12-40 Pro vs Panny Leica 12-60

[Arek Halusko]

Anyone have experience with these two on Em1.1? ATM I'm using a FT 12-60 and love the versatility of that range but wouldn't mind constant aperture but I think I'd miss the 20mm on the 12-40 the other option is the Panasonic Leica 12-60mm f/2.8-4.

 

[Cagey75]

I haven't used these lenses yet, but have been eyeing the 12-40. I don't really 'get' the 12-60 or even 12-100 lenses, but that is down to how I shoot. Between 40 and 60 is a bit of a dead zone for me, I see no real need to have that range. If I want 60mm, well, I can get the 60mm macro and have a nice macro and portrait lens in one. I don't believe in "all in one" lenses at all. If 40mm 2.8 doesn't cut it, with a little movement [with your feet!] 40-60 F4 probably isn't going to add anything.

 

[Androole]

I haven't used these lenses yet, but have been eyeing the 12-40. I don't really 'get' the 12-60 or even 12-100 lenses, but that is down to how I shoot. Between 40 and 60 is a bit of a dead zone for me, I see no real need to have that range. If I want 60mm, well, I can get the 60mm macro and have a nice macro and portrait lens in one. I don't believe in "all in one" lenses at all. If 40mm 2.8 doesn't cut it, with a little movement [with your feet!] 40-60 F4 probably isn't going to add anything.

Back in the early days of zooms, there were an awful lot of options in the 75-150mm range, so not too far off the ~80-120mm equivalent range you're talking about.

It may not be important to you, but a lot of people find the classic range between 85mm, 100mm, and 120mm (or 135mm) very useful...

 

[Kdgast]

I have both lenses. I use the 12-40 on my E-M.1 and the 12-60 on my G85. I like both lenses very much. I think the 12-40 has a slightly better build quality. I like the extra reach of the 12-60 and also the dual stabilization with G85. I can’t tell much difference in image quality other than they are both very good.

 

[Arek Halusko]

I haven't used these lenses yet, but have been eyeing the 12-40. I don't really 'get' the 12-60 or even 12-100 lenses, but that is down to how I shoot. Between 40 and 60 is a bit of a dead zone for me, I see no real need to have that range. If I want 60mm, well, I can get the 60mm macro and have a nice macro and portrait lens in one. I don't believe in "all in one" lenses at all. If 40mm 2.8 doesn't cut it, with a little movement [with your feet!] 40-60 F4 probably isn't going to add anything.

--

When you do lots of city/urban shooting the 60 can get you nice a close and the 12 gets you that real ultra wide. the 12-100 would be nice too but want something brighter.

 

[figure five]

120mm equivalent gets you significantly more telephoto compression than 80mm compression. It’s not just about framing or moving forward a few feet to approximate the same FOV.

Both lenses have great close focus ability. Both are sharp throughout the range. The Panasonic is lighter and better balanced on camera in my opinion. The haptics of both are nice, the zoom action a little smoother on the Panasonic.

 

[HRC2016]

The 12-40 is very good. If I was still buying lens and did not own the 12-40 I'd probably pick up the 12-60.

The 12-100 is too heavy.

 

[JHaagsma]

The preference for one of the other is personal. I often shoot > 40mm, so the 12-40 is too limited for me. The 12-100 is ideal in reach, but I find that one to heavy for a lens that will be on the camera for most of the time. So for me the PL 12-60 was the best compromise.

I had the 43 12-60 (which broke). With adapter it was about as heavy and large as the 12-100. The 12-60 is significantly lighter and more compact.

 

[epozar]

Personally I prefer ft 12-60, have both,
12-60 is "more f2.8" at 12mm, also wider indoors

 

[jeffharris]

Anyone have experience with these two on Em1.1? ATM I'm using a FT 12-60 and love the versatility of that range but wouldn't mind constant aperture but I think I'd miss the 20mm on the 12-40 the other option is the Panasonic Leica 12-60mm f/2.8-4.

I have the 12-40mm, but would prefer the extra reach of the 12-60mm.

However, I much prefer the wider and constant aperture of the 12-40mm. In low light, I generally switch to my primes, but in a pinch f2.8 along with an ISO bump (or 3) is a reasonable stopgap.

