Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by Djarum, Nov 1, 2013.
I may have to rethink some lenses I've got and sell them off to fund that bad boy, but I have a sentimental attachment to the deservedly heralded 14-45.
I wonder if the disparity of 7mm is worth the mammoth difference in lucre?
It doesn't look very sharp, eh?
I look forward to seeing these in the hands of someone who can take a decent photo.
Panasonic needs to lower the price of the 12-35 if it hopes to sell another one!
Based on this testing it appears it is sharper than the 12-60 at the long end. This does not agree with Olympus's published data.
The 12-60 was tested on the E510, I wonder how the higher acuity sensor in the GX-1 plays into this.
Does SLR Gear take into account the distortion and CA correction that RAWs have embedded, or not? Makes a difference when reading about it, and I can't keep straight which sites do and don't take that into account.
Yes, their tests are on corrected images. I checked 12-35mm and the distortion is corrected distortion, not 6% that photozone reported and/or the amount that I see with my Microsoft raw viewer.
Looking like a great lens. Looking forward to getting mine.
But there are so many on eBay for $1k
Great review from a well respected site.
Apart from how sharp this lens is and how fast it focuses, it's close focusing ability, weather sealing and rock solid hood are such bonuses. Vey well rounded lens.
Olympus did a great job on this one !!
The review seems to indicate that the 12-35 is similarly sharp, but with more CA and distortion. However, there are no comparison images and no quantitative figures for CA or distortion, so I think the jury is still out.
I am just glad Olympus decided to make the PRO category of lenses. This and 40-150/2.8 are signs for great things to come!
It looks like you gain a fraction more reach, better distortion and CA with the Olympus over the Panasonic 12-35mm. The Panasonic is significantly smaller and has OIS. The prices will probably end up about the same in the UK (the Panasonic is £100 cheaper at the moment, but I'm sure the Olympus will come down a bit).
It sounds like we have 2 good options, and it's just a question of choosing which compromises you prefer.
Thanks for the link. I really wish SLRGear did a better job of highlighting which of their reviews are comparable (and didn't 'blur units'). But it seems fairly clear that at least vs. the 12-35/2.8, the 12-40/2.8 is more consistent and better in the corners. So that makes one choice easier!
I picked up mine yesterday night. One thing that impressed me a lot is build quality, it feels really good in you hand, not too mention good looking too on my Silver E-M5! It balanced really well with half-grip of HLD-6. Did few shots outside 3200-ISO OOC RAW, seems very sharp in center at all aperture but less sharp on corners at f/2.8. The close focus magnification @40mm is really good, despite having trio 14/25/45, this lens likely be on the camera most of the time.
great review thanks...
Hey dhazeghi, love that Tamarac camera bag you sold me.
Not sure what you mean: here's the review for the 12-35mm which includes graphs of distortion and CA: http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1518/cat/all
A comparison also shows that the 12-40mm has sharper corners at nearly all apertures, although central sharpness is comparable at some. Really, it's not even close. I handled a 12-35mm and fell in love with it--always hoped to get one someday, if I could find a great deal--but, honestly, the 12-40mm looks just so much better.
To be honest, both are too big for what I like to do, but dang that IQ is something else.
Why couldn't Olympus have just priced it at $1499 and I wouldn't be having this temptation?!?