CP+ 2016: Hands-on with new Panasonic lenses and ZS100

Even the older ones had the software controls. Panasonic and Olympus have been pretty good about supporting each others lenses/bodies from the start. Not always with equal success, but certainly the ability to control OIS has not been an issue.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

John Bean (UK)

True, but not all older Olympus models handled it very elegantly, allowing both IS systems to be inappropriately active at the same time.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

'Inappropriately elegant' describes the girl that is both.. fun and suitable to meet mom.

a treasure

Feb 27, 2016permalink

gkdiamond

I'm so sure that this camera will be fun that I have already set up a date to show her off to my mom.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Jonathan F/2

Is that a plastic zoom ring on the 12-60? Panasonic too cheap to use rubber? No rubber, no sale for me!

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Haha, given my experience with the way Panasonic's rubber zoom rings loosen up over time (at least on their earlier lenses like my original 14-140), I almost see the plastic as a pro, not a con.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Mikofox

Ditto that! Can't even get that darn rubber for my 14-45 lens for a decent price here in Canada.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Vlad S

I have Panasonic lenses with both runner and plastic rings, and plastic is far more practical from my point of view as a user.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Vlad S

@Mikofox : pull the old ring off its seat, wrap a couple of turns of scotch tape around the seat, and pull the ring back on. It will be snug again. Mine has not expanded any further since 2009.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

I have a roll of double sided tape in my desk drawer for this exact reason. I own a lot of old lenses... Very common problem.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Some very nice lenses don't have rubber rings..
The focus rings are metal.

Of course, the plastic won't feel like metal, but not every lens must have rubber gripping surfaces in order to not be considered cheap.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Jonathan F/2

The only metal ring Panasonic I've tried comes on the 12-32mm. That looks plastic just like the 14-140mm f4-5.6 lens. I don't get the aversion to rubber? Plastic is prone to more damage due to bumping and dinging, especially with a huge surface area like a zoom barrel. Rubber serves as both as grip and protective cover for your lens!

Feb 27, 2016permalink

SeeRoy

For those M43 shooters for whom the Olympus 12-50 kit lens isn't nearly expensive enough.

Feb 26, 2016*permalink

Chez Wimpy

If this comes with typical Panasonic m43 zoom image quality... it should blow the 12-50 out of the water.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

agentul

for those m4/3 shooters that need a stabilized lens because they have Panasonic cameras.

Feb 29, 2016permalink

Beckler8

Better, grippier design with another proper control/button or two, tiltable screen and hotshoe would make ZS100 close to perfect compact camera (on paper).

Feb 26, 2016permalink

A tilty lens [screen - not tilt lens!] would make the camera even larger. Not so good. It has an EVF which is useful in ways a tilty screen isn't. A good trade-off for smaller camera.

The camera has at least 4 Fn buttons. I think this is enough...

What is a little off is proper placement of these buttons. The 'AF' button is not conveniently located. Hopefully, AF can be assigned to Fn1

Still, Fn1 would be better placed a bit left and up from its current location. Placing this button so that it would appear to be just to the northeast of the upper right corner of the display (at top of camera between the two dials in image 10) would allow two things...

There would be more room for the thumb and the thumb could be rocked forward so the tip could press the re-positioned Fn1 button. There would be no need to move thumb to use the button.

I suppose a hotshoe could be useful, but this is supposed to be a travel camera...

Feb 27, 2016*permalink

Michael Ma

I've never seen any quality 24mm equiv to superzoom perform well. Don't get your hopes up. It's for the casual shooter who prefers convenience over edge-to-edge sharpness.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/panasonic/14-140mm-f3.5-5.6-asph-power-ois-lumix-g-vario/review/

Does 5x count as a superzoom now?

The latest Panasonic 10x 14-140 II is surprisingly competent. According to Imaging Resource, at least as good as standard 3x kit zooms in most other formats, and actually really quite sharp when used at 1-stop below maximum all across the zoom range (i.e. 14-140 f5.6-8)

I agree that the 24mm equivalent factor probably makes it much more difficult to achieve good sharpness as the need for distortion correction becomes that much greater. But I guess we'll see.

