1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

12-35 if already have 12mm?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by F/Stop, Mar 31, 2013.

  1. F/Stop

    F/Stop Mu-43 Veteran

    451
    Mar 9, 2013
    West Virginia
    Brian Y.
    So, i know this has been covered, but im just looking for some more opinions. i know the pros and cons of these lenses, but im trying to see what other people have done that were in the same predicament that i am currently.

    my current lenses are 12, 17, 75. my plan is to fill the space with 25 pana and 45.

    so instead of buying the 25 pana, i can scoop the 12-35 and have flexibility almost to 45mm. (which would be the next lens)

    so my thoughts are, sell the 12mm, buy 12-35 or keep the 12mm for lower light and buy the 12-35.?

    i have a feeling once i buy the 25 1.4 i wont want to bother with the 12-35, so maybe ill just have to buy the 25 before making any other decisions..

    thank you for your time..:drinks:
     
  2. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    784
    Jan 10, 2013

    It isn't a cut and dried decision and depends on factors. There are photographers who bought the 12-35; and their previously purchased 25mm has been collecting dust since.
     
  3. ptolemyx

    ptolemyx Mu-43 Veteran

    290
    Jun 19, 2012
    Vancouver, BC
    Ben
    I had the 12mm once, and now I have the 12-35; after looking through pictures from both I think the only thing in favor of the prime is the extra stop--the 12-35 is just as sharp and (subjectively) I prefer the color/contrast anyway.

    The 25mm is a great lens. I just sold one (and the 17mm/1.8) to pay for the 12-35. I don't miss the 17mm, but the 25mm is hard to beat; I'd probably get it again if I could (although I'd try to find a nice used copy).

    IMO the 12 + 17 primes are nothing special. Unless you really need the speed at those FLs, I'd sell them both and get the 12-35 and the 25.
     
  4. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    I know my 20/1.7 has ... And there's at least some size advantage there.
     
  5. mrjr

    mrjr Mu-43 Top Veteran

    518
    Sep 25, 2012
    Unless you like the mZD 12 specifically for its special handling characteristics, I'd sell it and I'd buy the 12-35. And I'd also definitely buy the PL 25.
     
  6. RamblinR

    RamblinR Mu-43 Top Veteran

    545
    Aug 16, 2012
    Sunshine Coast, Qld Australia
    Maria
    I have both the P12-35 and the P25. If you don't think you will need the f1.4 of the P25 or the f2 of the O12 then you should be fine with the zoom as it is a great lens. It all comes down to your needs for fast aperture.
     
  7. RuffDraft

    RuffDraft Mu-43 Regular

    134
    Jan 13, 2013
    I have the same predicament at the moment:

    Option 1: Buy the 12-35 and 25 1.4
    Option 2: Buy the 12 with lens hood and 25 1.4

    The reason why I'm personally leaning towards the two fixed lenses (option 2) is because of the size and restrictions. I actually think that I'll enjoy the fixed focal lengths as I've enjoyed using the 45mm 1.8. Moreover, apart from the Macro Mode and obvious benefits of shooting with the 12-50mm kit lens, I've come to realise that it goes against every reason why I moved to m4/3 in the first place.

    The reason I'm here is because last summer, I grew enormously frustrated with carrying around a 5kg bag with DSLR gear up mountains and trails in Canada. After returning, I looked into alternative cameras and discovered the OM-D and the fantastic Olympus Primes. Those are the reasons that I'm posting here, so choosing a rather large (for m4/3) 12-35mm seems like a step towards the kit lens that I had for my 1000D. Also, although the 12-35 will be a superior lens in almost all ways to the kit lens (which I also dislike for its size, despite its overall adequacy), I don't think I'll need a greatly fast aperture during the day and stopping down is supposed to reduce the differences between the 12-35 and the 12-50. Throw in the fact that the 12-50, like the 12-35, is waterproof and the benefits disappear even further. Not to mention the fact that I'll nigh on render my 12-50 redundant by buying the 12-35, and the logic seems to swing even further towards option 2 (for me).

    Additionally, as I'm carrying an Oly OM-D, I think that I should wait incase Olympus bring out a cheaper zoom that's faster or longer etc. as I know that it would just use the OM-D's 5 axis stabilisation. I can always go through the motions of being restricted with a fixed focal length for my tour of Asia this summer, and come back educated as to my mistakes, or glad that I've been able to move around with an extremely compact kit. If I felt restricted, or time proved that changing lenses was a great annoyance, then I can get the Olympus zoom when it arrives. Meanwhile, the £250 on the 12-50mm will at least have had some use...

    So it depends on your arguments and needs, but I'd try not to forget why you chose m4/3 in the first place, although I'll be watching this thread closely to see if my opinion swings. I'm purchasing both lenses this week.
     
  8. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    Wait, so you're saying a couple primes is lighter and smaller than one zoom?

    Huh?

    If you were talking pancakes, maybe I'm with you - but the 12-35 isn't much bigger than the 25/1.4.
     
  9. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    784
    Jan 10, 2013
    It could be the weight of the lens while on camera - a camera such as E-M5 that does not necessarily require the added weight of the grip. Here's the specs on both, almost a 4 ounce difference; negligible size difference:

    Panasonic 12-35mm
    Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 2.66 x 2.91" (67.6 x 73.8 mm)
    Weight 10.76 oz (305 g)

    Panasonic 25mm
    Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 2.48 x 2.15" (63 x 54.5 mm)
    Weight 7.05 oz (200 g)
     
  10. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    I've always kind of skipped the midrange zoom but everyone's preferences are different.

