Panasonic 12-35mm/f.2.8: Too early?

MidEastGal · Feb 21, 2013

Hi,

I am wondering is it too early for me to invest in this lens as my first m43 experience on the GH3. And is it too early regarding high price and not much reviews with GH3.

I was looking for a much more economic option (in other threads and online) for over 3 weeks now and seems I am hitting wall. This lens seems to have what I want all in one: fast(er) aperture, decent semi telephoto zoom, and wider zoom at 12. The other option is buying a collection of lenses. Still an option that's why I said aim just wondering.

The closest cheaper lens I found in thisnrange is the Oly 12-60/f.2.8-4, but was advised against and I need adopter.

Is it worth the value? Anybody used it on GH3? How is it for video? Any cons or pros from personal experience are much appreciated.

brunerww · Feb 22, 2013

I'm renting one this weekend. I'll compare it to my 4/3 lenses (Oly 11-22 f2.8-3.5 and Sigma 18-50 f2.8) and let you know how it goes.

But I already know the answer. If you can afford this lens ($967CDN from Japan via eBay Canada, or $1300CDN from Amazon Canada), buy it

You won't need another lens for a long time.

usayit · Feb 22, 2013

MidEastGal said:
I was looking for a much more economic option (in other threads and online) for over 3 weeks now and seems I am hitting wall. This lens seems to have what I want all in one: fast(er) aperture, decent semi telephoto zoom, and wider zoom at 12. The other option is buying a collection of lenses. Still an option that's why I said aim just wondering.

This is exactly why I doubt you'll find the price of the 12-35mm drop anytime soon. If you need a fast high quality zoom that is native to micro 4/3, this is you one and only choice.

well.. other than finding on used.

If you compare it to the equivalent 24-70 fast zooms by first party manufacturers such as nikon and canon, the price is actually on target.

It is rumored that Olympus will release their own fast zoom... but since Olympus doesn't put IS in their lenses, you'll be at a disadvantage. I have the 12-35 and 35-100 f/2.8 for use on an E-PL1 and OMD. Quite happy but I haven't had much time to work them. I'm primarily a prime lens shooter... so those two are an alternative.

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

brunerww said:
I'm renting one this weekend. I'll compare it to my 4/3 lenses (Oly 11-22 f2.8-3.5 and Sigma 18-50 f2.8) and let you know how it goes.

But I already know the answer. If you can afford this lens ($967CDN from Japan via eBay Canada, or $1300CDN from Amazon Canada), buy it

You won't need another lens for a long time.

Brunerww, thank you. How amazing you are renting one! I asked in my local rental store and they don't rent any m43 lenses

I wish there is a rental that does in Edmonton. (Is there that I don't know of?)

So, I would probably have to stretch things out to afford it and that's why I am asking if it is worth it and if it would make not need another lens in near future. I hate clutter and got so much distracted in last month looking at eBay and forums to search for most economic lenses and pros and cons... I get into details and forget the bigger picture.

I am really really looking forward to your review and feedback on the 12-35! Please share quick any videos and stills and, if any, major problems against it before I break my bank account :hail: .....

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

usayit said:
MidEastGal said:

I was looking for a much more economic option (in other threads and online) for over 3 weeks now and seems I am hitting wall. This lens seems to have what I want all in one: fast(er) aperture, decent semi telephoto zoom, and wider zoom at 12. The other option is buying a collection of lenses. Still an option that's why I said aim just wondering.

Click to expand...

This is exactly why I doubt you'll find the price of the 12-35mm drop anytime soon. If you need a fast high quality zoom that is native to micro 4/3, this is you one and only choice.

well.. other than finding on used.

If you compare it to the equivalent 24-70 fast zooms by first party manufacturers such as nikon and canon, the price is actually on target.

It is rumored that Olympus will release their own fast zoom... but since Olympus doesn't put IS in their lenses, you'll be at a disadvantage. I have the 12-35 and 35-100 f/2.8 for use on an E-PL1 and OMD. Quite happy but I haven't had much time to work them. I'm primarily a prime lens shooter... so those two are an alternative.

