Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

  1. #1
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    I have the first version Lumix 12-35/2.8 and I never fail to be impressed with the image quality. I know it sounds unlikely but I really feel it delivers IQ which is almost identical to a prime lens. I've never liked zooms but the 12-35, with its longer sibling the 35-100 are great lenses. It really set the rot in with respect to my Sony kit when I started processing my photographs and along with the Oly 7-14/2.8 lead me to change systems back to m43rds.

    This week I took delivery of a Lumix Leica DG 15/1.7 'Summilux'. I'm not that impressed so far, which is strange because the Lumix Leica DG 25/1.4 'Summilux' is a fantastic lens. I decided to test the 15/1.7 against my 12-35/2.8 to see if there was a significant difference between the prime and the zoom.

    This is far from a scientific test but I remain amazed at the IQ of the 12-35. I don't think there is any significant difference in quality between the lenses, at least for all practical purposes, e.g. printing and reproduction. I actually think the rendering of the 12-35 is nicer than the 15/1.7.

    All photography is with the GH5, f4, iso200 - handheld.

    Here is the test subject, a building nearby which I need to photograph for my next book project. You can click through to the full frame. Both are jpegs exported from LR. The only adjustment I have made is to use the 'Auto' function on the RAW file to balance the light and shadow areas. You can click through to the full size file on the full images (12Mb).

    Full frame: 15/1.7


    Full frame: 12-35/2.8


    Centre frame: 15/1.7


    Centre frame: 12-35/2.8


    Edge of frame: 15/1.7


    Edge of frame 12-35/2.8


    For history buffs, this is a spiritualist church in Camden Town and its significance is that the foundation stone was laid by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (of Sherlock Holmes fame) who was a great supporter of the spiritualist cause.
    -----
    "My photography books", Flickr Stream
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  2. #2
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    10,762
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2512

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    +1

    The 12-35mm is an exceptional lens. I hardly ever leave home without that lens mounted on a camera, mostly on the little GM5. I've never cared much for "standard" zooms, but this zoom is 4 primes in one lens.

  3. #3
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,480
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    +1

    The 12-35mm is an exceptional lens. I hardly ever leave home without that lens mounted on a camera, mostly on the little GM5. I've never cared much for "standard" zooms, but this zoom is 4 primes in one lens.
    I'm glad someone agrees with me. You put it very succinctly, "4 primes in one lens".

    LouisB

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,700
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    The 12-35 has better centre resolution. At the edge there is not much in it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2017-12-19 at 18.30.50.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	20.6 KB 
ID:	130980   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2017-12-19 at 18.31.07.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	20.0 KB 
ID:	130981   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2017-12-19 at 18.34.25.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	19.9 KB 
ID:	130983  
    Bart ...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington D.C. region
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    I have the first version Lumix 12-35/2.8
    And the matching 35-100/2.8, too, yes --also happily.

    On the other side of m4/3, Oly's 12-40/2.8 is a good one, too, though larger (and which joins my 35-100). Interesting to see that some sellers (USA) have the updated versions on sale, with much higher (non-sale) prices on the older (at least for the telephoto)! (And it seems that there continues a push to try to sell out copies of the G7, even w/G9 imminent.)

    (-;
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    10,762
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2512

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by drofnad View Post
    And the matching 35-100/2.8, too, yes --also happily.

    On the other side of m4/3, Oly's 12-40/2.8 is a good one, too, though larger (and which joins my 35-100). Interesting to see that some sellers (USA) have the updated versions on sale, with much higher (non-sale) prices on the older (at least for the telephoto)! (And it seems that there continues a push to try to sell out copies of the G7, even w/G9 imminent.)

    (-;
    There are some great advantages with the Panasonic 12-35/35-100mm combo compared to the Zuiko 12-40/40-150:

    - They are much smaller, and since the 35-100 is short enough to be left standing in the bag, it takes up less than a third of the space that the Zuiko 40-150, which must be laid down in most bags, takes up.
    - They are much lighter, with a combined weight of 660g vs. 1,140g for the Zuiko combo.
    - They share lens caps, and while thise may sound unimportant, it's one of those things that make life easier while changing lenses in a hurry. I just move the cap from one lens to the other, without having to find a cap in my pocket, bag or wherever.
    - The bokeh of the 35-100mm is less busy than that of the 40-150.
    - Both Panasonic lenses offer Dual IS on Panasonic bodies. None of the Zuikos offer lens IS.

    There are disadvantages also of course, like shorter reach and no TC for the long lens. I also suspect that the build quality of the Olympus lenses is better. But as a sum, and for what I use m4/3 for, I'm very comfortable with this combo. That, in addition to the original theme of this thread: the "prime like" qualities of the 12-35mm lens.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington D.C. region
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    There are some great advantages with the Panasonic 12-35/35-100mm combo compared to the Zuiko 12-40/40-150:
    ...
    - They share lens caps, and while thise may sound unimportant, it's one of those things that make life easier while changing lenses in a hurry.
    But one need not have a brand purity combo, here; I have the 12-40 & 35-100, which along with the 7-14/4 share rear lens caps (I only cap front of 7-14). Size, weight, and cost dissuaded me from the long Olympus (though I still recall fondly a shot Jono posted of his dog, so hairwise sharply in focus, and then an entire other world reflected in its eyes (this, after Jono's in/out/back-again affair w/m4/3)). Not only smaller size but fixed size (no telescoping) of the 35-100/2.8 is quite nice (but I leave its long hood on).

    I tried to note the "lpmm"s of LensTips graphs, and might post the set in a center/edge pairing per noted lengths 12-23/25-35/40. But in short, the 12-40/2.8 is clearly designed to be shot wide open (2.8), and suffers a bit at the long end. While the 12-35 might better suit BigLouis apertures .

    -d.

  8. #8
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    10,762
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2512

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by drofnad View Post
    But one need not have a brand purity combo, here; I have the 12-40 & 35-100, which along with the 7-14/4 share rear lens caps (I only cap front of 7-14). Size, weight, and cost dissuaded me from the long Olympus (though I still recall fondly a shot Jono posted of his dog, so hairwise sharply in focus, and then an entire other world reflected in its eyes (this, after Jono's in/out/back-again affair w/m4/3)). Not only smaller size but fixed size (no telescoping) of the 35-100/2.8 is quite nice (but I leave its long hood on).

    I tried to note the "lpmm"s of LensTips graphs, and might post the set in a center/edge pairing per noted lengths 12-23/25-35/40. But in short, the 12-40/2.8 is clearly designed to be shot wide open (2.8), and suffers a bit at the long end. While the 12-35 might better suit BigLouis apertures .

    -d.
    Good points. Practical sides with regards to lens caps and hoods are not descussed enough. They have consequences for one's ability to react quickly to changes in the photographic reality. I never use lens caps on lenses with strong hoods that protect the lens properly. The hood of the 12-35mm offers little protection, and for me, the 35-100 becomes a bit to long for my most used bags with the hood on. The perfect "hood on" lens is the Zuiko 75mm; deep metal hood that is secured by a screw.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington D.C. region
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    ... ability to react quickly to changes in the photographic reality. I never use lens caps on lenses with strong hoods that protect the lens properly.
    Frankly, my aim can switch between long/short too much (if even not too quickly) to be comfortable swapping lenses, and so ... more bodies (where of course smallness of it all, helps.*) I do like the fit of the 7-14/4's front cap onto its fixed hood (vs things that need to be squeezed and then surely put into place, not just "almost")

    *To which point --ready to shoot-- I'd like to see Nikon's DeListed "DL" series return in the complementary form of 18-50/<fast> & 70-200<fast> or something like that. I'd think that they could do this better than trying to get it all into a superzoom (RX-10.3, .4; though that lens seems to garner praise all the way out to eqv. 600/4 (!!)).

    Here are the "LPMM"s in paired (center/edge) forms
    for the zoom points of Pana/Oly resp. 12 - 23/25 - 35/40,
    with my guessing on actual factual numerical values
    based on graph gazing or other methods of divination. (-;

    Given the reiterated remarks by Roger Cicala from his
    observations with multiple copies of many lenses at
    LensRentals.com, one can wonder what a few more
    tests might show among sets of these lenses!?
    (Or at, e.g., f/3.2 for the Panasonic; and at 35mm vice 40mm
    for the Olympus --i.e., backed up a bit from extremes.)


    @ wide open (2.8)
    12-35 : 56/55 - 73/48 - 65/42

    12-40 : 78/68 - 75/62 - 55/45


    @4.0
    12-35 : 76/65 - 77/56 - 78/58

    12-40 : 72/63 - 72/63 - 62/57

    @5.6
    12-35 : 72/63 - 71/62 - 73/55

    12-40 : 64/58 - 63/54 - 57/54

    @8.0
    12-35 : 64/52 - 63/52 - 61/55

    12-40 : 56/54 - 56/48 - 52/48


    ============================== *
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington D.C. region
    Posts
    131
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by drofnad View Post
    Here are the "LPMM"s in paired (center/edge)
    ...
    For the heckuvit, here's what Lenstip.com gives for the 35-100/2.8 ,
    at

    35mm - 63mm - 100mm FLs

    2.8 (wide open) ((would 100mm @f/3.2 be sharply better --nb [email protected]! ?))
    77/56 - 76/43 - 50(!)/47 ..... (ha : vignetting hides the soft edges)

    4.0
    75/57 - 77/48 - 78/52

    5.6
    66/57 - 69/48 - 79/52

    8.0
    58/52 - 60/53 - 60/54

    .:. f/4 looks overall best, but again I would like to see 3.2, 3.5's rating for 100mm
    (or even how much fall-off there is shy of the extreme 100, say, 90mm!?

    -d.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hurst, Texas (DFW area)
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    Good points. Practical sides with regards to lens caps and hoods are not descussed enough. They have consequences for one's ability to react quickly to changes in the photographic reality. I never use lens caps on lenses with strong hoods that protect the lens properly. The hood of the 12-35mm offers little protection, and for me, the 35-100 becomes a bit to long for my most used bags with the hood on. The perfect "hood on" lens is the Zuiko 75mm; deep metal hood that is secured by a screw.
    I have both the 12-35mm and 35-100mm. Another advantage is both use 58mm filters so you only need one set. I don't use many filters (uv haze, 81a warming, polarizer and two stop soft edge graduated ND) but it adds up in size and cost.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    bensonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,788
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1029

    Re: In praise of the Lumix 12-35/2.8

    Despite all the camera options I have, for a short travel trip, a pair of GX8s with the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 lenses is still my kit of choice.

    Heading to Los Angeles tonight to meet up with Steve Gilbert to visit the Porsche Effect exhibit at the Peterson Automotive Museum and the Luftgekhult 5 event.

    I should be able to get some good photos of amazing Porsches with this kit. As I did at the Monterey Motorsports Reunion in 2016 with the same cameras/lenses.

    Gary

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •