12-35 or 9-18

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by WT21, Jul 14, 2012.

  1. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    I've got the 9-18mm lens for my walk around. I use a bag to carry my two EPM1 bodies, so super-savings on size is not imperative to me.

    But I am not spectacularly happy with the CA and soft corners. The 12-35 looks like a great lens, and it is 2.8, but it's EXPENSIVE and doesn't go as wide.

    Even if I sold the 9-18 (let's say I net $500) and the P14 (net, what, $150 if I'm lucky? Maybe closer to $100?), that's still only 1/2 the price of the 12-35. I don't think I'd sell the fisheye, and I would in no way sell the PL25.

    I wish the 12-35 were about $400 cheaper. That would help me justify it a lot more!

    Just some venting.
  2. D@ne

    D@ne Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 23, 2012
    It's a pricey lens to justify...another thing to consider is the size/weight, which might not be handled well on the epm1. have you had the chance to try the 7-14 on your camera? Might be a good test to see how you like the size, as it's similar to the 12-35 I believe.

    Speaking of which, how about the 7-14?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    14 is too wide for me for a walk-around. 9-18 is just about perfect for how I shoot.

    I use the PL25 regularly on my EPM1 and even the 100-300, so I don't think size/weight is that much of an issue for me, lol.

    It's just the price!
  4. LVL8hacker

    LVL8hacker Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 4, 2012
    Pinehurst, North Carolina
    Real Name:
    Larry Anderson
    I could almost give up all my lenses for the 12-35mm. I almost shoot in that range all the time. I would never give up the PL25mm though...and I might need to keep the zoom.....crap....I just need more money :)
  5. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    There's always the 4/3 11-22/2.8-3.5, assuming size isn't a major constraint. CA corrects well in Lightroom, and the price should be under $400. Sharpness should be quite a bit better than the 9-18.

  6. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    The 12-35/2.8 is a fantastic lens and worth the full list price. DigitalRev has already started bringing the price down though, so you might not have to wait long.

    The other option would be to step into the 21 century and use a body that employs CA correction :)
  7. dre_tech

    dre_tech Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 31, 2012
    I presume by that you mean a Panasonic body, right? I've gotten a little CA with the 12-35 on the E-M5, not like the 7-14...

    WT21, you can wait and see if there will be GH3 kit with the 12-35, buy the kit, sell the new body. I would sell the 14mm right away, and the 9-18 in order to get the 12-35.

    Grey market imports of the 12-35 will also be cheaper than $1299 in the long run.
  8. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    I've never used the original 43 lenses. Of course, any of them would also require the $100 adapter.

    Would the 11-22 or the 43 9-18 both AF on my EPM1??
  9. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    That might be worth looking at. Good idea!
  10. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Ha ha! Friendly pot-shot politely ignored :wink:
  11. allenrowand

    allenrowand Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 10, 2012
    Portland, OR
    Real Name:
    Allen Rowand
    Unless you need a new lens right now, you could always wait and see if the rumored m.z12-60 is released. While the 12-35 seems like a great lens, I'd rather pay a few hundred less and not have the redundant OIS that I'll never use. The extra 25mm of reach is nice too :biggrin:
    • Like Like x 1
  12. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Real Name:
    @WT21 Be patient. If the 9-18 is close to perfect the 12-35 won't replace it. Wait for the price to settle. Wait for the early adopters and system jumpers to tire of it and buy it used. It may take a year. Be patient.

    Don't put your subject on the corners of the 9-18 and don't worry about the slight softness. Chromatic aberration is pretty easy to fix. You're making very nice photos with the 9-18. Don't ditch it for the shiny new lens.

    • Like Like x 2
  13. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Real Name:
    I can't see the 9-18 being replaced by the 12-35. The difference from 12mm down to 9mm is significant! I place a high value on the UWA option when making images, personally, and would have to have either the 7-14 or the 9-18 in addition to anything else. It sounds like you appreciate the UWA FOV as well, so I'd say sit with it.

    As for the 12-35... it totally rocks and its now my 'main' lens for m4/3. But it will be great to see what the rumored 12-60 turns out to be like! You may just want to add the 12-60 down the road to go with your 9-18. The 9-18 isn't a 7-14, but it is still a good performer and arguably a better '1-lens-walkaround' solution for those of us who appreciate the UWA FOV.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. FlyPenFly

    FlyPenFly Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    The 9-18mm needs one stop down to really shine.

    • Like Like x 3
  15. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    Both will AF, though the 9-18 is significantly faster. Nominally UWA is where m4/3 native lenses shine, but the 11-22 is kind of unique in terms of price/aperture. Of course, if you don't have the adapter, that adds a bit too, although I see the 3rd party adapters are now going for only ~$60 new which is a lot better than it used to be.

  16. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 15, 2011
    Aberdeen Scotland
    I love the m9-18 and have no issues with CA, doesn't LR4 correct for that anyway? For most part I fine the IQ excellent and don't find the small lack of corner sharpness a problem. However I am going to get the 12-35, that's a lens I'd use all the time and I'd very much appreciate the IQ, I had the excellent Zuiko 14-35 in my 4/3 days and that was an amazing lens, if the 12-35 comes even close to that quality I'd be over the moon. Whether I keep the 9-18 and PL25 once I get the 12-35 remains to be seen, I have found the difference between 9mm and 12mm not to be so extreme and I could probably get by with 12mm.

  17. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    And give up on in-body IS? NEVER!


    (more seriously, I'm personally getting very impatient to see DxO's modules for the E-M5. Here's hoping the 7-14 and 12-35 are among the first batch...)