The 12-60mm is only f2.8 at 12mm, which is a real waste. f2.8 seems to exist solely for marketing, since it hits f4 by around 35-40mm (I think). So, in use I'd consider it essentially an f4 lens, which for me is too slow. If it were constant f2.8, it would be perfect.

 

[Androole]

The 12-60mm is only f2.8 at 12mm, which is a real waste. f2.8 seems to exist solely for marketing, since it hits f4 by around 35-40mm (I think). So, in use I'd consider it essentially an f4 lens, which for me is too slow. If it were constant f2.8, it would be perfect.

Perfect, except that it would weigh just like a Fuji 16-55/f2.8...! Or perhaps like the Oly 12-100/f4.

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

You can't get away from physical aperture requirements, unfortunately. A zoom with a 60mm/f2.8 long end is never, ever going to be small.

 

[Albert Valentino]

The 12-60mm is only f2.8 at 12mm, which is a real waste. f2.8 seems to exist solely for marketing, since it hits f4 by around 35-40mm (I think). So, in use I'd consider it essentially an f4 lens, which for me is too slow. If it were constant f2.8, it would be perfect.

Perfect, except that it would weigh just like a Fuji 16-55/f2.8...!

Excellent point. I shot fuji for four years and really wanted he extra width that their 16-55 offered over my 18-55. However, the size, and lack of stabilization kept me away, one of the reasons I moved to m43 was the 12-40 f/2.8 lens. It had the range i wanted, particularly at the wide end, plus close focus, and of course weather size is perfect for my EM1.

Or perhaps like the Oly 12-100/f4.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#482.625,679.448,482.613,ha,t

You can't get away from physical aperture requirements, unfortunately. A zoom with a 60mm/f2.8 long end is never, ever going to be small.

 

[Albert Valentino]

The 12-40 is very good. If I was still buying lens and did not own the 12-40 I'd probably pick up the 12-60.

Probably the same here. My bed is made and ai will appily sleep in it. My two best lenses are the 12-40 and 60mm macro. Together they are a superior combo to the PL 12-60. But the convience of not switching lenses is virtue worth considering. Since like to shoot flowers and bugs... I prefer the combo with the 60mm macro. That lens has near perfectly circular out of focus highlights at f/2.8

The 12-100 is too heavy.

 

[Landscapephoto99]

Anyone have experience with these two on Em1.1? ATM I'm using a FT 12-60 and love the versatility of that range but wouldn't mind constant aperture but I think I'd miss the 20mm on the 12-40 the other option is the Panasonic Leica 12-60mm f/2.8-4.

I have the 12-40 but have used the 12-60. Both are going to be excellent optically, but as others have said there is nothing like having a constant f2.8 focal length for FF equivalent 24-80mm in such a small lens. Low light requires primes but f2.8 sometimes means I can just bump the ISO up a little bit and keep on shooting.

 

[jeffharris]

The 12-60mm is only f2.8 at 12mm, which is a real waste. f2.8 seems to exist solely for marketing, since it hits f4 by around 35-40mm (I think). So, in use I'd consider it essentially an f4 lens, which for me is too slow. If it were constant f2.8, it would be perfect.

Perfect, except that it would weigh just like a Fuji 16-55/f2.8...! Or perhaps like the Oly 12-100/f4.

Probably. There's the quandary.

But for me, a 12-60mm f2.8 would be much more flexible than the 12-100 f4.

I've been using my 14-140mm II more and more for the extra reach. In good light image quality is practically identical to the 12-40mm. The 12-40mm focuses much better in low light, so the 14-140mm II is essentially a daylight only lens.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#482.625,679.448,482.613,ha,t

You can't get away from physical aperture requirements, unfortunately. A zoom with a 60mm/f2.8 long end is never, ever going to be small.

Obviously. Who said anything about small? ;-)

 

[rponiarski]

Never used the 12-40, but I had the Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 and sold it for my PanaLeica 12-60 as I wanted the extra reach that the 60mm provides. Both are great lenses, with the Panasonic maybe a hair sharper and the Leica with nicer colors, though that is really pixel peeping. Can't go wrong with either...