And remember that the larger, faster Olympus 12-60 f2.8-4 was excellent optically.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

for all the 1 inch sensor camera since RX100
ZS100 is the most useful

in my opinion, the real use of small sensor should be big zoom
I use MFT for the same purpose

long zoom lens for full frame or even APS-C is too big to be practical

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Xentinus

Well...Despite I respect your needs and your opinion,1 inch sensor is not that big for high iso-lowlight shots...Hence you will need fast aperture.
I am sure ZS100 will fit some people's need.But with 1.8-2.8 aperture and 18-50mm focal range,new Nikon is more attractive.
And those Sony RX10 I-II and Pana FZ1000 are more useful when it is about tele.

Edit:I forgot to mention ZS100's aperture range....It is 2.8-5.9
I wish It was a little bigger with 2.8 constant aperture or at least 2.8-3.5

Feb 26, 2016*permalink

olivemoonstudio

Agreeing with Jefftan here, there are better options in the 1 inch range that cover a specific focal length really well, but as for covering a decent sized range without being the size of an fz1000 or rx10ii makes the ZS100 quite good. I guess I'm less worried about aperture equivalencies seeing that up until this point P&Ss offered a similar aperture range with a much smaller sensor. If I'm making it a primary camera to cover specific styles of shooting, yeah there are better options out there, but it fits the bill for travelers and amateurs looking for a well rounded camera.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

photomedium

Jefftan,
what you said is all good for amateur photographers, pros at the sidelines at sports events still need to use the huge bazookas on monopods and the full size DLSRs. Sorry, but there no sub for that, except the DSLR may become smaller MILC in the near future but the lenses are going to stay huge. No use fighting physics.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

steve ohlhaber

Photomedium,
Since no pro would ever use a travel zoom for a gig, the zs100 camera is better for the non pro stuff. I had the sony rx and the lack of a zoom made it worthless to me. If you take 1 camera on a trip and want to shoot personal stuff and don't like 1/2.33" sensors, that is the best option. The only other thing similar is Nikons 24-500, but that is twice as thick and $300 more. So, this is perfect for people that want some zoom range and better than tiny sensor quality. Its perfect.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Well, I don't think is built to compete with the RX100 (excuse me, the Nikon 1" camera with 18-50 was mentioned. either one)

It is a 'travel zoom'

It has a great focal range. Given the increase in sensor size, they still managed to mount a faster lens than previous TZ cameras. I think?

So, it makes a great TZ camera for people that will occasionally want to zoom in to fotograph a detail high on il duomo. This is what the camera is made for. (so, I agree with Jefftan)

Feb 27, 2016*permalink

210 gram is too heavy for a MFT slow lens
$500 is too expensive, fair price is at most $300

Feb 26, 2016permalink

John Bean (UK)

The arguably best kit zoom for micro 4/3 is the original Panasonic 14-45/3.5-5.6, which despite having a much smaller range is only a smidgin lighter at 195g.

The weight of the new lens is fine; whether it is worth the price depends on how good it turns out to be optically.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Best kit zoom for MFT is olympus 12-40mm f/2.8. Heavier than those and little bigger but every bit better.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Err, the 12-40/2.8 is not a kit lens.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

i agree with u that 12-40 F2.8 is the best zoom lens optically for the MFT system
but no way i would use a 400 gram lens for MFT

with E-M10 II total weight become 800 gram!!!!!
that is approaching full frame level (A7II with kit lens 900 gram)

even with GM1 total weight 600 gram, way too much

Feb 26, 2016permalink

digifan

The 12-32mm is THE Best "cheap" kit zoom lens for m43 optically.
The 14-45 isn't as sharp as the latest kit lenses from Panasonic.
But I think there's more to optically best alone.
The 12-50mm Olympus is not the sharpest but pretty sharp and has very nice features that are very underrated, in fact if the 12-50mm had OIS than this would def be the best kit zoom.
The 12-50mm does great macro has additional function button, it is INTERNAL ZOOM AND AF and is weathersealed, has mechanical and electronic zoom possibility et.etc.
I think it is a tremendous plus if a zoom lens has internal zoom so people don't notice you're zooming in on them, a priceless feature IMO.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

papillon_65

I love how everyone is judging the 12-60mm before we even know how it performs, I wish I had those magic powers.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Sorry but it has been multiple times validated that 12-40mm is a KIT LENS.

It comes as kit with next combos:
E-M1
E-M5 Pro
E-M5 II
E-M5 II Titanium

And what is a "kit lens"? It is a combo where manufacturer packages body and the lens to same box at the factory.

What is then a "bundle"? It is where the retailer takes two boxes like body and the lens and sells them with special deal to customers.

Sharpest kit lens for MFT is the 12-40mm. It can be cheap that way as you can pay just about $400 for it that way, but it is not cheapest what is the pana 12-32mm, that is as well smallest and widest too.

But when the claim that what is the best (optically and by design) kit lens is something cheap f/3.5-5.6 then it is not true as best is 12-40mm. But if the best (by lowest weight and size) is differently set then 12-32mm and 14-42mm EZ are the best choices.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Bhima78

@Rusk
And there are EP-5 packages with the 17mm f1.8, but we wouldn't call that a kit lens. The way most use the term kit lens is that:
1) it is bundled with the camera and
2) it does not significantly affect the price from just a body only purchase

Feb 26, 2016permalink

digifan

@Papillon_65 Well not by me, I talk about what is now the best "cheap" kit lens. The 12-60mm isn't even available yet.
The best overall kit lens is the 12-40mm as explained above.

Feb 26, 2016*permalink

papillon_65

@digifan I was referring to some general comments, the MTF charts look pretty good to me, I think some people may be in for a surprise.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount

no point arguing if 12-40 F2.8 is a kit lens or not
definitely not cheap kit lens price

Feb 26, 2016permalink

zzzxtreme

Zs100, more interesting than nikon DL
And I'm a nikon 1 fan
Can panasonic still do auto iso in manual mode?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

SETI

ZS-100 looks smaller than new Nikon. 1:0

Feb 26, 2016permalink

achim k

“...ZS-100 a very attractive camera for traveling, in theory...“, indeed, but why did Panasonic not make the camera a few millimeters wider and incorporated a proper EVF. That tiny, low-res hole taken over from the ZS 70 is no fun to use!

Feb 26, 2016permalink

majicmoments

Panasonic seem about to make the near-perfect camera..then fall short by making a tiny evf.. or leaving out the most valuable of features..the tilting screen, which has been one of their hallmarks.. A real shame as i feel this could be the perfect travel or street photography pocket camera.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

"The lens is constructed from polycarbonate, but the mount is metal."

I doubt that. 208g and metal mount. I bet that mount is plastic just like almost with any other lens that others do. There are few from Canon, Zeiss etc that do have metal mounts but only a few.
The most metal mount lenses are from WW2 era where whole lens is made from metal (or like Leica has).

Who doesn't know what I talk about, should learn what are the lens parts (what a mount really is) or at least read the lensrental article about metal mounts.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Johannes Zander

Read this about lens mount:

Now who doesn't know?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Really, a wikipedia? Should have guessed that someone doesn't even read.
http://petapixel.com/2014/01/03/metal-mounts-really-better-plastic-lens-rentals-investigates/

What people believe they call as mount, is not even visible.

So how can you (or a wikipedia writer) know what is what?

