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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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

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

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

@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...

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.

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

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

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!

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

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...