Usayit, thanks for the informative reply, especially about price trends! Makes sens I guess. I will wait more reviews while I prepare my financial shock

I think it is a side topic here, but just cuz u mentioned the word, what is your favorite prime? and is the quality from the 12-35 close (even a bit) to any of your prime lenses?

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

I read somewhere that the 12-35/f.2.8 is great for stills (close to some primes) but the video is not as the aperture does not remain constant. Any comments on that? I did not find more details or verification of this lens' use with video and its fixed f2.8. And makes a very faint clicking noise (?) How true? :meh:

Note to Brunerww: Kindly keep an eye for these 2 problems when you rent yours this weekend

usayit · Feb 22, 2013

MidEastGal said:
I think it is a side topic here, but just cuz u mentioned the word, what is your favorite prime? and is the quality from the 12-35 close (even a bit) to any of your prime lenses?

Most of the primes I shoot are with another system (Leica M). Even when I was shooting with high quality Canon EOS lenses, I still preferred the primes (24L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 and 135L) over my two fast zooms; 24-70L and 70-200L. The choice between high quality zooms versus primes is really a personal one.... but I enjoy the faster aperture and subtle image quality advantages. I've never been in a situation when a zoom offered the same experience, quality, and satisfaction as a good set of primes.

But..... it comes with a price... flexibility of the zoom.

Specific to micro 4/3, I have Panasonic 14mm, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, and Olympus 45mm f/1.8. The highest quality one is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8... absolutely stunning when used properly. It is also my least used micro 4/3 prime.. simply because its a telephoto. The one that gets the most use is the 14mm because I generally like shorter focal lengths although neither the fastest of primes nor the highest quality. I'm now considering the Olympus 12mm f/2 as a replacement due to this. 20mm f/1.7 is a good all rounder.... but many are moving to the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 Summilux with good things to say. The advantage of primes on micro 4/3 is that they are so darn small and easy to pack/carry.... its great!

Despite that, I still prefer primes my other (primary) camera system. I have 3 kids now... life priorities have changed. Its part of the reason why I don't shoot with Canon anymore... big.. bulky... heavy. The reason for the purchase of the 12-35 and 35-100 is to see if those two keep me satisfied enough when I don't have room for a dedicated camera bag. If so, I'll probably sell my micro 4/3 primes... and micro 4/3 will be all zooms as a pure convenience.

usayit · Feb 22, 2013

MidEastGal said:
I read somewhere that the 12-35/f.2.8 is great for stills (close to some primes) but the video is not as the aperture does not remain constant. Any comments on that? I did not find more details or verification of this lens' use with video and its fixed f2.8. And makes a very faint clicking noise (?) How true? :meh:

Note to Brunerww: Kindly keep an eye for these 2 problems when you rent yours this weekend

no experience with video... but I hear the Panasonic 14-140 is a favorite. No idea how it stacks image quality wise against the 12-35.

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

usayit said:
MidEastGal said:

I think it is a side topic here, but just cuz u mentioned the word, what is your favorite prime? and is the quality from the 12-35 close (even a bit) to any of your prime lenses?

Click to expand...

Most of the primes I shoot are with another system (Leica M). Even when I was shooting with high quality Canon EOS lenses, I still preferred the primes (24L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 and 135L) over my two fast zooms; 24-70L and 70-200L. The choice between high quality zooms versus primes is really a personal one.... but I enjoy the faster aperture and subtle image quality advantages. I've never been in a situation when a zoom offered the same experience, quality, and satisfaction as a good set of primes.

But..... it comes with a price... flexibility of the zoom.