Welcome to lens design 101

Feb 26, 2016permalink

While you were sleeping, Wikipedia became an accredited source. Probably more reliable and accurate than 99% of the junk you read. ;)

The lens mount is the part that physically attaches to the camera, the parts that actually touch. The article you linked to simply states that the metal mounting portion of the lens is then attached to a plastic "casing" of the lens itself, and that is the portion that fails. This is not the mount... this is the join between the mount and the lens itself. So please, don't post articles in defense of your ignorance when you don't even understand the article itself.

Having taken apart hundreds of lenses, from 60(70?) years old to brand new, I can tell you that this is indeed the weak spot in most designs, even the all metal ones. It's usually just 3-4 small screws.

The purpose of a metal mount is usually to avoid wear on the friction surfaces caused by mounting/dismounting. Something that professionals do quite a bit.

"lens design 101" eh? lol

Feb 26, 2016permalink

"an undercarriage or part on which a device (as a motor or an artillery piece) rests in service"

The parts between the 2 devices that actually touch... Not the part that those attach to.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Kevylloyd

Woopeewo Rusk, so you've found a discrepancy in word usage to your own and Lensrentals. We all know the article was describing what Lensrentals would merely describe as the external mount, and with the 12-60mm it is indeed metal unlike some other Panasonic lenses. Whether this is better or not is open to discussion maybe, but your point seems to be just here to gain some kind of petty ego boost. Move along folks, back to the adult conversation.

Feb 26, 2016*permalink

ozturert

Well, the picture says it's metal but then people don't see anymore...

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

Picture show that bayonet is metal, nothing about mount it is attached under it.

Even the Wikipedia is collision with itself in the article, but it doesn't matter when self promoted dpreview fans eat everything that manufacturer markets to them.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Bayonet is a TYPE of MOUNT(as opposed to a screw mount), it is not the name for that part of the lens. That part of the lens is the MOUNT. The MOUNT is made of metal. Learn a little bit about lens design before you try and teach it.

Feb 26, 2016*permalink

Vlad S

Language is a tool for communication, and the words mean what the majority of people understand them to mean. If at some point there was a different definition and it fell out of use, then i is pointless to keep referring to it, because it does not communicate that idea any longer. If most people understand the "mount" as the bayonet part, then so it is, regardless of what was meant in the past.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

futurewah

I bet you're fun at parties.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Vlad, I don't think you understood what was said at all, you just felt like interjecting some pseudo-intellectual nonsense. This is exemplified by the fact that what you seem to be implying is taking place is actually the opposite of what is happening here.

The mount is the part of the lens that touches/attaches to the camera body. Always was. Never changed. Even outside of cameras this term has been static.

A bayonet is a term in cameras used since the development of a mount that slid into slots, rotated, and locked with a pin was used as a type of mount. Never changed.

A "bayonet", in this usage(related to cameras) IS a MOUNT.

It's not complicated.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Jacques Cornell

Dude, have you ever owned an ILC? I mean, this assertion is utterly clueless. As a professional photographer, I've owned and used scores of cameras and lenses for 30 years, and the only one that had a plastic lens mount was my Canon 50/1.8. All of my Panasonic lenses have metal mounts, and the only Panasonic lens I'm aware of that has a plastic mount is one of the newer kit lenses. My Panasonic 20/1.7 weighs just 87 grams and has a metal mount.
You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Zoron

LX200 anywhere near the horizon ?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

^ Nothing. But cameras always get replaced by new models. Are you new to technology?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

What are you smoking? Nobody wants a camera that is exactly the same with a new model number. Most of the time when a manufacturers makes a new model, it will have new features and functions and things will be changed. Nobody is forcing you to buy it. Just because youre happy with your existing model (which is great), does that necessarily mean all technology improvements should halt to a stop to please you? Are you that insecure about your purchase?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Bhima78

@Operator
For starters, a tilting touchscreen and slightly better than the bleh GX7's EVF would be nice for an LX100 successor. Can't believe they left off the touchscreen on the LX100...

