skip to Main Content

Panasonic says new 12-35mm f/2.8 coming end of June, priced £1,000.


Panasonic confirms at Amateur Photographer that the “new 12-35mm f/2.8 lens is expected out at the end of June, priced £1,000.” Interesting that Panasonic didn’t mention the other new 35-100mm f/2.8 X lens. Don’t know if they forgot to mention it or if that lens will arrive even later! I guess the price in Euro will be 1.100 and expressed in Dollars $1,150-1,200. That’s half the price of the Olympus Four Thirds 14-35mm f/2.0 (here on eBay) and also a couple of hundred dollars less than a lens like the 24-70mm L f/2.8 from Canon.

AP posted other interesting news:
1) Panasonic says Mirrorless global market share (for all system cameras) will be at $50 in 2015 (it is 22% today). Currently it is 54% in Taiwan, 51% in Japan, 28% in UK and 18% in USA.
2) Panasonic lost some market share because of the growing competition (such as Nikon’s 1 system).
3) Sykes (Panasonic manager) said that “the continued loyalty of many photographers to major camera brands such as Canon, owing to their long photographic heritage, continues to pose a ‘massive challenge’ to Panasonic, despite the firm’s success in the CSC arena.” Panasonic expects Canon to launch its first CSC in 2012.
One more little info: All m43 cameras are made in Japan, apart from the G3 which is produced in China.

Just my two cent: I wouldn’t fear the Canon competition that much. Canon always acts very conservative and I don’t expect anything revolutionary. And we already have tuff competitors like the top selling Fuji X PRO 1 (Click here) and Sony NEX-7 (Click here).

New GF5 preorders:
Black GF5 with 14-42mm or 14-42mmX lens at Amazon (Click here and choose the lens).
White GF5 with 14-42mm or 14-42mmX lens at Amazon (Click here and choose the lens).
Red GF5 with 14-42mm or 14-42mmX lens at Amazon (Click here and choose the lens).

  • Too steep for me. I had to sell a kidney for my OM-D and I need the other one for the pub.

    • Dario

      My thoughts exactly!

      • Peter C.


      • It’s your liver that you need for the pub. Go ahead and get yourself that lens.

    • MJr

      Pretty much exactly what i and most everyone else the least resourceful expected tho.
      But i have to say the pub part was kinda funny.

    • Duke

      Unless the quality is exceptional I won’t buy a zoom.

      But as far as pricing goes this is on the LOWER end of my estimations.

      When you think that the 12mm is $800 (and not super sharp) this is almost cheap. I worry that the quality is not there.

      Its odd how everyone wants fast lenses (this isn’t even that fast) but when they announce them they are too expensive.

      • Jason

        @Duke – agreed the 12 mm is no good, so this may be a good option. But quality is paramount.

        • Duke

          Yeh even the 7-14mm has comparable IQ and sharpness if you are willing to give up the 2 stops

      • It is also cheaper than the Nikon/Canon 17-55/2.8, but more than the Sony/Pentax 16-50/2.8 (though no IS). Hopefully, the street price comes a bit lower.

        • Reza

          nope, as of 3 days ago Pentax has increased the price of its 16-50 f/2.8 to $1500.

          • ght

            Tamron will be coming out with a stabilized 24-70 2.8 for around $1,000 that was designed for full frame. Honestly, I think the micro four thirds lenses, at least the decent ones, are a ripoff in terms of price. I look at the Nikon 35mm that was designed for DX cameras. It’s a 50mm equivalent lens and provides pretty much the same dof as the Panasonic 25mm. But the Panasonic is around $350 more expensive. The m43 lenses are smaller and cheaper to make and almost always more expensive.

    • WT21

      Same here. I will likely get this lens, but not immediately. Wait for used.

      On the other hand, I had to go back to a DSLR to get PDAF for action. I am using a Sigma 17-50/2.8 on a Canon DSLR. I might not be ready for an m43 fast zoom anyway, until they do something like the Nikon 1 series — PDAF on the sensor. If m43 could do that, then I could lose the DSLR, and have more cash for a nice 2.8 zoom lens.

    • Andy Taylor

      Hahaha :D

  • tmrgrs

    It’s probably going to be several months after its release before I will consider buying this lens. There needs to be extensive testing by review sites and competent users to assure me that that the problems with the 14-42X and and 45-175X aren’t also going to be an issue with these much more expensive fast zooms. If they are OK, I will be buying them eventually though. Hope you get right this time Panasonic.

    • Diane B

      Totally agree with this. My 24-70L was probably my most used lens and I’d love something comparable light wise for my m4/3 (esp. for travel) but it will have to be very good or I’d rather carry all primes. I change lenses quickly LOL.

    • Gabi

      Panasonic was not able to solve the issue with the X lenses so far, therefore I am not too confident that the new lenses will be worth the price. I will wait for the first user reviews before making a decision. In the meantime, I will be using the 14-54 II via the MMF-3 adapter. If the 12-35mm is not much lighter than the 14-54, I might skip it anyways.

      • What is the issue with the X lenses?

        • lensguy

          blurriness, double immage. generally when you zoom in all the way.
          although, not all lenses have this issue. but it seems to be a lottery if you get a good one or bad one.

          • They must have used my Zeiss multi-focal glasses lens. Zeiss make good camera glass but their multi focals are the worst I have ever used.

        • Gabi

          Blurred images, maybe due to the OIS, even wehn the latter is turned off.

    • WT21

      Got point Tim. They need to regain some trust here, though I think the X lenses (being collapsible) introduced new issues that these lenses might not have. Time will tell.

    • David

      It’s probably going to be several months after it’s released before ANYONE will be able to buy it…with Panasonic’s stocking problems I expect it won’t actually hit stores until Christmas

      • Nelson

        So true, especially on quality stuff it take ages for in stock!

  • 1. I think mirrorless market share of sales could reach 50% in 2014
    2. I don’t think it was too much too the Nikon1 system (and I wouldn’t be worrying too much about the Nikon1 it’s too flawed), if they lost any it was because of Olympus and Sony and also beccause of their failure to make their cameras more aspirational…
    3.Leave the dinosaurs behind, trying to drag canon or nikon users away isn’t worth the time, effort or money in the main…

    • DGTE

      Jesus H!, do you never stop with the bitchin about the Nikon 1 . Seriously buy what you like and let others buy what they like. It only makes you look like a ranting fanboy . 95% of professionals probably use Nikon or Canon with a few high end MF digital and a few bottom feeders like you using low end mFT gear. Seriously dude you aint in no position to be passing judgement on what any pro uses .

