Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
Thread started 21 May 2012 (Monday) 18:03
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Panasonic Announces 12-35 f/2.8 OIS

 
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
May 21, 2012 18:03 |  #1

http://www.dpreview.co​m …oom-for-micro-four-thirds (external link)

http://www.dpreview.co​m/previews/panasonic_1​2-35_2p8 (external link)

Looks great, Theres a few samples on Panasonics site... the only kicker on it is the price... $1300...which is pretty high sounding... Keep in mind in terms of DoF you're looking at f/3.5 in APS-C terms or f/5.6 in FF terms, its pretty small however, much smaller than say, a 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM or especially a 24-70 f/2.8L II....


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Luckypenguin
Senior Member
Avatar
612 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
May 24, 2012 02:05 |  #2

DOF equivalence...now there's a can of worms! I tend to think that f/2.8 is f/2.8. If the early test results are anywhere near accurate and if this can be priced at or below the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 it could be considered to be comparitively good value (albeit still expensive).


Nic - flickr photostream (external link)
G1X (last Canon standing)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
May 24, 2012 15:29 |  #3

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14477186 (external link)
DOF equivalence...now there's a can of worms! I tend to think that f/2.8 is f/2.8. If the early test results are anywhere near accurate and if this can be priced at or below the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 it could be considered to be comparitively good value (albeit still expensive).

At least from the sounds its built better than the 17-55 f/2.8 IS...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pxchoi
Goldmember
1,146 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jun 01, 2012 10:58 |  #4

I wish they would have made this lens f2


Patrick Choi
Portfolio (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link)
EOS 7D | 580EX II | 10-22mm f3.5-f4.5 | 17-55mm f/2.8 IS |70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
For Sale: 17-55mm f/2.8 IS | 10-22mm f3.5-f4.5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckypenguin
Senior Member
Avatar
612 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jun 01, 2012 20:58 |  #5

At least at f/2.8 I have a hope of affording it :p


Nic - flickr photostream (external link)
G1X (last Canon standing)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gaiaswill
Hatchling
6 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Jun 04, 2012 17:26 as a reply to  @ Luckypenguin's post |  #6

At about the same size as the 18-55 IS, this is the first lens that seriously has me considering taking up m4/3...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
7,959 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 775
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Jun 04, 2012 17:57 |  #7

The thing on a wide angle, DOF is of limited use. On wides, unless your subject is really close, everything is going to be in focus, even wide open, and often softer than need be. The speed is nice though, and I wish Sony had something like it.....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jun 04, 2012 19:46 |  #8

Croasdail wrote in post #14531187 (external link)
The thing on a wide angle, DOF is of limited use. On wides, unless your subject is really close, everything is going to be in focus, even wide open, and often softer than need be. The speed is nice though, and I wish Sony had something like it.....

The only issue is that the Sony equivalent would be VERY big compared to this, this is roughly the same size as the 18-55 OSS i believe


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,586 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jun 05, 2012 00:42 |  #9

The NEX equivalent would be a 16-45mm f3.5. So that's not a huge lens by any means.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 614
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jun 06, 2012 20:18 |  #10

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14477186 (external link)
DOF equivalence...now there's a can of worms! I tend to think that f/2.8 is f/2.8.

I don't understand how 'DOF equivalence' or whatever you want to call it can be discounted. Everyone knows that if you use a camera like an S100, you will use much shorter focal lengths for any type of shot than when using, say, a 5D. The effect of these very short focal lengths means that any given aperture will deliver much greater DOF (equal framing and equal perspective). Just because a m4:3 or 1.6X camera falls in between a compact digital and a FF digital does not suddenly make these two formats the same as FF.

In fact, this lens IMO illustrates this point quite well. The new 12-35 lens for m4:3 is obviously selected because it gives the same field of view as the ever popular 24-70 range on a 35mm camera.

But obviously, 12-35 f/2.8 isn't going to give the same DOF as 24-70 f/2.8 when used to take the same shot on different formats, and in order to get the 24-70 on FF to give the same DOF one would have to stop down to f/5.6.