Feb 26, 2016permalink

They should give it the new 20MP sensor (16MP with crop), and give it a touch screen. And they should let the EV comp dial adjust brightness in M mode with Auto ISO.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Zoron

A tilting/articulation screen.....that's what kept me from getting the LX100

Feb 26, 2016permalink

cameron2

And support for interchangeable lenses, IBIS, a better EVF, and a grip. Maybe call it the GX8?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

That seems like a total non-sequitur, cameron. The physical form factor and the control logic of the two cameras is totally different.

That said, I imagine that some people would be interested in taking the LX100 as is and giving it an M4/3 mount. Almost like a spiritual successor to the original GX1, whereas the GX7 and GX8 were progressively larger cameras.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

cameron2

I must admit to being facetious in my previous response. Sometimes the wish-lists of "what to stick into this tiny package" become long enough that you know that the tiny package will no longer contain the result!

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Fair enough. I don't think any of the suggestions are particularly unreasonable. Touchscreen and the updated sensor add no size, nor does the software change to the EV compensation.

The tilting screen would add some thickness, but in the case of the RX100 vs. RX100 II, it was 2.5mm to add the articulating screen.

I'm not sure that would personally be worth it to me, as I'm finding that the one-axis tilt on my GX7 is only a tiny bit better than fixed, and I would prefer full articulation. But I think that would probably be a bridge too far for a compact camera like the LX100, so I'd certainly leave that off my wishlist.

Bigger EVF would also require a large form factor, though, to be sure. Again, not something I'd necessarily want to compromise on.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

^ except all of that is very doable. The technology for all of that in a small formfactor already exists. Look at the Sony RX100 series for example. And the GM5 successor can be the one with m43 mount. So hows that unrealistic? And if youre so happy with your current camera, why are you so against progression and advancements?

Feb 27, 2016permalink

Archiver

When I think of travel zooms, my mind goes back to 2006 and the Canon G7, which was a revamp of their hitherto-larger G series. 35-210mm f2.8-4.8 and a tiny sensor, 640x480 30fps video or a whopping 1024x768 15fps!

It was a great camera for its time, and allowed me to take thousands of photos, many of which I am quite proud.

Ten years later, we have a 24-250mm f2.8-5.6 camera with a 1" sensor, 4k video and what should be a pretty decent EVF. Has it really been ten years?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

ShatteredSky

Any info about the macro capability of the TZ100? Thanks!

Feb 26, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

I don't think it is capable anywhere near 1:1 magnification.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

ShatteredSky

Yes, this is what I thought. Hmmm, then DL24-85 for underwater ...

Feb 26, 2016permalink

ZAnton

I can only imagine those massive barrel distorsions of Pana lens, and I'm already scared.

Feb 26, 2016permalink

JEROME NOLAS

You don't have to be. Software is taking care. It's a mega zoom, what do expect? Great travel camera. :)

Feb 26, 2016permalink

altafbusal

I wish it was 12-69 f2.8

Feb 26, 2016permalink

ZAnton

why not 4-600 f/1.4?

Feb 26, 2016permalink

altafbusal

I meant to say 12-60 f2.8
Sorry

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Henry McA

12-60mm f2.8-4 would have been nice - like the old 4/3 Oly lens. But that lens was much bigger...

Feb 26, 2016permalink

It's not intended as a pro lens. I would guess a lens like you are describing would cost upwards of $1000, and be VERY heavy/large. Not what they are aiming for.

This is just a slightly nicer(mid range?) alternative to the mediocre kit lenses(which I hated and sold immediately). The added reach and FoV are both very nice, IMO.

I am trying to find a reason to NOT buy one for my old G5/GX1 bodies. Even "wasting" the weather resistant abilities leaves you with a great all-in-one lens for light travel.

I am eagerly awaiting test results...

Feb 26, 2016permalink

Henry McA

The Oly 12-60 wasn´t a pro lens - it was just a really good mid-range zoom lens.

Pana (and Oly) differentiate too much at the bottom of the market. Maybe because that´s were they believe theiry customers are. Well, not me...

Feb 26, 2016permalink