• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

New Oly lenses ... specs


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#21 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 912 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 17 September 2016 - 10:30 AM

The new Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM looks attractive in comparison (price/weight wise) even though it does not go as wide (29-240mm FF equivalent) and it is a tad slower on the long end (and not weather sealed). It was my first reaction to this f4 Oly..... Pro (high price) with f8 FF equivalent aperture? What is the sense of that?

A do it all zoom for photojournalists ?



#22 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 17 September 2016 - 11:09 AM

One could use the Oly 14-150 or the Pany 14-140 II in a much much more compact package. I'm not convinced the brightness difference is a big deal for photojournalists. The Pany is supposed to be pretty good (for what it is) but unfortunately wasn't reviewed  by PZ.


  • Brightcolours likes this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#23 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,049 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 17 September 2016 - 10:19 PM

Think of the Canon 28-300mm L. A monster lens, slow, yet loved by a certain community. And way, way bigger than the Oly.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#24 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 17 September 2016 - 10:42 PM

The Canon 28-300 f3.5-5.6 would be equivalent to a 14-150 f1.75-2.8 in MFT land. Hardly comparable to the 12-100 f4 aforementioned. Such a 14-150 lens would undoubtedly be huge too. Furthermore, I'm not convinced a FF 24-200 f8 would be much bigger (if at all) than the 12-100 f4.


  • Brightcolours and JoJu like this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#25 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,049 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 10:20 PM

Pro lenses aren't often heavy because of the optical components but because of the construction.

I'm sure you could put the 28-300L into a plastic housing with a total weight of less than half of the current lens.

The 12-100mm could certainly be shaved by at least 150g using consumer-grade housing.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#26 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 10:49 PM

Pro lenses aren't often heavy because of the optical components but because of the construction.

I'm sure you could put the 28-300L into a plastic housing with a total weight of less than half of the current lens.

The 12-100mm could certainly be shaved by at least 150g using consumer-grade housing.

The nice thing is that mFT now finally has some choices for the traveler ranging from expensive "pro" zooms like this one and the announced panaleica's (e.g., 12-60 F2.8-4) and the cheaper and much lighter consumer zooms from Pana and Oly. The format is starting to become really attarctive, to me at least.


  • longbowswift likes this

#27 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 919 posts

Posted 22 September 2016 - 12:46 PM

So which will be the better option 12-100f4 or 12-60f2.8-4. Curious how the price/performance turns out for the pair.



#28 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 22 September 2016 - 12:48 PM

So which will be the better option 12-100f4 or 12-60f2.8-4. Curious how the price/performance turns out for the pair.

 

I find the 12-100 way too bulky.

The 12-60 is probably going to be significantly smaller while being brighter.

Plus, if you really need reach 100mm won't cut it anyway.

Personally, I'd go with the 12-60 (on paper at least).


--Florent

Flickr Page


#29 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 22 September 2016 - 02:02 PM

I find the 12-100 way too bulky.

The 12-60 is probably going to be significantly smaller while being brighter.

Plus, if you really need reach 100mm won't cut it anyway.

Personally, I'd go with the 12-60 (on paper at least).

Unfortunately while the 12-60 F2.8-4 may just be a little smaller on the outside (98.5mm x 79.5mm), it's actually a little heavier at 575 g.... so forget about that aspect. Plus usually the brightness advantage disappears quickly and would only be fully available at the less useful wide angle side which for all intents and purposes makes it a f4 lens as well.

 

It will come down to optics for me because I don't see much else being different (incl. price)



#30 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 22 September 2016 - 02:29 PM

Unfortunately while the 12-60 F2.8-4 may just be a little smaller on the outside (98.5mm x 79.5mm), it's actually a little heavier at 575 g.... so forget about that aspect. Plus usually the brightness advantage disappears quickly and would only be fully available at the less useful wide angle side which for all intents and purposes makes it a f4 lens as well.

 

It will come down to optics for me because I don't see much else being different (incl. price)

 

I wasn't aware Panasonic released their lenses' specs. Where did you see it?


--Florent

Flickr Page


#31 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 22 September 2016 - 08:30 PM

I wasn't aware Panasonic released their lenses' specs. Where did you see it?

Wooops, I humbly apologize. My bad - it isn't out yet so hope remains for a lighter and smaller lens like you mentioned and I am also hoping for!



#32 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,049 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 22 September 2016 - 09:42 PM

Unfortunately while the 12-60 F2.8-4 may just be a little smaller on the outside (98.5mm x 79.5mm), it's actually a little heavier at 575 g.... so forget about that aspect. Plus usually the brightness advantage disappears quickly and would only be fully available at the less useful wide angle side which for all intents and purposes makes it a f4 lens as well.

 

It will come down to optics for me because I don't see much else being different (incl. price)

 

This is the size of the Oly 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ? Did you take this one as a guidance ?


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#33 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 23 September 2016 - 01:54 AM

This is the size of the Oly 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ? Did you take this one as a guidance ?

Yes it's the old one when I thought I had the specs of the new one. So a dumb mistake, however, looking at the pic of the lens that is the new lens, it may very well end up with similar specs.



#34 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,049 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 23 September 2016 - 07:19 AM

Yeah, it's likely. The oly 12-60 was pro-spec and the Leica will be similar. Maybe a little shorter.

Honestly I was almost about to buy the Oly (once again, also the 50-200mm SWD) ... it's such a nice lens and it should be pretty usable via adapter.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#35 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 23 September 2016 - 07:21 AM

From the photos it looks smaller than the Oly 12-100 though.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#36 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 23 September 2016 - 08:33 PM

From the photos it looks smaller than the Oly 12-100 though.

Maybe so but the new 12-60 is clearly longer, and also slightly thicker than the old Oly 12-60 (posted by Photokina visitor on DPreview), so the difference in size (and likely weight) with the Oly 12-100 are likely going to be very small at best. Not happy about that, but I guess that's the price to pay for Pro specs.



#37 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 23 September 2016 - 08:36 PM

Maybe so but the new 12-60 is clearly longer, and also slightly thicker than the old Oly 12-60 (posted by Photokina visitor on DPreview), so the difference in size (and likely weight) with the Oly 12-100 are likely going to be very small at best. Not happy about that, but I guess that's the price to pay for Pro specs.

 

OMG, I need to get my head checked. The picture shows the "slow" 12-60 which of course is very small. So let hope come back to all incl. me. I will now stop posting for a while :)



#38 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 04:52 PM

Finally the (rumored, but probably correct) specs of the NEW 12-60...

 

Maybe so but the new 12-60 is clearly longer, and also slightly thicker than the old Oly 12-60 (posted by Photokina visitor on DPreview), so the difference in size (and likely weight) with the Oly 12-100 are likely going to be very small at best. Not happy about that, but I guess that's the price to pay for Pro specs.

 

From http://www.43rumors.com/

 

Attractive specs for a "travel/all-purpose" zoom. Let's hope IQ holds up.

 

LEICA DG Vario-Elmarit 12 – 60 mm F 2.8 – 4 Power OIS
– Lens construction: 12 groups 14 pieces (4 aspheric lenses and 2 ED lenses)
– Shortest shooting distance: 20 cm (wide angle), 24 cm (telephoto)
– Maximum shooting magnification: 0.3 times (converted to 35 mm 0.6 times)
– Shake correction: POWER OIS
– Filter diameter: 62 mm
– Size (maximum diameter × length): 68.4 mm × 86 mm
– Weight: 320 g



#39 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 912 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 03 January 2017 - 06:49 PM

Finally the (rumored, but probably correct) specs of the NEW 12-60...


From http://www.43rumors.com/

Attractive specs for a "travel/all-purpose" zoom. Let's hope IQ holds up.

LEICA DG Vario-Elmarit 12 – 60 mm F 2.8 – 4 Power OIS
– Lens construction: 12 groups 14 pieces (4 aspheric lenses and 2 ED lenses)
– Shortest shooting distance: 20 cm (wide angle), 24 cm (telephoto)
– Maximum shooting magnification: 0.3 times (converted to 35 mm 0.6 times)
– Shake correction: POWER OIS
– Filter diameter: 62 mm
– Size (maximum diameter × length): 68.4 mm × 86 mm
– Weight: 320 g

A 24-120 equivalent that's quite interesting as a range if it comes with good image quality and light weight that makes it ideal as travel lens or a lens for photojournalists.
When you're into MFT shallow DOF isn't generally your priority

#40 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 919 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 01:45 PM

It would be interesting to see solid reviews of the new 12-100f4 and the lecia 12-60f2.8-4; I suspect the 12-100f4 will be more interesting of the two but we shall see (soon). Also leica introduced a 35-100f2.8 mk2 (not sure how the mk2 differ from mk1) ?






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de