    If you already have the 12/2, why bother selling it for another lens that duplicates the range of some of your other primes? How important is f/2 at 12mm?

    This question should've been asked before acquiring the Olympus 12mm.
     
  11. RuffDraft

    RuffDraft Mu-43 Regular

    134
    Jan 13, 2013
    Of course not. But on the camera, both of those lenses are smaller.

    I realise the size of the 25mm 1.4, but the aperture and quality of that lens really sets it apart from what I've seen / read. Even so, in recent times from recent comments I've read here, the 17 1.8 tempts me for it's size difference over the 25 1.4 too.

    Take into account my other reasons and I think my considerations are warranted in terms of my own thinking with regards to the rest of my kit.

    And I've racked my brains since 2012 as to this decision. Both options have strengths and it's probably the hardest choice that I've faced. If I could, I would purchase both options. I do think that I may rue the decision in the future but I was brought here with the idea of having a trinity of primes and I think I still feel the same way.
     
  12. kevwilfoto

    kevwilfoto Mu-43 Veteran

    294
    Sep 23, 2011
    Colorado
    If convenience is the driving factor, how about dumping all the primes and get the 12-35 & 35-100?

    If that's really not an appealing option, I say get the 25 & 45. I have those two, with the 25 staying on my camera 80% of the time and want the 12, 17/1.8 and 75. Even though I'm a zoom ******, I can't justify the cost of those pany 2.8 zooms. I'd be tempted at half their current price, but for now I'll stick with my 12-50 & 45-175 and concentrate on amassing this killer prime kit.
     
  13. RuffDraft

    RuffDraft Mu-43 Regular

    134
    Jan 13, 2013
    They're cheap enough already; a zoom with as good a quality 12mm as the Oly prime but ranging up to 35mm all at 2.8 and equalling the quality of other primes. It's a good price in my opinion, especially if you have a Panny body.

    That said, I'm hoping the same as you for my kit in the future.
     
  14. F/Stop

    F/Stop Mu-43 Veteran

    451
    Mar 9, 2013
    West Virginia
    Brian Y.
    thank you for all your opinions! i think since i already started my collection of primes, i will continue on that path. After using all the primes for a considerable amount of time, i will re-evaluate my options down the road to see if the 12-35 is really worth it...

    meanwhile, 25 1.4 sitting in shopping cart @ amazon....
     
  15. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    784
    Jan 10, 2013
    Before you finalize the deal, contemplate whether you'll be in a position to shoot under inclement weather. The weatherproofing is another feature of the 12-35mm. You can shoot at 12mm and not have to stop when drops start to fall.
     
  16. sabesh

    sabesh Mu-43 Veteran

    Just add the 45/1.8 and then you'll be set: 12, 17, 45, 75

    Ask yourself how often you really use the 75. If you don't use it much, you can sell it and get the 12-35.
     
  17. F/Stop

    F/Stop Mu-43 Veteran

    451
    Mar 9, 2013
    West Virginia
    Brian Y.
    Ended up getting the 25mm 1.4 before the 45mm. And I love the 75mm and use it quite often.
     
  18. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    My two cents...

    This is not about filling in the gaps in focal length or about collecting lenses. This is all about whether or not you prefer to shoot zooms or primes. People tend to fall in one or the other.... some wander between both never really sticking to one.

    I am mainly a prime shooter but I do find times when a fast short zoom is beneficial. No one can argue convenience vs image quality adequately.

    So my recommendation... save up and get both... that's what I did.


    If you are still on the fence, I'm going to give another recommendation that I haven't seen posted yet. RENT IT! Shoot the 12-35 next ALL your primes and decide if the Image quality and aperture is "good enough". Do the same with the 35-100. If so, then sell your primes and stick with the fast zooms. If not... then you've just saved yourself the trouble of buying something you don't need.

    LensRentals.com - Rent a Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 X OIS
    http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/micro-four-thirds/lenses/telephoto/panasonic-35-100mm-f2.8-x-ois

    My guess... You'll probably slowly sell your primes in lieu to a combination of 12-35 and 35-100 choosing to bump the ISO a stop or two to compensate in lowlight.
     
  19. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    784
    Jan 10, 2013
    12mm is going to be my next and last prime. The present instant rebate is too attractive; especially after not being able to take advantage of the 3x$150 off with body sale.

    I started with the 12-35mm from a practical standpoint and looking to replicate what I had in my 5DII with 24-105 combination. But I haven't been drawn to the zoom after getting primes. And that is because the Canon L primes were costly and always out of reach for me; the Micro 4/3 primes are some kind of release from deprivation.

    So, Micro 4/3 is a series of firsts in my experience. First with a set of primes and first with having dual bodies. As the air releases from recent GAS attacks and I get down to taking pictures, I'll soon find out what stays and what goes.

    The 12mm has gotten more favorable reviews than bad, so I'm going for one and calling it a day.
     
  20. ntblowz

    ntblowz Mu-43 Veteran

    312
    Nov 13, 2011
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Well my friend sold his 12mm after he got the 12-35mm, while I sold my 25mm after I got the 12-35mm, it is really useful for trips and what not, though I do have a 20mm pancake for size and aperture consideration.