Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by tdekany, Sep 13, 2013.
I am glad I pre-ordered the lens along with the E-M1! Looks like one sharp lens on par with the ZD 12-60/2.8-4.0, if not sharper!
Hope there will be a taker for my 12-35/2.8 at a decent price!
I asked him to comment on the 12-40 vs the 12-35. Lets see what he has to say.
my thought also
sounds like it is going to be a killer piece of glass
You are Back!!!
It must be the drawing power of the E-M1 and the 12-40/2.8!
Superb lens. Let's hope oly will make fast Primes in the PRO serie too.
He does seem to like it. $1000 is high in the absolute sense but not at all unreasonable for a quality 2.8 zoom. If Oly were to make a cheaper f4 version (I doubt it) that would also be a nice alternative.
It does sound like a nice lens - likely as good as the 12-60/2.8-4.0 much to my surprise.
Just for the sake of novelty though, I'd like to see a fast standard zoom that went to 24mm EFL and didn't suffer from either corner softness (12-35/2.8) or field curvature (apparently the new 12-40/2.8).
Did anyone else notice in the review that the lens appears to have an un-advertised quasi-macro functionality? What's the max magnification of the 12-50 kit zoom in macro mode?
It's 1:2, if I recall correctly. This doesn't seem to go near that, but it seems to focus as close as you could possibly want for non-dedicated macro work anyway.
Officially it goes to 1:3.3. Unofficially, it seems to focus a bit closer, although still not 1:2.
That's pretty damn good for a non-macro lens. Could be useful!
It will be extremely useful, but I'm still keeping my 60mm f2.8 Macro!
I am wondering if this lens coupled with the upcoming GX7 would make a nice single body/lens high quality compact travel kit for those that like using an EVF?
High quality, certainly; compact, definitely NOT!
Resale value on the 12-35 is definitely going to drop in the near future now that this lens is out.
The Oly is clearly better from 36-40mm.
His response to the comparison between the 12-35 was "better". What does that mean?
I really need a lens right now but would feel awful if the oly is much much better at the same price.
This is from the review:
"And I certainly didn’t see any of the nervous double-imaged backgrounds frequently generated by the Panasonic 12-35, either – and believe me, I was looking for it...
...In a stroke, I think this lens becomes the defining do-it-all-and-anywhere for M4/3; yes, it’s a bit large, but the useful range, reasonably large aperture, solid build, outstanding optics, very close minimum focusing distance more than outweigh that. It’s not a cheap lens; but then again, I can’t think of any others with the same spec that are. Optically, this is one of the best zoom lenses I’ve ever used."
In the comment section when asked specifically how it compares to the Panny 12-35:
"Better. It doesn’t have the odd double bokeh I’ve seen on every sample of the 12-35 I’ve tried."