 

[OldGuy-Yuri]

Hi,
I'm hoping to get some more opinion from users who might have used both the Oly 12-40mm f2.8 PRO and the Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0.
any notes & thoughts are appreciated.
I currently have the Oly 12-40 for 2 years now. Not used hardly at all. I find the 40mm is too short and restrictive for me - i do a lot of 'outdoor' photography and 40 often is just not there - 50 to 60 mm often gets me there...
F2.8 is nice for the golden hours, but with 40mm, I just don;t carry it, going to sell it and I'm considering the Panny Leica 12-60 as replacement.
Although I haven't tried the focus stacking yet - I don;t carry tripod, so it would have to be my ultrapod or some solid rock or lumber... not sure I'll ever make it a habit...
Other considerations to help with your comments.
1. not interested in Primes - I have a bunch I never use - I'm a zoom guy
2. not really interested in the Oly 12-100 - just too big for main carry. 12-200mm, again the more restrictive max stop at 70+mm - already covered anyway...
3. I have the Kit 14-42 & the 12-50 - I like them both and prefer the 12-50 of the 2. But would still like that extra 1/2 to full stop of 2.8 (to 4) .

Thanks for your thoughts and comments.
Yuri

 

[Javaka]

Hi,
I'm hoping to get some more opinion from users who might have used both the Oly 12-40mm f2.8 PRO and the Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0.
any notes & thoughts are appreciated.
I currently have the Oly 12-40 for 2 years now. Not used hardly at all. I find the 40mm is too short and restrictive for me - i do a lot of 'outdoor' photography and 40 often is just not there - 50 to 60 mm often gets me there...
F2.8 is nice for the golden hours, but with 40mm, I just don;t carry it, going to sell it and I'm considering the Panny Leica 12-60 as replacement.
Although I haven't tried the focus stacking yet - I don;t carry tripod, so it would have to be my ultrapod or some solid rock or lumber... not sure I'll ever make it a habit...
Other considerations to help with your comments.
1. not interested in Primes - I have a bunch I never use - I'm a zoom guy
2. not really interested in the Oly 12-100 - just too big for main carry. 12-200mm, again the more restrictive max stop at 70+mm - already covered anyway...
3. I have the Kit 14-42 & the 12-50 - I like them both and prefer the 12-50 of the 2. But would still like that extra 1/2 to full stop of 2.8 (to 4) .

Thanks for your thoughts and comments.
Yuri

I don't understand what your question is. You've decided to sell the 12-40, you don't like primes, you don't want the 12-100, you do like the 12-50 but want an extra half stop. 'm assuming the 12-45 is also too short for you. That leaves you with the 12-60 f2.8-4. It's a great lens that I chose for the extra reach over the ones that go to 40.

I have no experience with the Oly 12-40 PRO, but I know how irritating it is to have a lens you don't get on with. I have a Sigma 17-50 for Pentax APS-C. Lovely lens, but 50mm (75mm equivalent in full frame) is too short and leaves me constantly changing lenses.

Cheers,

Alastair

 

[VinceC]

I've drifted back from Fuji, via an Oly 5.2, then splashed out on the new Oly M1.3 as I sold my fuji kit. I got a 12-40 f2.8 pro on a deal with the 5.2, I had it a few years ago and I like it. However, as an everyday lens, I want a bit more reach, so I bought a secondhand PL 12-60 f2.8-4.

I love it. Good and sharp, weather resistant, well balanced on my M1.3. I'm not selling my Oly 12-40 f2.8, but it isn't getting out of the bag much!

Most of the photos in this Flickr album are taken with the PL 12-60 f2.8-4.

 

[Adam-T]

The PL is F3.5-4ish through most of its range - the Oly of course is F2.8

as a Left Fielder , may I suggest the cheaper, lighter but still W.sealed Pan 12-60 F3.5-5.6 as a to go walkabout , from reports of those who have compared it to the PL (not me personally) , it`s pretty much as good , only slower (and with decent edges at the wide end even at F3.5) . I DO own this lens and find it very useful , even does good closeups at 60mm -- I`m still going to get another Oly 12-40 F2.8 however , IMO its the best fast Pro standard zoom for the system ..

The ultimate do everything M43 zooms are the panasonic 14-140-F3.5-5.6 (Still the best 10X or more standard zoom for any ILC system) and of you can handle the bulk and weight , the legendary Oly 12-100 F4 (this is one I want to try)

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **