Panasonic X lens hands-on video (+ one more size comparison)

FacebookShare


Which UK posted the Hands-on video you see here on top. And here is another size comparison with the upcoming 12-35mm X lens (Click on it to enlarge):

Those are the preorder links:

Black 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Silver 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Black 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Silver 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Black GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
Red GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
White GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).

FacebookShare
  • I just love where this guy has to speak, ahh the UK =)

    • Henry

      Are you talking about him speaking from a fire exit?

  • frank

    It would be amazing if the 12-35 is a straight 2.8. I sure hope so, but the size difference to the 24-70/2.8L is that big that it might just not be 2.8 at the 35mm length I am afraid. Just wait and see I suppose!

    • If you want to compare to the 24-70L, the lens MUST be F2, oterwise the DOF and light gathering abilities are different

      • Anonymous

        Agree on the DOF, but F2 is F2 whatever focal length or sensor size

      • Yes, no and no :)

        Yes DOF is different – NO – light gathering is the same per unit area of the sensor. You’re gathering more light overall with a larger sensor, but per unit area on the sensor it’s the same.

        You need F1.4 to math full frame cameras in dof at 1/2 focal length.

        If you want to match the Canon APS-C, you need 2.8*(1.6/2)=F2.24 – but then you’ll need a focal range of 38.4-112.

        Now – What does it take for the Canon to match a lil camera with this in fun?

      • Nick Clark

        For the same depth of field, it would actually have to be a f1.4, but anyway…

        For light-gathering ability – f2.8 is f2.8 is f2.8… Doesn’t matter if it’s Micro Four Thirds, APS, full-frame, medium format, P&S…

        • dumbo

          yes, it’s amazing people still have difficulties with this.

          it’s really not difficult to understand, f stops are standard, thats the point of them.

          i use the gf1 as a ‘digital’ polaroid for my rb67 which is a medium format film camera made in 1980. i set the exact same iso on the gf1 to the film i am using, i set the same shutter speed and same f stop. the lighting is the exact same as it is in a studio with strobes – and the exposure is always the exact same. no difference. doesnt matter on what lens i use.

          otherwise what do you think would be the point of having f numbers on everything :)

          • pdc

            F stop = focal length divided by front (objective)lens diameter; eg 300mm (1 foot) divided by 75mm (3 inches) = f/4.0. Doesn’t matter one iota what film or sensor the lens is put in front of. At the film (sensor) plane, for any part of the image circle, you get the same luminance (light intensity) so it doesn’t matter what camera is used. Don’t confuse magnification of a lens with it’s F-stop. For any given film (sensor) size there is a “normal” focal length (angle of view approximately 53 degrees). For 35mm “normal” focal length is about 50mm, for FourThirds 25mm, hence the 2x “crop factor”. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_lens. So, use any legacy 35mm lens on a mFT camera and you get to utilize whatever its focal length and maximum F-stop are. It’s that simple. 300mm on a 35mm camera gives you 6x magnification. On a mFT camera the magnification is 12x. The luminance received per unit area of sensor or film is exactly the same. As the mFT sensor is 1/2 the size of 35mm film, a 6x magnication lens for a mFT camera can be 1/2 the size (and weight) of one for a 35mm camera.

  • Bu

    Bring forth the 12-35!!!

  • Chris K

    The question about the 12-35 and 35-100 is, what aperture are they? They would be unbelievably-small at f/2, but they may be f/4 for all we know.

    • Narretz

      f4 is definitely not bright enough for a pro lense. And Pana said they will be fast. So 2.8 is pretty much set, let’s hope it’s on both ends.

  • voldenuit

    The EF-S 17-55/2.8 is smaller than the 24-70, but it is still quite a bit larger than the 12-35 X lens.

    I really hope Panasonic have managed to keep the lens a constant F2.8, as I think F4 would be a bit slow for a bright standard zoom, especially with m43’s handicap in low light. I also hope they’ve priced it closer to sony’s 16-50/2.8 (~$700) than Canon’s (~$1,000).

  • Mar

    So, if 12-35 is to be 2.8 (which it might but I think it won’t be constant aperture), it’s like having a 24-70 f5.6 lens on a FF camera :P

    Unfortunately, there are no such slow lenses on a FF camera, but if you don’t need 2.8 which you probably don’t need to have on a modern FF camera, you can get great results with a good f4-5.6 lens.

    Fast zooms are not the answer for m43.
    Olympus failed here as well even offering optically significantly better lenses that it’s competition (14-35 and 35-100) which are definitely going to be optically better and faster than 12-35 and 35-100 for micro.

    These lenses should cost under $800 to have any appeal to potential customers, they’re in no way competition to FF 24-70 and 70-200mm f2.8 lenses.

    • frank

      They might have the DOF comparable to a FF 5.6, but as far as light goes they are just as 2.8 as any 2.8 lens. Personally I quite like the somewhat bigger DOF of m43 compared to FF for the same f-stop.

      My 20/1.7 and 7-14/4 are very good already wide open and are very useable in real life. Whereas a 40mm on full frame would have to be used at f3.5 for the same DOF and would need a shutter speed 4 times that of my m43 cam because of the smaller light opening…

      So what’s the best situation?

      • Mar

        Yes, but FF sensors have 2 stops over (m)43rds sensors anyway, so it’s really quite comparable.

        DoF is plenty shallow with 14-35 or 35-100 f2s, and I think it’s more how bokeh is rendered than how shallow the DoF is, hence why certain lenses have a lot of appeal even if they’re not too usable at max apertures (lenses such as 85mm 1.2/1.4, 135 2.0 etc).

        • bilgy_no1

          So, if it’s really quite comparable, why not choose the smaller, lighter and cheaper m43 option instead of FF? I realise that FF will have the edge in extreme situations, but for most amateurs, m43, or APS-C, is more than good enough.

          • Chris K

            Exactly.

            I’ve carried a 5D2 and 24-70 on all-day shoots and if you told me I could carry something half the size/weight, with an extra stop of light-gathering power thanks to f/2, AND an extra stop of DOF, I’d be ecstatic. I’d use it anytime there’s enough light to shoot at ISO1600 or lower. Which is the vast majority of the time.

            I know my 5D has about two stops ISO noise on my EP3, but I happily give that up whenever it’s possible, because I don’t enjoy carrying a 4lbs camera. My whole m43 KIT weighs 4lbs!

            I hear all these arguments why M43 is awful for noise or DOF or whatever. It makes me wonder what people were shooting before we had the 5D and D3. Was photography impossible before FF digital? Are all pictures taken before the 5D awful?

            • Bidou

              The answer is : before 5d mkII pro used film. Not every pro for sure but this camera, for a lot of professional photographer in my entourage, was the trigger to switch from analog to digital.

  • fred schumacher

    I used to be a working photographer, and I would take increased depth of field any day over bokeh, which I think is highly overvalued. Ninety percent of the time you wish you could get more depth of field than the lens and light can supply. For me, that’s the big advantage of 4/3.

    • Boooo!

      But… but you can’t have 14982 faves on your Flickr photos unless you shoot at f/1.2 and ISO 25600 with a FF camera!

    • pdc

      Noteworthy comment Fred. Bokeh, schmokeh, but sometimes the artefact is neat.

  • Brod1er

    The other benefit comes when you remove the fast zoom and fit a fast pancake or the 14-45 X lens and slip the camera in your pocket. Try doing that with a 5D or D700!

  • Dreaming of F2.0

    Here’s hoping it will be F2.0-aperture:

    http://i54.tinypic.com/rjgwt4.jpg

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close