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

Considering the Panasonic 12-35

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by nuclearboy, Jun 6, 2013.

  1. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    After traveling in NYC the other weekend with my brand new Olympus 12mm and the Panasonic 25mm, (along with the 45 and the 40-150), I found that switching lenses became an issue under some of the non-ideal conditions (mist on the boat and occasionally a light drizzle).

    Recently I started looking at reviews of the Panasonic 12-35mm lens. This has some weather sealing and is apparently a sharp lens. It has some Vignetting and is not as fast at f2.8 but it would be one lens that would have covered most of my shooting.

    I see the cost of the 12mm at $750 or so and the cost of a 17 or 25 at around $400 and I am up to the cost of the Panasonic 12-35mm.

    Anyone else considering this lens and do you think it be worth abandoning the 12mm and one other prime to pick up this 12-35mm Panasonic?

    I am considering it and wanted to get any other opinions here.
    Thanks
     
  2. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    It's a very tempting lens but not, for me, in lieu of my primes, and not at the current price. Maybe a used on in 4 or 5 years.
     
  3. rklepper

    rklepper Mu-43 Top Veteran

    733
    Dec 19, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Robert
    I have the 12-35 and it is my most used lens. I love it. I have never had any vignetting on it, not sure where you got that. That and the 35-100 will defiantly stay with me as long as I use this system.
     
  4. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    The 12 used will fetch $600 if your lucky. Probably more like $500-550. The 25 can get $400- $425 net. These 2 could get you a 12-35 new from Japan or used here. The 12-35 won't be quite as sharp or fast as those two, but convenience might outweigh those factors.
     
  5. lala

    lala Mu-43 Rookie

    10
    May 22, 2013
    I also have the 12-35 and it is my most used lens as well. It is expensive but there are deals to be had if you watch for them. I have the 25 lumix prime and plan on picking up the 75 and then the 35-100. It is good to have a couple of primes for the times you want a shallower depth of field and or to travel super light. I own the 9-18 and wish I had the 12 f2 but I don't find it as wide as I would like so am on the fence regarding the 12. I picked the 75 as my next purchase as it is a good lens for flowers. It is a tough decision you have but considering how switching lenses is not always ideal a good zoom is very handy to have.
    Cheers
    Lala

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Mu-43 mobile app
     
  6. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    This is exactly what I am weighing. My reading of the reviews tells me it is probably sharp enough and I guess I could live with the slightly slower f-stop for the convenience. The 12mm Olympus is only 1 stop faster. I would have a real hard time parting with my Panasonic 25mm, however. I do like the idea of the f1.4 lens.
     
  7. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA

    I may have a "like new" 12mm for sale soon if I buy the 12-35 :).

    I cannot see the need for the 12mm if you already own the 12-35. The 12 is nice looking on the camera and is one stop faster but other than that, the 12-35 seems to give you basically everything else.
     
  8. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    Have to disagree at least as far as Olympus bodies go, although it is nothing that cannot be fixed in post, wide open at 12mm there is moderate degree of vignetting. Usually it goes unnoticed but a couple times it has been quite obvious.

    Sharpness wise, corner to corner average, I feel the (or at least my copies) 12-35mm is sharper than the 12mm 2.0 I owned briefly.
     
  9. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA

    This is consistent with the reviews I have seen. One thing the 12mm Olympus is pretty good at is controlling the vignetting.

    Thanks for your input as an owner of both lenses. If I do get the Panasonic 12-35, I will keep it and the 12 for a while too.
     
  10. rklepper

    rklepper Mu-43 Top Veteran

    733
    Dec 19, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Robert
    You can disagree but that doesn't make mine vignette. Sorry.

     
  11. Drdave944

    Drdave944 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 2, 2012
    You didn't say which camera you are using.If Panny you will use IS switch on the lens.
    F2.8 is a good speed. You will have to stop down to F 3.5 or more in sunny conditions.
    This is the lens for people who don't want to carry a lot of lenses or change a lot of lenses.
    This is a sturdy lens.Not as light-weight as the kit lens. For general photography it is very good. Keep as many of the smaller lenses you can.I take a 20mm f1:7 to events with low light. More compact and lighter.
     
  12. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    Here is a good "technical example" with the lens used with a olympus body.
    Panasonic G X VARIO 12-35 mm f/2.8 ASPH. P.O.I.S review - Vignetting - Lenstip.com

    The corners at 12mm can be almost 2 stops darker, even photozone has the vignetting at 1.4stops when corrected on a panasonic body. Panasonic LUMIX G X VARIO 12-35mm f/2.8 ASPH POWER OIS - Review / Test Report - Analysis

    Like I say, at times it is certainly noticable but also correcable but I am not sure how yours could have none.
     
  13. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    At one point I have two 12/2s and two 12-35/2.8s here. Each of the zooms was sharper at 12mm/f2.8, f/4 and f/5.6 than either of the 12/2s. The 12/2 was obviously a better performer than the zooms at f/2, but... :wink:
     
  14. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    I don't understand why people think this lens is expensive.

    If you add up the cost of the primes it reasonably replaces, you're at least 50% more than what the 12-35/2.8 costs, and its about half what the full frame versions cost.

    I didn't think I would use this lens as much as I do ... It could just about be welded to the body.
     
  15. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    850
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    Thanks for the help

    Thanks for all the suggestions and help.

    My plan is to buy the lens at the going used price and use it like a rental for a few months. At that point, I will know what is best for me. By the end of the summer (or sooner if things become obvious) I should be selling a near mint Olympus 12mm f2 or a Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8.

    Hopefully I will be posting some 12-35 photos before the end of the month....
     
  16. ptolemyx

    ptolemyx Mu-43 Veteran

    290
    Jun 19, 2012
    Vancouver, BC
    Ben
    I bought my 12-35 used from a forum member hear a couple of months ago, and I'm glad I did. Like tc just said, it's pretty much welded to the body (E-M5).

    I sold my 25/1.4 and 17/1.8 to pay for it... sometimes I miss the thinner DOF, but in every other respect the images I get from the zoom are just as good as from either of those lenses.
     
  17. ShrubMonkey

    ShrubMonkey Mu-43 Regular

    58
    Apr 6, 2012
    I've moved away from primes (inc 25mm) and now ave 12-35 and 35-100, quality and flexibility for me is the winner, same filter size also helps as I now have a nice selection of ND filters that i can swap between lenses
     
  18. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    DXO scores the 12-35 a "17" best at 25/f2.8, while the 12/2 scores a "19" best at 12/2. The 25/1.4 scores a "21" best @ 25/1.4. "Lensrental" had similar results in comparing. Most of the time, the difference would seem negligible, though.
     
  19. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    Negligible is the right diagnosis, I think. What's quantitatively discernible in a bench test and what's visible in a real photograph often don't correlate very well. And there's sample variation. I had two 12/2s that were easily inferior to both of two 12-35/2.8s. Maybe if DXO had sent me their lenses, things would have been different. :wink:
     
  20. trandg

    trandg Mu-43 Regular

    61
    Sep 24, 2012
    Toronto
    David
    I'm a big fan of the 12-35mm. It's on my OM-D almost full time. The only downside is that it makes the whole kit a bit heftier. It's totally manageable but I wouldn't mind picking up the 17mm f1.8 as a lighter alternative. The f2.8 is no issue for me and I have shot a bunch at higher ISO and it's still brilliant. I'm super impressed with the lens and that's coming from being used to a 17-55mm f2.8 Nikon lens.

    If you can swing the money, pull the trigger and you won't regret it. That with the 75mm and I feel like I'm pretty much covered.