      Here’s a couple of tips that you should try out focus, exposure , framing and the only thing funny about these photos is that some retard would pay for them.

      • @DGTE

      • Haswell
      • I think they are good quick take fun shots, take the occasion. What’s your gripe with that?
        “focus, exposure , framing” Awww, they’ve all gone home.

        • elthom1970

          jimd It takes just the same time to take a good image as a bad one. DGTE should not be posting links to others work when hiding behind an anonymous ID and while retard might be an acceptable term in the good old USA it is both offensive and uncalled for. A lot of the photos in the gallery while not technically good do capture real emotions and fun, lighten up.

          • jim

            “and while retard might be an acceptable term in the good old USA it is both offensive and uncalled for.,,”

            Totaly agree!

            In the UK you now call em SCOPERS!

          • Elaine. “while not technically good do capture real emotions and fun, lighten up”. That’s what I said, if you bother to follow the links. My comment was to DGTE he was having a go at Yoydidntdidyou.
            I commented that I thought the pix captured the moment and therefore any time taken on framing and so forth loses the moment.

      • @DGTE
        – if you want to pass individual comments about my flickr photos in that set you can do (assuming you know how to use flickr) regarding focus,exposure and framing as well as any other aspect of photography or composition.

        – actually I bite my tongue on the Nikon1 system, I could say a lot more but I don’t.

        – if (and a big if at that) you have paying clients they must be a pretty miserable lot if they can’t laugh at themselves and don’t appreciate funny photos…

        • And, they don’t hold the expressions or strange balance while you compose a shot. I know it’s most inconsiderate of them but that happens to ALL of us. Take the shot get, the flavour.

    • MichaelKJ

      Even when someone from Panasonic says they lost market share to the Nikon 1, you refuse to believe it.

      Nikon J1 configurations were the 6th (white, single kit lens) and 7th (white, double kit lens) best selling ILCs in Japan for March. GX1 was 6th, NEX-7 was 10th, GF3 was 11th and E-PL2 was 12th.

      • @MichaelKJ
        Japan is just one market on the world stage.

        • chauffeurdevan

          yeah right, maybe you should try to do your pixmania popularity “reliable” trick again to see the actual situation. But from what I see, there is more -red- Nikon J1 and Pentax Q sold than any Olympus.

          • @chauffeurdevan
            what was the trick about it??????

            • chauffeurdevan

              Please convince me that it was not a trick.

              So if it was not a trick, you have to admit that -red- nikon J1 and Pentax Q are [better seller?/more popular?] than any Olympus camera as the current situation is mostly that.

              If not admit it, it was a trick in that you only use those Pixmania popularity chart when it support your say. As right now, it is not support your say, you just discard what MichealKJ say by not bringing any proof.

              In both case, I do not believe I’ll actually see a confession today.

              • The Pentax Q is outselling the Oly µFTs?!?! May I ask in which country this is supposed to be the case?

                • chauffeurdevan

                  It seems it is all over Europe if we may believe those Pixmania Popularity Charts that YouDidntDidYou liked to show us this winter when it supported his claims that m43 was dominating sales.

                  Personally, I don’t give those any importance. A product with a bigger gross margin, with a high quantity in stock, and a near end of shelf life will probably get a higher ranking than a bestseller that is out of stock with a lesser gross margin.

                  The OM-D will probably takes really long to be in their Top 10 charts just because of that.

                  • @chaufferdevan
                    Nikon 1 are selling at 28% discount now just 6 months after launch and 3 months after they reached distribution – smells like a “fire sale” *cough,cough*

                    – with red models Nikon1’s in clearance already

                    even the Nikon1 dpreview forum activity has slowed down to a trickle just like the Nikon1 groups on flickr.

              • @chaffeurdevan
                Olympus is first with panny taking next few positions, the first two nikon1’s are at 28% discount and then the red model is on clearance,it shocked to see Pentax Q then appearing on pixmania UK.
                Nikon 1 is now “selling in”due to large discounts and Nikon enthuasists and a spurt of heavy marketing.

  • Finally a more solid date!

  • MP Burke

    The price for the 12-35mm lens is a bit disappointing, but not too surprising. At that price it may not be supplied as a “kit” with a camera body either, which could have made it more affordable.
    Panasonic UK is running a number of cash back offers on lenses at the moment. Once the 12-35mm has been available a few months, the price should start to settle down and it should also become available with cash backs or special offers. I would like to see test reports of the lens being used with the highest resolution sensors before considering buying.

  • Tron

    Weather sealed?

  • Berbu

    Must be really good lens, but not for me.

  • MJr

    Oh come on not this picture again, after months and months it’s making me sick. :(

    At least we have some kind of date now, took them long enough.

    Price is pretty much exactly what i expected.

  • JF

    upper 1000 euros is upper my psychological limit for just a lens…

  • Me

    > One more little info: All m43 cameras are made in Japan, apart from the G3 which is produced in China.

    Sorry, but that’s very wrong. Even the GH2 is “Made in China”. In fact, the only Panasonic camera I personally owned that was made in Japan was the GF1.

    • Steve

      I was going to say the same thing. My G1 an GH2 are both made in China. My GF1, GF2 and GX1 are from Japan though.

  • slomo

    This does not look good. The price is way too low for a constant 2.8. It should be at least $1800. Either the price is wrong or quality is not good and Panasonic knows it could not sell it at a high price.

    • JF

      Man ! 1100 euros for bad quality !! are you kinding ?? This is the price of some Canon and Nikon pro lenses…ok the new Canon 27-70 f2.8 USM II is 2500 euros but this is not the same class (and this is too much expensive) and the nikon 24-70 f2.8 is 1500 euros. This lens MUST be top-notch or will never sell…

      • slomo

        This is why it has to sell more than the Canon or Nikon equivalent, if it were to have the same quality. The 12-35 will not sell as many, therefore to pay the investment, it would have to have a higher price tag.

        So either the price is too low and has to be slightly above the popular 24-70 f2.8, or Panasonic skimps on cost and the result is a lower quality lens.

    • gswpete

      My white GF3 was made in Japan.

  • Yun

    Not the lens I’ll get with such price tag , better save the money for Zuiko 75mm F1.8 . Even the 35-100 looks much promising than this one . Such lens should done in F2 not F2.8 .

  • OlyFan

    £1000!?!? Are they nuts!? Even the revered 4/3 Zuiko 12-60 in its hey day was not costing so much. Granted its slightly slower, but £1000 for constant aperture is insane!!

  • Mar

    Who will buy this?
    It’s going to be quite big, probably not much smaller than 14-54mm for 43rds which is a perfectly sized lens for DSLRs, but not for m43.

    Also, it’s going to be software corrected like other Panasonic lenses without Leica tag.

    Furthermore, it’s “just” f/2.8 which coupled with it being a wide to normal angle lens won’t produce any decent bokeh or shallow DoF which most people here want to buy it for, nor will it be that good at low light.

    Primes are a way to go for m43, range of 12-35mm is good in theory, but with relatively slow f2.8 (for a 43rds sized senzor and such wide angle) lens such as 12-50 f2.8-4 or something similar to 43rds 14-54 or 12-60 would make for a much more useful lens.

    If you’re going to build expensive, limited zooms (i.e. short range – 12-35 and 35-100), you’d better make them very bright rivaling primes.

    • Vivek

      Quite a few were clamoring for these. They will buy it.

      I will enjoy all the upcoming reviews linked through this blog. :-)

      • I was wondering this myself. At 35mm equivalent, it will only have f/2.8. I own the 45mm at f/1.8 and still find that it does not provide enough shallow depth of field in situations shooting people far away (although it is perfect for portraits). I also own the 45mm macro at f/2.8 and found it not enough for portraits.

        I’m still interested in a bright zoom, but personally a bit concerned it will not give me enough shallow depth of field. To each their own though. I’m sure it will be very welcome for some :).

    • Mike

      1) It has more wideangle than the 14-54
      2) (I guess) It’s smaller & lighter – if you add the 43 adapter
      3) It has OIS (very important for Pana Users)
      4) As far as I know you can produce the same DoF with any focal length you like – you just have to go a step closer to the model :-)

      • Esa Tuunanen

        It’s no wider than 12-60 and looses in usefulness because of lot shorter long end.
        And while 12-60mm isn’t constant aperture difference isn’t that huge. (remember extra slow zooms are m4/3 fashion)

        Also if this Panasonic is going to use software to cover up off the charts distortion then it’s probably going to be also of lower quality. Just like wannabe premium 12mm M.Zuiko loosing to 12-60.

        • Andrew

          This is way more useful generally speaking, because of functional autofocus and IS. Not to mention that the 12-60 is about the size of a football.

          • Ahh but what a football.

    • Atle

      So what? Thats like complaining about lenses using more elements to correct distortion. There is nothing wrong with software-correction, its a tool, like all others in lens design, with upsides and downsides.

      • Mar

        There is something wrong because:

        1. Lens is usually significantly wider than stated. For instance 20mm 1.7 is about 15mm uncorrected so the lens behaves like that (15mm 1.7 and NOT 20mm 1.7 – more like 20mm f2.5) as far as the DoF/Bokeh is concerned.

        2. Lens is easier and cheaper to design/make than optically corrected version, yet prices are often higher than optically corrected lenses.

        3. Optically corrected lens using additional software correction to perfect it will always outperform optically uncorrected lens + software correction.

        • #1 has to be measured. In any event, I switched from the 1.7/20mm to the 1.4/25 and I personally don’t find the 25mm’s DoV to be much shallower.

          #2 Such as Panasonic’s 7-14 vs Olympus’s 7-14…?
          I just checked online, and the only stunning cases I have found is the 75-300 and to a lesser extent the 9-18 . “Often” is very debatable.
          In any events, I’ll leave it to the market. When I moved to M43, I accepted the fact that optics would not necessarily be bargains.

          #3 I’ll take a good corrected lens over crappy glass any day of the week. Your sweeping statement would be debatable when everything else is equal, but its never so simple.

          • Mar

            Panasonic 7-14mm uses much less (expensive) glass and lower quality materials of construction.
            Olympus version is also better optically and has less CA/vignetting/distortion plus it’s got weather sealing.
            Also, ZD 7-14mm is actually f2.8-4 unlike Panasonic…

            Don’t forget it’s also made with a lot longer register distance specs which makes it bigger and harder to make than a similar lens for m43.

            Those differences are worth the price tag.
            In reality, Panasonic lens should cost as much as ZD 9-18mm since amount of glass is similar and m.ZD 9-18mm should be a bit cheaper (although it wins a lot of points for extremely compact size unlike Panasonic 7-14mm).

            • In reality, if a lens sells at a given price, for whatever the reason, then the price is correct.

              • If, it sells in the required volume. Then this is so. If, under the volume required then it is to expensive. The correct level can not usually be seen on a new product, it needs to get the “dedicated follower of fashion” out of the way and then assess its value.

                • Yes, of course. The answer could be even longer winded into an economy lecture ;)

                  • Yes, and not necessarily correct. Economists and Marketers are notorious at getting it wrong. Only the few make it, then often due to good fortune, occasionally to good planning.

                    • :D hehe thanks for reminding that fact to me ;)

                      I’ll just leave it to the fact that a prefer a notoriously wrong theory that has the merit of having been searched, detailed, debated and open to the critic, rather than to loosely dump that this or that lens should sell that that price..

            • Olympus 7-14 is a constant f4. Get your facts straight. Fom pics I’ve seen, the Panny 7-14 holds up well against the Oly 7-14 considering its a little over half the SHG lens price and considerably smaller.

            • E-1

              The ZD is 7-14/4. You’ve sounded like you own 43 glass, I doubt that now.

              • Mar

                ZD 7-14mm is f4 unless you press lens release button (or dismount the lens by a mm or so just so it loses contact).
                After that it becomes f2.8 at 7-8mm.

                Similar thing with ZD 14-35mm which is f1.8 or so at the wide end (but not so practical because difference isn’t huge), however 1 stop for ZD 7-14mm is great, especially in low light/night scape photography.

        • Atle

          Even if you totally disregard cost and size, there is a quality penalty to using a lot of elements do to correction. And there is a penalty to using software to do correction. Not using software-correction just for the sake of it as as stupid as just using 7 elements, just for the sake of it. All design is a question of weighing pros and cons of different design choices, there is cons to using optical correction too.

          • Mar

            What penalty (except for size/cost?).

            What I see is that optically corrected lenses from 43rds outperform m43 versions.

            ZD 14-42mm
            PL 25mm

            Not to mention that even mid range ZD zoom (12-60mm) outperforms any current m43 prime, let alone zoom lens.

            • Atle

              Reduced brightness, reduced contrast, more prone to flare are disadvantages of using many elements. The is no free lunch, even if cost is not an issue. The quality of different versions of lenses as you present is the total sum of a lot of design consideration (among them, size), you cant use that to say what is best. (Even though i never said software correction is better than optical correction, just that its stupid not to use an available tool, just for the sake of it, whats the better tool will come down to a total analysis of the upsides and downsides of the design choices)

              • Esa Tuunanen

                > …reduced contrast, more prone to flare are disadvantages of using many elements.
                So why does 12mm M.Zuiko prime have so much fuzzier image in border and even optically nice simple 45mm focal length M.Zuiko looses tiny bit in contrast to 12-60mm while both are optically lot simpler?

                Maybe because like you said best image sharpness, contrast and such comes from quality of whole optical design and not just from difference in number of lens elements…

                • Atle

                  What is your point? As you said, and I wrote, the total quality is the sum of a lot of design choices. Your single-lens comparisons are therefore totally useless because both lenses is the sum of a lot of design considerations (and border sharpness has nothing to do with any of the things i wrote?). But many lens elements does cause reduced contrast, reduced contrast and more prone to flare.

                  My whole point, which anyone with a minimal knowledge about leses should agree to is that ALL design choices av upsides and downsides, both when it comes to optical choices and software choices. Do you disagree with that?

            • Just one thing: the larger amount of glass, the larger amount of brightness loss. Better correct the distorsion than insert a supplementary tag and make T-number worse.

              • Esa Tuunanen

                Wrong, with modern coatings few more elements aren’t going to do any notable difference to light transmission especially when such zoom lens in any case requires something like dozen+ elements.
                And losses inside glass elements are in general negligible compared to surface reflection losses unless you’re going to do something like put double thickness of glass into light’s path.

            • Vivek

              There is no question about the superior performances of the 4/3rds Olympus lenses.

              Some of these folks (Panasonic shareholders?) are just posting utter nonsense. You guys must be buying several of whatever Panasonic make and sell, right? I will give you a tip- buy their batteries- where they make their most cash. ;)

              • We talk here of a pro M43. We talk here of smallness. We need to think about what we want. The M43 can be small and light and easy to handle, we already have that.
                But what of a pro M43 version. It would need to be far bigger than the E-m5, why? Controls, for a pro M43 we will need buttons and dials and space between them. That means a camera about the size of the E30 maybe a tad smaller as long as we can have dedicated and assignable function buttons that are finger friendly.
                So M43 does not have to be all small. Correspondingly lenses do not all have to be all small. There will be larger glass for M43 and there will be smaller. It is also apparent that most of it will be zooms, just look at the lens request blog. But bear in mind that request was made without the consideration of an M43 pro body.

            • Rudolf Remmler

              Ok the 12-60 outperforming m43 primes was funny

  • OlyFan

    “the continued loyalty of many photographers to major camera brands such as Canon, owing to their long photographic heritage, continues to pose a ‘massive challenge’ to Panasonic”

    Well, don’t say that. Make your products (esp sensors) more competitive. No excuses for that. If Apple thought this way about Nokia and RIM, they would have never been where they are today (in smartphone market).

    • Chris K

      True, if the product is good enough people will switch. But the analogy isn’t perfect because people don’t generally have a lot of supporting equipment for their phones. To switch from Blackberry to iPhone you go to the Apple Store and buy a phone. Here’s what I’ve done to switch from EOS to M43:

      Sell: 350D, 40D, 300/2.8IS, 2x TC, 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/2, 20/1.8, 70-300APO, 28-135, 28-75/2.8, 17-40
      Buy: EP1, EP3, GH1, 9-18, 14-42, 14-140, 100-300, 20/1.7, 45/2.8, FL-36R

      I STILL have thousands tied up in Canon after all this, and I’m not even listing all the Four Thirds equipment I’ve bought and sold the past few years.

      I wouldn’t call it “brand loyalty” that’s keeping me with Canon as much as it is a giant pain in the butt to switch systems!

      • Diane B

        Exactly. I’m terrible at selling off gear–even though I sold quite a few lenses, I still have most of my fast primes, other lenses, but lots and lots of other accessories (which are very difficult to sell and extremely tedious to even try)–like you, thousands of dollars still tied up. No loyalty at all though my last Canon, my 5D and I “bonded”. I doubt I ever buy another Canon though I shot Canon film and started with the original D30 in digital and upgraded my way to the 5D.

        • Pavlo

          That’s why I’m not intending to invest much in a gear. Regardles of a platform. But I’m amator.

        • rrr_hhh

          I have never sold anything (except when I upgraded from the Contax G1 to the Contax G2), I switched (painfully given size and weight) to Canon when the D60 was issued and later got a 5D; at that time Canon had the best sensors and then the only FF accessible to amateur photographers. Nowadays I think that Nikons are better, but I won’t change system. I’m even wondering if it makes sense to keep the Canon gear, since I shoot mainly with mft cameras. I have passed some gear down the line to my brother or nephews (the Canon G2, the Panasonic G1, no one wants my E-P1, but I use its battery as a spare for the E-P3). I kept the Canon D60 as a spare body, or second body, but never used it. Unlike mft, it was too heavy to take two DSLRs bodies n holidays or photo outings ! In retrospect, I should have sold it.

      • OlyFan

        I agree with your point. However, I think the reason why existing users of other systems would not switch to a newer system is because they are somehow better served with the older system. It could be the sensor, design ergonomics, better lens range etc. If you incorporate all of that in m43, show a genuine progress on every product release, improve lenses, time to market, quality, UI design, better performance to cost ratio whilst still keeping to the strengths of m43, I don’t see why existing users will not consider dumping their systems. It is after all going to fetch them some profit and they are going to use that money to buy into m43.

