the 14-42, is a lens I would get only in a "kit", and then only if I cant get a "body only".
Its a slow lens... Dog slow at the long end..From all accounts, its well built and high quality as well as being weather proof, it just isnt "fast enough" for me to bother with.
Living where I live, there just aren't enough days with the kind of weather conditions I would need to use it well. On any given day, when I go out to shoot, its likely that there wont be enough light for that lens.
I do need a lens that can do wider than 14mm, but this lens isn't the cure for that problem.
I'll buy the OMD most likely, but I'll look real hard and long for a "body only" package, or a package that includes a better (read that as FASTER) lens for me.
It would truly be a "waste of space" for me to have it in my m4/3 kit.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde
Its a slow lens... Dog slow at the long end..From all accounts, its well built and high quality as well as being weather proof, it just isnt "fast enough" for me to bother with.
Living where I live, there just aren't enough days with the kind of weather conditions I would need to use it well. On any given day, when I go out to shoot, its likely that there wont be enough light for that lens.
I do need a lens that can do wider than 14mm, but this lens isn't the cure for that problem.
I'll buy the OMD most likely, but I'll look real hard and long for a "body only" package, or a package that includes a better (read that as FASTER) lens for me.
It would truly be a "waste of space" for me to have it in my m4/3 kit.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde
It's only 1/3 of a stop flower than the existing kit lens, and the existing kit lens doesn't zoom to 100mm, so at overlapping focal lengths I expect the new lens to be the same as the existing kit lens.
herebefore
Senior Member
Exactly the problem..
It performs like a "kit" lens, and not many experienced photographers would want another kit lens.
The OMD is supposed to be the "ne plus ultra" of m4/3 so far. I'm guessing that the OMD is going to sell to previous m4/3 owners more than to newbies.
Its a well made lens, and probably will be just great to introduce the OMD to the "Newbie World" and get them using the camera.
Since the question was asked HERE, I didn't give a response aimed at "Newbies".
The OP was "Are you going to give it a try?"
I dont need to try a dog slow lens to know its a dog slow lens, so what ever other features it has, I DONT NEED IT.
OTOH Im not trying to get people not to buy it.. If they have use for it, then they should "Have at it".
I have and use "Kit lenses" all the time, some of them are really good lenses for what they are.. BUT, I dont need another one.
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde
aroundomaha
Senior Member
I agree, as an enthusiast your lens combo would get my money before the 12-50 would. f/6.3? Only in broad, bright conditions.
Aroundomaha
http://aroundomaha.blogspot.com
Home of the wannabe photographer!
--
Aroundomaha
http://aroundomaha.blogspot.com
Home of the wannabe photographer!
Gregm61
Forum Pro
Which is doing the 12-50 no favor....
The 12-50 is the worlds first kit lens with high-end build quality. Not a good combination. There's a very good reason why kit lenses are relatively inexpensive to buy. Otherwise, no one would buy them. They're cheap. That's the draw. The more you look at the 12-50, the less compelling the lens is. The optics are simply not a match for the build quality, which is a shame.
Even here in January in Denmark, I do wide shots in 5.6 or 6.3 to get increased DoF. Where do you stay that is so dark? 
Well, it is quite understandable, I would not buy the lens on it's own either. Though I do expect to get one in a kit with an OM-D series camera, the advantage over the current kit lens is that it is weather proofed, it is the only lens that is currently. Also a slow zoom lens is nice for travel, because it is also light and versatile. I can always change to a fast prime when I need that extra speed, but tbh. when I travel, I don't change lenses that often.
Well, it is quite understandable, I would not buy the lens on it's own either. Though I do expect to get one in a kit with an OM-D series camera, the advantage over the current kit lens is that it is weather proofed, it is the only lens that is currently. Also a slow zoom lens is nice for travel, because it is also light and versatile. I can always change to a fast prime when I need that extra speed, but tbh. when I travel, I don't change lenses that often.
herebefore
Senior Member
South Eastern Connecticut, New England, USA..Even here in January in Denmark, I do wide shots in 5.6 or 6.3 to get increased DoF. Where do you stay that is so dark?
Well, it is quite understandable, I would not buy the lens on it's own either. Though I do expect to get one in a kit with an OM-D series camera, the advantage over the current kit lens is that it is weather proofed, it is the only lens that is currently. Also a slow zoom lens is nice for travel, because it is also light and versatile. I can always change to a fast prime when I need that extra speed, but tbh. when I travel, I don't change lenses that often.
Its not the length of the day thats bothersome... Its the frequency of DARK cloudy weather...
Being right near the shore, the weather only stays clear, on average, a couple of hours a day, and only if I get LUCKY do I get to shoot in sunshine.
Cloudy/Bright is my favorite lighting... but we dont get much of it here... Because of the way the prevailing winds pile the clouds up along the shoreline, I might have to drive 20 miles or so inland to get "cloudy bright" conditions, or Sunny day conditions.
Just the other day, I was out at 2PM and it was dark enough to make reading a news paper difficult... Dark, "Movie Effects Tornado sky DARK".You need your headlights on .. we get that kind of sky a lot, without the accompanying storms of course..
Benjamin Franklin is credited with saying "If you don't like the weather in New England, wait a minute". He was right.. It can go from a very nice clear day, to a really dark cloudy/rainy day, in the time it takes to drive a country mile to get the Paper.
Im not complaining.. Im used to it, but being used to it makes me hesitate to buy, or try, another slow lens...
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde
The Nikon D7000 also comes with an f/3.5 to f/5.6 kit lens. I suppose that this new Olympus lens is a little slower.
With regards to how the lens "performs" I have no idea. Fast focusing and sharp photos would be a good performance. On the other hand, if it's no sharper than the 14-42mm II lens (which is soft when zoomed to 42mm), then you have my permission to bash it. A slow $500 lens ought to at least be really sharp.
Those who need a faster lens can buy the new Panasonic f/2.8 zooms, but obviously Olympus won't provide competitors' products as a kit lens.
They are inexpensive because lenses actually aren't that expensive to manufacture as you would think based on the sales prices. For a kit lens, the R&D is spread across a very large number of units.
All the major manufactures have increased the quality of their kit lenses during the last few years, so they are not as bad as they once were. And with image stabilization and cameras capable of high ISO, you can do a lot more with a slow lens than you could just a few years ago.
Laszlo13
Leading Member
Thanks Pekka
Great comparisons - I really appreciated the lenses and crops you've selected, they tell a great story. One takeaway is the confirmation of Oly's previous 4/3 strategy: no need for primes if you've got the best zooms in the market. The 12-60mm is just an outstanding performer. Of course there are still the size and speed advantages to primes, like the Oly 45mm. Anyhow, the 12-50mm doesn't seem to justify itself against the 14-42mm kit lens in image quality. Disappointing, since I was rather enthused about getting it (as a kit only) with the new OM-D. 12mm is really disappointing, and while 50mm is pretty decent - that's at a fairly slow aperture. So other than weather proofing - I don't know.
One remaining puzzle is whether or not the new camera will improve focusing of 4/3 zooms, like the 12-60. The rumors have been quiet about this. If OM-D does manage to improve focusing, there will be a rush to snap up lenses like the 12-60 and 14-54
Regards, Laszlo
Tim in upstate NY
Veteran Member
. . . Is there any possibility that you have a bad copy of the 12-50? If not, my reaction is that I'm very glad that I have the Panny 14-45.
tropicalsun
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 372
- Reaction score
- 0
It's the black version of the Olympus 12-50mm that is in stock right now at B&H Photo, the silver version is still showing as not available yet.
Olympus 12-50mm (black)
http://bhpho.to/w6VijH
Olympus 12-50mm (black)
http://bhpho.to/w6VijH
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum