[shoplink 40444 ebay]
[/shoplink]
The price for the the Panasonic 12-35mm X lens just dropped down to $99 thankt to top rated seller [shoplink 40444 ebay]MZgamers on eBay (Click here)[/shoplink].
Speaking of high quality zoom I do hope Olympus-Panasonic will learn the lesson from Sigma. Their new 18-35mm f/1.8 zoom not only is terrific fast, but also of very high quality. And all that for $799 (Amazon price). I hope they will acknowledge that!
More deals:
All Olympus E-P5 kit variations in Stock at Amazon (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Brand new SanDisk 16GB SDHC Extreme Class 10 UHS-1 Memory Card in Stock at BHphoto (Click here).
53 Responses
$99? What a steal! 😀
Still over-priced.
+1
+1
That Sigma is nice but in m4/3 it would be a 14-26mm. To short range. But it is a fast zoom with good optics at a nice price.
Wrong, the lens would still be an 18-35mm zoom and if Sigma were to build one with a u43 mount it would become equivalent of a 36-70mm on a FF body. You are not the first and will certainly not be the last to get this focal length issue incorrect.
Totally arrogant answer, but not even seeing his point: He was talking about an equivalent m43 lens to that Sigma APS-C lens:
14-26 * 2 = 28-52 ~ 27-52.5 = 18-35 * 1.5.
if you want to be pedantic about to be equivalent ( DOF , total light etc) then to match an F1.8 lens on Nikon Aps you need an F1.2 lens . You did want equivalent didn’t you lol
No, @Mark was just talking about the focal length and that is what I was refering to. 😉
With respect OMega but it’s a APS-C lens so you have to take the numbers by 1.5 (or 1.6 for Canon) and than count it back to m4/3. But if I am wrong please explain a little bit more. Thanks!
Omega is simply gluing a m43 mount to the existing Sigma lens, so of course it stays 18-35mm.
I think you were talking about Sigma designing a new 14-26mm “equivalent” lens for m43 (adding a focal reducer like presumably Oly 14-35mm f2.0 or starting from scratch). You’re both right in some way.
Thanks Paul, just read the latest entries and would have responded but no need seeing as you have. I did say if Sigma were to make it with, Paul is not the first person to get confused by the actual focal length as opposed to equivalent. This whole business of focal length has become a complete nightmare for those unaware of the factoring of sensor size.
yeah both of you are right but omega feels better because he had a good snide on the interwebs
Admin – $99? This is by far you’re best typo.
“You’re” for “your” is a pretty good one too!
hahaha…indeed! Although my typo won’t save me $900 !
Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 DC HSM is $695 in Australia with genuine Sigma warranty.
And does it fit a m4/3 camera and provide very fast AF and OIS?
A lesson from Sigma? Their zoom lenses have a reputation for erratic quality, although maybe they have improved. And why even compare the Sigma APS-C lens with the Panasonic MFT lens that has a wider range, is 30% smaller and is one-third the weight!
And no IS either.
yep IS is vital on a wide angle lens lots of epileptics out there lol
I much prefer a small 24-70 equivalent f2.8 zoom, than a big 27-52mm f1.8.
This 12-35mm is starting to get attractive.
Still a bit too expensive compared to fuji 18-55 f2.8-4
(I know, it is brighter, wider, better AF, etc.)
Sigmas lens is superior but also very huge and heavy but less expensive than 12-35. I thought that m4/3 lenses are better than APS-C rivals but it seems it is not the true! Sigma got 24 DXO mark points, Panna 12-35 only 17… even latest E mount prime lenses scored higher in DXO than its m4/3 peers (E35/1.8 vs 25/1.4). Something is stinking here…
Maybe put a little time into what those numbers mean, as they aren’t really comparable between different formats.
pixel wise it could be compared as the sigma is tested on a 18mp body vs the GH2 body. Seems to be a promising zoom, which prob would find fans here too, if it was available with mft mount.
Most certainly, and I’d likely be one of those.
But my comment concerned the dxo testing and how that doesn’t compare well between formats.. As Richard Fernandez also points out, it also depends heavily on which camera in a system is used for testing, hence, those scores don’t say that much about the lens, they say something about a specific lens + camera combination, and just switching to a different camera may totally change the score, not to mention going to a different format. I wasn’t anywhere trying to say the Sigma zoom is a bad lens.
keeping in mind which pixel class body is used, i think its still possible to compare certain metric lens tests, with the sharpness part being the most obvious one. I think the problem is that some people just use the total score as reference..
Absolutely, thats why I initially said TheTree should look into what those numbers mean.
…and Olympus 75í1.8 still gets marginally lower (23 vs. 24) result than Sigma on DxO?!
LOL ROFL MUHAHAHAHAHA!
Third party zooms always tend to be cheaper. Maybe Sigma should make a fast zoom for mft?
999$???? REALLYYYYY????? UUUUHH UUUHHH!!!!!
ill buy 10 now
DXO is a great resource but I don’t trust everything they say. Nikon lenses are tested with the latest d800,d600 models, canon lenses are tested 5d3,6d again the latest models cameras, nex lenses are tested on the nex7 nex6 again latest model, then you get to m4/3’s and the lenses are tested on the gh1 or ep1 ep3 epl3 And the gh2 great movie camera not the best stills camera. Why aren’t m4/3 lenses tested with the OMD, epl5, Gh3 or the ep5. The 12 to 35 on the ep1 is a 14 on the gh2 it’s a 17 what would it test like on the gh3 or omd?
Look at their score of the canon 35 f2 is usm lens scores from 16 to a 33 depending which camera they test it on
+10000000
I really don’t understand why dxo are stuck with GH2 and don’t use E-M5 or GH3, overall score would be better for sure…
no the only relevance of the camera types is the mp count and take a long hard look a the sub one stop difference between the GH2 and OMD to see this has zero impact
just recently picked a second copy of this lens. it is still kind of expensive but happy with the quality, not to mention full electronic compatibility
Why a second copy, was there a problem with the first?
2 lenses for Stereo!
two bodies!
The Sigma is 18 mm not 12 mm. To me, that is quite a difference. And if we get both to FF format. It is either 18-35 or onan APS-c 27-53 mm. Compared on 24-70 on the m43.
Just not comparable.
sold my 24-70 2.8 canon glass borrowed a nikon 24-70 2.8 this year when I switched to Nikon just wanted a change from Canon after all these years 🙂
having shot both the nikon and canon and having the OMD with this lens if anything I would say the nikon and canon are over priced 🙂
and cant see buying the FF 24-70 2.8 models anymore ? I mostly shoot primes on my FF gear these days and a super wide zoom but the OMD has mid level zooms 60 macro and the 75 1.8 are insane primes on the M4/3
Well, fact is, this Pana lens is less good than Canikon’s 2.8 lenses, and it does not have the same subject isolation versatility (which is the main point of fast lenses). Yes, Canikons are overpriced, but the Sigma lens clearly shows that the Pana lens is also way overpriced. It is not a pro lens (unlike the Canikons), it does not have the same IQ of the Canikons, it is much slower than the Sigma lens…
Me thinks that: the m43 line requires a series of excellent IQ but not overpriced and not too heavy 2.8 zoom lenses (Oly, are you listening?); plus a series of excellent IQ and heavier and more expensive 2 or even 1.4 zoom lenses (if Sigma can do 1.8 for APSC, there is no serious reason why Oly could not do 1.4 for m43 with the same quality and size; I expect that sort of lens to be more expensive…)
At the moment, the apsc 1.8 zoom lens by Sigma has demonstrated that NONE of the other brands is doing much for improving or innovating the way we can use our non-FF cameras…
“, and it does not have the same subject isolation versatility (which is the main point of fast lenses”
No, the main point of FAST lenses is to allow for FASTer shutter speeds at a given light level, that is why they are called ‘FAST’ to begin with. Shallow DOF is a consequence, one that for much of photography history has been regarded as an undesirable one, but that is a matter of what you are trying to achieve.
But taking pictures in lower light levels while still retaining a useful shutter speed and not needing too high sensitivity is and always has been the point of such lenses, as is made clear by what they are called.
+1000 bart. I rarely shoot my Voigty 17.5mm f0.95 wide opened to achieve a shallow DOF. I use my fast lenses at evening/night. The background/scenery is part of the photo.
in digital photography, the main reason for fast lenses has become less the ability to shoot in low light, because of the available high isos with less noise. A photographer who buys such lens mainly because of the lowlight ability, is these days better off buying a 1 stop slower lens and just set the iso higher with little loss in IQ, saving lots of money. So now you see the DOF effect being more reason for such lens to buy, even advertisements promote the dof more now then the lowlight ability, especially with smaller sensors.
Well it really depends. Upping ISO from 400 to 800 and using a 1 stop slower lens will make that you are better off financially probably, with little difference otherwise, but while ISO 400 was considered ‘fast’ for film, its actually not very fast for a digital sensor.
But when talking ‘low light’, I’m talking ISO 3200-6400 @f/2 and 1/320. Those are pretty standard exposure settings when doing photography in theaters, during concerts, indoor sports etc. Upping the ISO level by 1 there means ending up more then 1 stop above the highest non extended iso level of an E-M5. That 1 stop is going to make a very significant difference in quality in that case. Oh and yes, that 1/320 is often needed for stopping motion, especially for the concerts and indoor sports.
Anyway, I don’t doubt your motivation for buying fast lenses, rather I know you do very nice things with how they render a scene, but, that is your personal reason for buying them but not THE point for such lenses existing. Also, no doubt you aren’t alone in buying such lenses with that motivation.
My post however was a direct reply to lorenzaccio making the claim that shallow DOF was THE point of fast lenses, and its really not difficult to see how that is not true as a general statement, historically its totally wrong, and it still isn’t true today. Most cameras today can’t achieve shallow DOF unless it is with extreme close-ups or with a f/0.005 lens, as most cameras are small sensor compacts. Yet quite a few of the more serious ones do have fast (zoom) lenses, and really, the only thing to be had from that is faster shutter speeds at a given iso level.
That is what you say bart, and it’s the usual pointless sophism. Nobody ever issued a law defining “fast lenses and what they are for”.
You go on shooting your cars, we’ll go on enjoying proper photography and, when needed, shallow DOF.
Most certainly Bollox, they are called ‘fast’ because you can slice bread faster with a more shallow DOF…
Great lens this Panasonic. Hope Olympus will also come with a fast standard zoom because I need one the next summer vacation. Have used my 12 and 45mm this summer citytrip but it was a pain in the ass not having a zoom. In the end the 12mm did almost all the work and it’s a great little lens but I prefer a zoom in situations like this.
So, is there any way to use the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 on my Olympus E-M5? What adapter would I use? What version of the Sigma lens would I buy? Has anyone done this?
I was so excited when I saw “$99″…. :-/
no wonder that Pana and Olympus loose customers or miss potential sales with their product / price policy regarding zoom lenses… Fuji makes a much better job… It seems that Panasonic and Olympus are not interested about what customers need and want.
No theyre just not interested in what you want. Funny how everyone thinks “What I want it what everyone wants!!!” Stick your head out of your ass.
Those tiny pieces of glass you see in our lenses are diamonds, that’s why.