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

Panasonic 12-60 f3.5-5.6 coming?

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by Holoholo55, Feb 23, 2016.

  1. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2016
  2. sammykhalifa

    sammykhalifa Mu-43 Top Veteran

    762
    Jun 22, 2012
    Pittsburgh PA
    Neil
    I bet one will come on the GH5.
     
  3. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Oooh!

    If it's optically good, I think a lot of people are going to be happy with a new kit lens with this level of versatility. I wonder how big it is...

    Power OIS suggests to me that it's not going to be as cheap as the aperture range suggests. Probably closer to the $399-499 range that the 45-175mm slotted into when it was newer. Just a little bit less than the 14-140mm.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The seemingly large size and slow aperture makes me wonder if it is a cheap kit zoom. At first I thought maybe it was a companion lens to the 100-400 and would be premium quality, but then I would expect Leica branding.
     
  5. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    I could see this being a very useful range for a kit/walkaround lens, albeit a bit slow like a lot of kit lenses in this range. If it is as versatile as the Olympus 12-50 with good close up capability, it could be a very useful lens. But, it doesn't make sense to have so many short zooms in this range. At least 10 including this one. Some things gotta go.

    What we got? (left off some of the older ones that got replaced)
    Pana 12-32 f3.5-5.6 pancake
    Pana 12-35 X f2.8
    Pana 14-42 II f3.5-5.6
    Pana 14-42 X f3/5-5.6 pancake
    Pana 14-45 f3.5-5.6 (still available?)
    Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
    Olympus 12-50 EZ f3.5-6.3
    Olympus 14-42 EZ f3.5-5.6 pancake
    Olympus 14-42 IIR f3.5-5.6
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Why do they have to go? All but the f2.8 lenses are mainly kit zooms meant for bundling.
     
  7. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I think it will be cheap-ish, but not cheap. Like a half-step between the 14-42 and the 14-140.

    Probably fits in there size-wise, too. Here's my guess:

    oxYgu1x.

    Not what I'd call big, but not a pancake, obviously. Might be a little bigger than that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. sammykhalifa

    sammykhalifa Mu-43 Top Veteran

    762
    Jun 22, 2012
    Pittsburgh PA
    Neil
    What if it's the same price and size as the 14-45?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Repp

    Repp Mu-43 Top Veteran

    500
    Jan 27, 2011
    Oak Harbor, WA
    I'm betting they are updating their lens line to add Dual-IS capability to the next set of cameras and lenses. You can probably expect to see another iteration of the 14-150 later down the line as well. I really want them to make a weather-sealed Dual-IS 8-16 w/ filter that can work with the Lee Seven5 system.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    True, but how many different models do you need? A lot of overlap and confuses the consumer. Kinda like Apple's bewildering proliferation of Mac and Performa models back in the bad old days before Jobs came back. That's just me - seems messy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Hypilein

    Hypilein Mu-43 Veteran

    292
    Mar 18, 2015

    I would sell my 7-14 for that probably. With this lens, I really think it should have been F4. If it is going to be bundled as a kit lens though, that is a really nice range for a kit lens. However, that means that when they announce that lens they should also announce a camera to go with it, and it is too big to be a kit lens for the GM series.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I'm saying it isn't messy because 2/3 of those are lenses that just come with your camera. You don't comparison shop those.
     
  13. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Pete
    If it's sharper than the average kit lens, then I may partake...despite it being "slow"
     
  14. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Definitely feels like a 45-175 level lens (which I like very much). I wonder whether it is weather sealed?
    Not many 12-X in the system actually - just the pro zooms, the 12-50, the 12-32 pancake and that semi-mythical Kodak 12-45. I think maybe Panasonic took notice of how many people were sticking a 12-32 on their bigger cameras just for a good affordable 12mm.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  15. ashburtononline

    ashburtononline Mu-43 Veteran

    394
    Jan 21, 2015
    New Zealand
    too slow
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. kingduct

    kingduct Mu-43 Veteran

    298
    Oct 12, 2013
    As a kit lens for people who don't already have an m4/3 camera, I see it as very attractive. Buy it and you've got a wide range covered. Throw in a 20mm/1.7 or 25mm/1.7 and you have a very practical 2-lens kit.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Yes, I agree. Pity it isn't a constant f4.
     
  18. Svein Wilhelm

    Svein Wilhelm Mu-43 Rookie

    14
    Aug 25, 2013
    Norway
    Svein Wilhelm Kristiansen
    Why not a 12-60 3,5-4,0? Would it be so very much bigger? I once had the Oly 12-60 2,8-4,0. It was a great lens, unfortunaetly I sold it...There are lots of those 12,14-whatever kitlenses. My favorite on the GM-5 is the 35-100 2,8. Fits just perfect.
     
  19. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Well, it would require an aperture entrance pupil that is 40% larger.

    60mm/f5.6 = 10.7mm
    60mm/f4 = 15mm
    15/10.7 = 1.4

    So yeah, it probably would be so very much bigger, unfortunately. Physics suck that way.

    Obviously the comments in this thread aren't nearly to the same extent, but I've read people saying that that the Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm isn't worth the price because it's not a constant f4, not realizing that going from f6.3 to f4 on such a lens would more than triple the size and weight, and result in a lens that cost over $10,000 were anyone ever to make such a thing in the first place.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    That it starts at 12mm (instead of 14mm) is a fantastic specification, in my view. As good as a few of the 14-xx lenses are, I'd take a 12-xx over a 14-xx any day of the week, as 12mm is a focal length I use far more than 14mm. My 12-35 gets a LOT of use and I'm beginning to press my 12-32 into more use now, as well. My 14-xx lenses are sitting on the sidelines pretty much all the time.

    If this lens performs as well as the 12-32 does (which is a little gem of a lens!) then I think this will be a great, longer range alternative to the 12-32.

    And if the IQ is comparable to the 12-32, it would be an excellent daylight walk-around lens and a great kit lens, especially for a first-timer with no other lenses. The speed doesn't bother me; as it's not intended for very low light, nor for very shallow DOF. The vast majority of photo-op situations don't call for those requirements anyway and there are plenty of other lenses perfectly suited for those specific applications.

    Perhaps a bit too much is made of having very fast lenses; and slow lenses often are undervalued, simply due to speed. Perhaps unnecessarily so. I definitely appreciate (and have) a number of very fast lenses and enjoy them as much as anyone does... but they are only needed (by me, anyway) in a relatively small subset of situations.

    In spite of what may appear to be the drift on the forums, good photography is not all about totally blown out backgrounds. There is plenty of suitability for a general-use lens of this specification, especially if the IQ is very good.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 10
    • Like Like x 2