Specific to micro 4/3, I have Panasonic 14mm, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, and Olympus 45mm f/1.8. The highest quality one is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8... absolutely stunning when used properly. It is also my least used micro 4/3 prime.. simply because its a telephoto. The one that gets the most use is the 14mm because I generally like shorter focal lengths although neither the fastest of primes nor the highest quality. I'm now considering the Olympus 12mm f/2 as a replacement due to this. 20mm f/1.7 is a good all rounder.... but many are moving to the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 Summilux with good things to say. The advantage of primes on micro 4/3 is that they are so darn small and easy to pack/carry.... its great!

Despite that, I still prefer primes my other (primary) camera system. I have 3 kids now... life priorities have changed. Its part of the reason why I don't shoot with Canon anymore... big.. bulky... heavy. The reason for the purchase of the 12-35 and 35-100 is to see if those two keep me satisfied enough when I don't have room for a dedicated camera bag. If so, I'll probably sell my micro 4/3 primes... and micro 4/3 will be all zooms as a pure convenience.

Thank you so much for sharing your usage insight. So helpful! I actually love primes too (theoretically speaking as not used them yet). But was afraid of the restriction in zoom as a beginner on m43. I might still consider this as the starting option if the 12-35 (or other zooms) don't work out for me. I even looked at the voigtlander nokton 25mm f0.95 on ebay for around same price or bit less than the 12-35. Still on back of my mind. I also heard v good things about the Pan 25/1.4.

The only thing I am sure about at this point s that I don't want to sacrifice quality or clutter lenses. I want one good lens, be it zoom or prime, that suits indoor interviews (with pr light or without in unplanned situations), and takes good stills in normal range (if I may use this term loosely).

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

usayit said:
MidEastGal said:

I read somewhere that the 12-35/f.2.8 is great for stills (close to some primes) but the video is not as the aperture does not remain constant. Any comments on that? I did not find more details or verification of this lens' use with video and its fixed f2.8. And makes a very faint clicking noise (?) How true? :meh:

Note to Brunerww: Kindly keep an eye for these 2 problems when you rent yours this weekend

Click to expand...

no experience with video... but I hear the Panasonic 14-140 is a favorite. No idea how it stacks image quality wise against the 12-35.

Thanks. Yes, the 14-140 was my previous choice and I actually tried it for a couple days on GH2 before I return and get the GH3 body. I used it for trial interview setting at my work (where I'll be using it mostly) and it was not to my liking. I admit partly due to my inexperience but still too bad results in that room that was lit with decent amount of fluorescent plus daylight. If it was cheaper I would get it for hiking and wild life which I do often, but then I'll need another one for faster aperture and low-light.

Here is an interesting (not so positive though) review I found on the 12-35: Panasonic LUMIX G X VARIO 12-35mm f/2.8 ASPH POWER OIS - Review / Test Report - Samples & Verdict The reviewer concludes "we are still not convinced that the lens is really worth its very high price tag although there's no doubt that most users can get perfectly happy with it".

This is a v good video review with comparisons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-_4kmPbWWM

Edit: and this 12-35 shakiness thread http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-shakiness-possible-lemon-Any-others-see-this

usayit · Feb 22, 2013

Of course I have different needs....

But

When I was a Canon shooter and I needed something relatively lightweight for long walks.... My preference would be the Canon 5d (my 1dMarkII was too heavy) + 24-105L f/4 (good range and quality) + 50mm f/1.4 in my pocket. Often I would carry this combination without a bag. Basically, relied on the zoom and switched to the 50mm once I went inside.

Now..

I walk around often with 1 camera + 35mm + 50mm and that's it.

The same can be applied with micro 4/3. A bare OMD (no grip) + 12-50mm + 20mm f/1.7 can also be a good combination for someone on the go.

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

Yes, I guess all comes down to personal needs and value of return.

I like your reasoning of weight and luggage, so important and often I forget about that.

MidEastGal · Feb 22, 2013

I am thinking aloud here by accumulating these links so don't shoot me:

Short video on a town with GH3 and 12-35mm: [video=vimeo;57332403]http://vimeo.com/57332403[/video]