So I think it is perfectly applicable and easy to understand that the 12-35 lens on m4:3 will perform for DOF much as a hypothetical 24-70/5.6 would on a 35mm camera.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,586 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jun 06, 2012 20:36 |  #11

SLRgear charts for this lens look really good:

http://www.slrgear.com …t.php/product/1​518/cat/69 (external link)


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mattia
Senior Member
528 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2009
     
Jun 07, 2012 02:50 |  #12

DoF equivalence only matters up to a point. 2.8 remains 2.8 in the area that most matters - light gathering. The smaller sensor cams won't give me the same look my 5DII can in terms of DoF, and I'm OK with that. They make up for it in portability.


5DII | 300D | 30D IR | 17-40L | 24-105L IS | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 15 FE | 35L | 50/1.8 mk I | 135L | Sigmalux 50/1.4 | Sigma 105/F2.8 Macro | C/Y Planar 50/1.4 | C/Y Distagon 35/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckypenguin
Senior Member
Avatar
612 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jun 07, 2012 07:45 |  #13

JeffreyG wrote in post #14542312 (external link)
I don't understand how 'DOF equivalence' or whatever you want to call it can be discounted. Everyone knows that if you use a camera like an S100, you will use much shorter focal lengths for any type of shot than when using, say, a 5D. The effect of these very short focal lengths means that any given aperture will deliver much greater DOF (equal framing and equal perspective). Just because a m4:3 or 1.6X camera falls in between a compact digital and a FF digital does not suddenly make these two formats the same as FF.

In fact, this lens IMO illustrates this point quite well. The new 12-35 lens for m4:3 is obviously selected because it gives the same field of view as the ever popular 24-70 range on a 35mm camera.

But obviously, 12-35 f/2.8 isn't going to give the same DOF as 24-70 f/2.8 when used to take the same shot on different formats, and in order to get the 24-70 on FF to give the same DOF one would have to stop down to f/5.6.

So I think it is perfectly applicable and easy to understand that the 12-35 lens on m4:3 will perform for DOF much as a hypothetical 24-70/5.6 would on a 35mm camera.

I don't see why there is this constant need to "educate" people about DOF equivalence as though shallow depth-of-field was the holy grail of photography. Just have a look at at least 50% of the comments that follow every DPReview news release. Why should I be so concerned as to compare my camera to another type of camera that I don't even care about?


Nic - flickr photostream (external link)
G1X (last Canon standing)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 614
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jun 07, 2012 08:28 |  #14

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14544103 (external link)
I don't see why there is this constant need to "educate" people about DOF equivalence as though shallow depth-of-field was the holy grail of photography. Just have a look at at least 50% of the comments that follow every DPReview news release. Why should I be so concerned as to compare my camera to another type of camera that I don't even care about?

Am I educating or are you obfuscating?

Keep in mind that a large number of people buying or considering NEX or m4:3 systems are currently using dSLR systems now. I see no downside in understandind how working within different formats affects DOF whether you want it shallow or deep.

And you can downplay shallow DOF all you want, but a lot of people spend a lot of money on fast lenses to have this ability. Anyone who thinks the 12-35 on m4:3 will behave like a 24-70 on their 5D with regard to DOF is going to be surprised.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,586 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jun 07, 2012 09:21 |  #15

Luckypenguin wrote in post #14544103 (external link)
I don't see why there is this constant need to "educate" people about DOF equivalence as though shallow depth-of-field was the holy grail of photography. Just have a look at at least 50% of the comments that follow every DPReview news release. Why should I be so concerned as to compare my camera to another type of camera that I don't even care about?

You are on a forum that is primarily about sensors that are not 2x crop m4/3 size. So for the rest of us, it helps put things into relatable terms.

What I can't understand is the incessant need to act like it doesn't matter for 4/3 (see the other 50% of comments on dpreview news releases). We don't do that here on the Canon forum when comparing APS-C and FF cameras. We don't act like f2.8 is the same on all sensor sizes.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,770 views & 0 likes for this thread
Panasonic Announces 12-35 f/2.8 OIS
FORUMS News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mike1911
902 guests, 157 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.