    • “There is no question about the superior performances of the 4/3rds Olympus lenses.”


      I always believed that this was the case but just the other day, a long-time Oly user (since the OM days) in the German ‘Olympioniken’ forum told me, that his copy of the M.Zuiko 9-18 defintely is better than his ED 9-18. So, I’m not so sure right now if you can say that the FT lenses always are better than their µFT sisters.

  • Rudolf Remmler

    I ll get the 2 new sigma primes instead, cheap, 2,8 and very versatile

  • Andrew

    With Panasonic’s 12-35mm and 35-100mm, and Olympus’ 60mm macro and 75mm, there’s really only one popular lens left. Fast, mid-range zoom (14-54mm). But at this rate, at least another year, given all these announced/rumored lenses are released in 2012…sigh.

    • Nono – we still need a 50-200 2.8-3.5. Urgently!

      • Andrew

        a 50-200 fast zoom? Really? Don’t mean to be sarcastic, but after a presumably fast 35-100? After there’s already a 45-200 and 100-300? I understand people want certain lenses, but think about what’s actually desired by MOST m43 users: a fast, mid range zoom. It’s the most desired lens going off the recent poll here. The people have spoken. “We” want a fast, mid range zoom.

  • Doug

    I don’t understand why people think the price is high. Look at the cost of the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8. I think I paid $1600 for mine when it came out….. Which reminds me, why did the Panaaonic 7-14mm go up in price from $888 to $949?! I should have taken advantage of that GX1+7-14mm $200 off combo earlier this year :(

    • Mr. Reeee

      List price for the 7-14mm is $1099.95, so the price does fluctuate quite a bit. In February last year I got mine for $770. Last Summer it was around $1000.

      The 7-14mm is a great lens!

      • E-1

        The 7-14 is the reason I will not switch to anything else in the foreseeable future.

      • Frank

        If the 12-35 is as good as the 7-14 it is worth the money without a doubt. I really like the range and think it is a very sensible addition to the panasonic range.

        • Mr. Reeee

          +100 Frank and E-1!

          • +1,000 Frank, E-1 and Mr. Reese!

            High quality f/2.8 zooms at $1,000 a piece simply do not exist, except for the likes of Sigma.

            A mere $1,000 USD for a small, light-weight, 24-70mm equiv. zoom is a bargain.

            • Bob B.

              +++10 …as long as the Build Quality and the IQ is there!

    • hytr

      The Nikon is designed to cover a frame four times larger and to match the DOF for us mFT users we would need a F1.4 zoom, I can’t see that happening. Not forgetting you Yanks get the cheapest Olympus prices in the world the Nikon 24-70 costs £1190 here compared to a stonking £1800 for the 14-35

      • Rudolf Remmler


  • Tropical Yeti

    > Just my two cent: I wouldn’t fear the Canon
    > competition that much. Canon always acts very
    > conservative and I don’t expect anything revolutionary.

    Being a bit conservative is normal approach, if you dominate the market. Dominating the market means you are doing it right. I also think Canon did revolutionise the market with some features in their cameras.

    Obviously they will position their mirrorless system, not to compete with their DSLRs. Like Nikon. And I would say Nikon did revolutionize in some aspects with their J1, V1 cams – for the intended market – compact camera upgraders. (Forget complaints from camera lovers, believing they are “professionals”, J1, V1 are not intended for them).

    Anyway – you don’t buy a camera, because it is revolutionary (at least not me). You buy it for god mix of features, size, price, usability (and sexyness of the camera for some people :-))

  • Chris K

    I think we should withhold value judgments on the lens until we see reviews. Some thought the 20/1.7 and 14-140 were overpriced when announced, but they ended up being better lenses than their specs implied.

    I don’t think the 24-70L is a good comparison for the 12-35/2.8. The effective 24-70mm zoom range is the same, but if you put the 24-70L on a 5D2 and the 12-35 on a GH2 and shoot them both at f/2.8 you’ll get much different images. You’d have to stop the 24-70 down to f/5.6 to get the same image from both lenses.

    Depending on how you use a 24-70, the 12-35 may or may not be able to do the same job. I use my 5D2+24-70 kit with a flash as a portrait machine. On the 5D2 the DOF is short enough at f/2.8 that I don’t need to monkey around with a bunch of primes. I get a LOT more candids thanks to the zoom.

    When I shoot with my 7D I use my 50/1.4 instead, because the DOF is often too large for portraits for my taste. With my GH1 it’s a bit worse than that; I need to shoot my OM 50/1.8 wide open to get the background separation that I want.

    While we won’t see a 12-35/1.4 anytime this century, a 14-35/2 would be a passable portrait zoom. Not ideal, but passable. At f/2.8, however, you’ll still be reliant upon primes when you need short DOF.

    That’s not to say f/2.8 isn’t useful. But just like I don’t often shoot portraits at f/5.6 on my 24-70, I won’t be using the 12-35/2.8 for portraits. I’ll keep my 5D2 for portraits, and use my M43 gear for everything else.

    • Rocko

      I agree with Yeti. While Canon (and Nikon) might be considered “conservative” by early mirrorless adapters, just wait until they get rolling… Remember the Minolta Maxxum? It put autofocus SLRs on the map and they were selling like hotcakes. Canon countered by offering a couple of bulky, awkward AF lenses in the FD mount in the beginning, and then introduced the ground-breaking, AF-motor-in-the-lens EF mount which steamrolled over the Maxxum, et al (and to a point, Nikon too). I’m amazed that some 4/3 and m4/3 users seem to believe that Canikon buyers are simply lemmings following the crowd. While that may be true with some buyers, Canon and Nikon didn’t magically become the Big Two. They’ve been innovating and making great camera systems for years. I’m an Oly 4/3 user myself, but I certainly don’t “fear” future Canikon mirrorless development. Once the big guys warm up to the task, we’ll see some interesting and innovative cameras, I’m sure, and the increased competition and selection will benefit all of us.

    • Swejk

      They go one step closer to your subject with the camera smaller and
      they have their DOF …

  • chris

    For that kind of cash it had better be more like a Canon 24-105L and less like the Panny 14-140 in terms of construction. The FL and constant 2.8 is very attractive as M43 lacks fast zooms, but a dodgy pile of plastic with poor manual focusing will not cut it.

    Mirrorless is definitely going to continue gaining market share, but 50% is certainly still at least a few years away and that won’t happen until Canon and Nikon decide its time to start cannibalizing its DSLR sales by building APS-c compacts. DSLR sales are obviously still very robust, otherwise CaNikon would already have an APS-c compact – if they felt there was more profit potential with a compact over another D3000 or T4i they would build it. They also have the advantage of selling in far more retail outlets so their cameras are in front of more casual shooters, and that’s the market for volume sales numbers.

    The GH3 had better be something special, Panasonic needs a camera that whips the masses into a pre-order frenzy like the Nex7, EM5 and Xpro1. Though some hate it, a rangefinder styled brick would start to create that nostalgia/passion where Panny is missing out, but Olympus and Fuji are cashing in.

  • twoomy

    Awesome! Looking forward to it and if it has corner-to-corner sharpness, I’m in. (Or if Oly announces an m43 update to the legendary 12-60mm beforehand, I’d jump on that instead.)

    TO the people whining about price and size, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? Compare it to the Nikon/Canon equivalents and maybe that will put it into perspective. Me, I’m sick of all of the cheap and crappy 14-something kit zooms that have sh1tty corners, so I’m willing to pay good money to have a big lens that gives excellent image quality!

  • Rob

    The price seems reasonable for a constant F2.8 zoom. I guess there might be a psychological factor in handing over that amount for the size of the product though compared to a Canon or Nikon heavy beast.

    I can’t quite afford it just yet myself, but will watch it closely as it gets reviewed as it’s one I’d certainly consider buying in the future as soon as a price drop happens as I don’t think it’ll drop by much.

    I’d probably rent this lens before I bought it, just to make sure it would be right for me.

    It’s a shame Panasonic feels threatened by Canon fanboys. I worked in a camera shop and totally see where they are coming from. Some of them refuse to buy a different brand compact camera and they have a Canon SLR despite it being a completely different product. Saying that some people buy Sony cameras because they have a complete Sony multimedia setup at home too, but their loyalty isn’t anywhere near as fierce.

    Panasonic needs to work on grabbing new customers to the micro-4/3 format rather than convert Canon fanboys who are still waiting for a mirrorless camera after forking out for overpriced and boring (albeit consistant) SLRs.

    I don’t think all micro-4/3 cameras are made in Japan too. The OM-D says made in China, designed by Olympus in Tokyo.

  • 43shot

    I’ll wait to see what the next few month will offer. I cancelled my order for the slow and bulky 12-50 on my OMD and go with the disposable 14-42. I think there are going to be many 12-50 lenses on ebay at $200 this year.

  • See below

  • just an opinion

    i do understand panasonic’s frustration. They have been in this market for a few years now, but there are certainly potential buyers who are still waiting for a canon mirrorless. on the other hand panasonic too has been a bit too conservative, especially with the GH line, out of fear of hurting their video cameras sales.

  • This is great news. F2.8 constant aperture and OIS… if the image quality is there (which Panasonic will be aiming to nail with these flagship lenses) then this is a lot of lens for £1,000.

    I film events with an AF101 and GH2 and this lens and its bigger brother are just what I’m after. Constant F2.8 will give me that much needed extra light indoors and will work seamlessly with my cameras unlike the beautiful (but heavy and expensive) Olympus FT lenses.

    When I need shallow DOF I’ll use the Voigtlander!

  • lensguy

    hopefully, street price is lower.

  • I bought into the 4/3 concept 3 years ago and left Nikon for the following reasons:
    1. Lenses are an investment
    2. Camera bodies are obsolete the second they are put into production.
    3. Four thirds and Micro four thirds can use any legacy lens.
    As a result, I own 3 Leica 4/3 lenses, 3 Lumix M43, 4 Nikon (with adapters), 2 leica M mount (with adapters), and 2 Olympus 4/3.) All are exceptional quality except for 2 of the Lumix lenses, which are merely adequate.
    I have 4 Lumix 4/3 and M4/3 bodies.
    The point is that we don’t have to put up with cheap crap. Our camera bodies can use the best this industry has to offer.
    Put your money into glass!

    • Vivek

      How much did you pay for the 14/2.5 and how much does it sell for now?

      “Investment”?! Really?!

      • Not all lenses go up in price, but carefully chosen ones hold their VALUE.

      • David

        Photography equipment will *almost* never be a good monetary investment. That’s entirely the wrong metric to judge equipment. Photography is supposed to be fun. You are investing in yourself.

      • One of my Nikons, 50mm 1.4 with aperture ring, is , unbelievably, lower cost than one without the aperture ring. My model is one of the best lenses (judged by sharpness, etc.) Nikon has ever built.
        I paid around $800 for it in the 00’s and it can be had from Nikon now for less than $500.
        But I have gotten a great deal of Value from it.

    • You are right, I have 5 leica M lenses that have almost duplicated in price since I bought them new. The 135 APO Telyt is today more than twice the price I pay 9 years ago. I’m using them on my E-P3 and are exceptional, specially the APO telyt and the 90 f2.8 tele Elmarit. I can’t afford an M9 body. I guess these glasses will be great with the OM-D.

      • I sold my Leica equipment when I went digital Nikon in ’03. I really miss those lenses.
        The 4/3 Leica lenses I have now are are not as good as my old ones.

        • Rudolf Remmler

          Investing in good glass is ok but the 43 mount is about as far from ,future proof, as it can be Leica M or nikkors are more future proof as they can be adapted just about everywhere. Heck even om s are better than 43 they work great on nex

    • Thomas. I agree with the investment in glass. However even that is a bit of a problem with modern glass. The lens tends to be useless without the body family it was designed for. Usually not much or nothing works without the lens contacts being driven by the body.
      This means that many a lens cannot be viewed in terms of the past. When the body family dies so does the lens, when the body functions change the lens is handicapped.
      I, like you, have older glass that can be used on mirrorless cameras without the need to be controlled by the body and I am keeping them. But I also have a reasonable range of 43 and m43 glass.

  • MK

    do you know if it will be kit with gh3?

    • Actually, that’s pretty much my strategy: great manual glass for primes, reasonably fast zooms for carrying around.
      My most-used lenses: Leica 14 150 auto and Nikon 300 manual (auto on a Nikon body.)
      I use my G3 for carrying around, my G3 and L10 for tripod stuff.
      The megapixel wars come up in my thoughts, but I have a 4×5 print from my G1 (12MP) hanging in my bedroom. That’s 4×5 FEET. And it looks great. That photo was shot with the Leica 14 150, and at viewing distance (3 feet or more) its perfect.
      The most important thing is the glass.

  • emde

    Must be an excellent lens if priced above the 12-60, which is made for the same image circle…
    Let’s wait for the price of the 2,8/35-100, which I personally find more tempting

    • slomo

      35-100 f2.8 should be around $2K+.

      • emde

        Then the 1,8/75 Oly will do and there is money left for another fast tele prime which may come later. I will never pay 2k for a 2.8 zoom!

        • it

          I’ve got my eyes on that 75mm oly. Has there been any indication of arrival date?

      • Chez Wimpy

        In what universe? Sure if it were a REAL Leica… but this is hardly an ambitious lens (only the “35-100/1.4” equivalent lenses do run in that price range). Most of the 3rd parties have the 50-135ish f2.8 APS-C versions for sub-$1k, and still we are talking a FF 70-200/5.6 in design/material cost. Nothing even remotely exotic.

  • les

    I will buy this if the quality is good to replace my 14-140 as a standby lens for situation demanding quick shot.

  • David

    I really really really will never understand how some people expect an allegedly high quality constant aperture zoom to be inexpensive. I see comparisons up there to the 12-60…that’s a silly comparison. This lens is faster AND smaller. I see comparisons to a FF 24-70mm. True, in FF terms this is only a constant f/5.6, but again, smaller, and much lighter. Seriously folks, if you can’t afford 1000 for a high quality lens (assuming that’s what this is…it might suck) then in my mind either you probably don’t need a high quality lens. People who do need it are willing to make the sacrifice in other places in their life.

    • JF

      You know, there are rich people with expensive gears who can afford it but don’t really need it and less rich people being talented photographers who might need it but can’t afford…1000 is really a lot of money for many people
      And yes, this lens has to be expensive…

    • Duke

      David I agree with you. People seem to want premium quality on the cheap. I remember when people were disappointment when this wasn’t f2. f2 would have cost twice as much and be quite a lot bigger.

      It is still a f2.8 as far as speed goes but yes, it has more DOF than f2.8 on a FF

    • emde

      Your comparisons aren’t better either. Sure the 12-35 is smaller and lighter than a 24-70 FF lens – it has to cover a much smaller image circle, the focal length is smaller, etc.
      On the other hand the 12-60 is a 5x zoom, whereas the 12-35 is not even 3x.

      However, I will continue to go light: slow AND COMPACT zooms combined with fast primes – at least for the shorter focal lengths.

      And please, do not push the argument too far that people could not afford a >1k lens if they consider it a bit pricy. It has to be quite excellent if they ask for ~1,100 EUR.

    • David, its still 2.8 The DOF will be 5.6 on FF, but how many use FF?

      • Chez Wimpy

        Aha! Few people use FF, so Panasonic thinks it can pull the pricing wool over their eyes. Very clever ;)

  • Keith

    Hmmm hope this first mirrorless standard zoom is high quality.
    So far we have to ut up with kit zooms from olympus, panasonic and sony.
    58mm filter ring doesnt suggest it is m43 small either…

    • JF

      the 14-140 is 62 mmm so in comparison 58 mm is small enough for me as far as the length is not to long

    • Elf

      I have a canon T2i with a 17-55 f2.8 constant apeture…… It has a 77mm filter and is bigger in all dimensions than my Panasonic LeicaD 14-150 zoom which has a 72mm filter and is almost identicle in size to the Oly 12-60 which likewise has a 72mm filter.. A constant f2.8 12-35 with a 58mm filter is comparable in size to the m4/3 40-150. For this calibre of lens it is small……And I want one.

  • Jedd

    Bright, zoom, deep DOF, constant aperture, power focus, in-lens IS – all sounds like a perfect video lens.
    Most likely we’ll see it for $999 in US, which is very reasonable for what it is. Comparison with Nikon/Canon is out of place. It’s a niche market and they gonna sell it for what they think it will sell.

  • “All m43 cameras are made in Japan, apart from the G3 which is produced in China.”
    My GH2 says Made in China.

    • Bing Wang

      Yep my GH2 is also made in China. Xiamen to be precise.

  • Jason

    This lens is smaller than the 14-54, why would it be bigger – idiots.

    • Yes, same size so FT lens ZD14-42mm F3.5-4.5, so also have 58mm filter size.

      • Jason

        @Inquo-M – Filter on 14-54 is 67 mm…

  • Bob B.

    IF? the lens is really good….IF?….it is a very reasonable price compared to what is on the market. Admin compares it to the price of the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 and says it is a “couple hundred less”…what he forgot to mention the the announced Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II will be $2300. So if the performance is equal you are looking at a lens that is $1200 less…. In true Japanese form, Canon slated the lens to be available mid April…but now is said to be delayed at least until July, or whenever????? (They also introduced the 5DIII which is $1000 higher than the 5DII ????..the prices are getting silly?) Considering what is going on with Japanese companies…if Panasonic actually delivers this zoom at that price (and it can do nothing but come down with time) ….I think it is a very fair price…as long as the performance is there. I plane on buying the Canon lens and keeping my 5DII. I am just going to keep shooting with my MFT primes….they are soooooo great!!!!!

    • Charlie

      Japanese this, Japanese that ….. never took you for a xenofobe, Bob. :|

      • Bob B.

        I think that would be xenophobe?….and no…I am not…maybe a misogynist perhaps…but definitely not a xenophobe….just stating the facts and the current mood coming out of Japan…not all companies, though.

  • BillM

    There is so much yet to be determined as has already been mentioned here. My guess is even if these lenses are really good optically, we’ll see price drops on them within the first year. Remember too that any image stabilization is going to add to the cost of the product which is why I like that Olympus has it built into the body and it sounds like the new 5-axis IS can compete with the OIS of Panasonic lenses which opens an opportunity for Olympus to come out with similar lenses without IS built into the lens and thus being cheaper than the Panny equivalent.

    If you’re comparing DOF then these aren’t close to FF f/2.8 lenses and that is part of what you’re paying for, it will be interesting to see how the market responds.

  • bedrzich

    Yeah, it’s not cheap – but worth consideration :(
    Although – in either APS-C or full-frame they are pretty good AND cheap alternatives from Tamron or Sigma.
    Until they don’t show similar products for m43 we’re doomed

  • d1000

    Wasn’t cheaper gear one of the advantage of 4/3 ????!!!!

    • Swejk

      Yes cheaper but not cheap …

  • Let’s see how the optical quality will be and if it’s worth the price. But zoom range is very limited for me, I would prefer something like 14-54 or 12-60…

  • matt

    I think there´s no doubt the new x lenses will have superb IQ.. I have the 14-140mm and for its range it´s one of the best zoom lenses on the market so is the 7-14mm ..
    but honestly.. I am waiting more for a
    weathersealed 12-50 f2.8-f3.5
    or weathersealed 12-60 f2.8-f4

  • fgl42

    What kind of depth of field can you expect with a micro four thirds sensor and this lens at say 25mm? How shallow can you get? Or should you just stick with the 25mm 1.4 if you’re interested in shallow dof?

    • Daemonius

      25mm f2.8 x 2 = equiv. of 50mm f5.6 on lets say Canon 5D

      Yours is 50mm f2.8 equiv, only Voigtlaender (and couple of exotics) can achieve truly shallow DOF.

      Tho truth is that for portraits, bit more DOF doesnt hurt.. And its nothing that regular fast 50mm wouldnt fix. :D (with adapter or without, simply use longer lens).

    • Swejk

      You can get closer with a smaller camera also go one step , without having to scare people …

    • If you come one meter close, so is DOF only 16mm on 25mm and aperture F2.8.

  • Daemonius

    Hardly true that m4/3 made in. Sure my G1 was from Japan, but later batches (those which tend to break apart) were made in China. First batches are usually from Japan.

    That price.. ehm ehm. No Leica tag for 1000 GBP? Thank you but I will rather get some older (but super high quality) lens for that price tag. And for 1000 GBP that can be some really interesting stuff.

    Not mentioning that Voigtlaender 25mm f0.95 is cheaper.. No it cant zoom or AF, but its f0.95! :D

    Btw. for 1000GBP you can buy used 5D.. (actually for only 60% of that price..).

  • Typical 43rumors forum post:

    (before lens is released) — I’d give anything for a faster, wider lens with more zoom.

    (after lens is released) — I’m not paying more than $400 for a lens… guess I’ll just stick with my kit lens.

    • Nawaf

      Totally agree! If it isn’t for you just don’t get it. Expensive or not you have a choice.

    • Jason

      Yes, of course…

      I will buy it if the optical quality is good. If not, I’m sticking to primes. Price is relevant, and lower is better, but I will pay $800-$1200 if I have to.

  • Thurin

    It’s MSRP, right? So the actual street price should be lower? If so, and assuming optical quality on par with 2.8 zooms for other brands, it’s a fair price. Steep, but fair, and if anything cheaper then anyone sane expected.

  • nicwalmsley

    I don’t see that many people complaining about the price. Just some people can’t afford it.

    Wish Olympus was releasing this. Sonic has been too iffy lately.

    • emde

      Look at the price of the 2(!)/14-35 and compare… Then you might understand why people consider a lens that incorporates electronic distortion correction with only f/2.8 is considered a bit pricey at 1,000 GBP…

    • Jason

      Yeah, I would prefer this to be an Oly, but Olympus has proven with their 12-50 mm that they are not yet capable of making a quality zoom with a MFT mount.

  • Gouging

    Price is ridiculous. This is not a FF 24-70 L. The DOF is similar to F4, the Canon 24-105 F4 is the best of the best in this type of lens, will hold its value forever, has longer zoom range and can be bought new on amazon for $1150. The Oly 12-60, is a recognized reference for it’s range, is longer than the Panny, holds its value and can be had new for $999.

    They are gouging because there are no other decent options. The X lenses have had trouble, even if it matched the quality of the Oly and Canon it should be a $700 lens. For the price they are asking it would have to be the best zoom ever. Pound sand Panansonic, not only did you loose a sale, but you lost Oly a E-M5 sale, and yes a 100-300 sale. Will wait to see what Canon does with mirrorless in august.

    Olympus and Canon glass are friends of mine. Mr X Lens, you are no Olympus or Panasonic.

    • Jason

      Good luck waiting for Canon to make a mirrorless camera as good as the E-M5. Impossible.

      • RAS

        Right…whatever you say.

  • Nelson

    Can’t wait for it to release to replace the 14-140mm as the video zoom lens!

  • BLI

    In my view, the lenses look lovely (lots of glass, much smaller than e.g the Nikkor 24-70/2.8). If the quality is good, the price is ok. If the lenses are weather sealed and high quality, they might be good lenses for e.g the E-M5.

    Would I buy the lenses? Don’t know. In any way, I’d wait for solid reviews. I love the range (from using the similar Nikkor). Right now, the Zuiko 75/1.8 is more tempting — with the lenses I’ve already invested in.

  • Haswell

    Taken with GF1. Nikon enough for you?

  • MirrorOnTheWall

    Does anyone read Japanese? Is this a pre-order option?

    • MirrorOnTheWall

      Anyone? I interpret line number one as a date, maybe May (month 5) 2012, and the price 40,000 Japanese Yen (42,000 yen when something is included, maybe VAT?) The Kenko 400mm can be bought for 20,000 yen at the same site, so I guess this is a high introduction price. Can anyone please translate this Japanese for me? I would really like to buy this Tokina 300mm mirror lens.

  • MikeH

    Gimme this lens!

  • Farrukh

    Unless this lens is tack sharp, for that price, I’d prefer the 7-14mm.

  • Scotch

    a new high end m43 from Pana is on the way?

  • George H

    If this thing performs then it’s worth it. After Olympus released their 12-50 lens which in my opinion is a dog I think we all need to realize that making high quality m43 lenses is not as easy as one would think.

    The 12-60 was good buthad complex distortion which is hard enough to correct on stills I would have no idea how you correct for it on video, is huge and loses a stop at the long end. While fast it was not always accurate (on my E-3 at least)

    The 14-54 is way cheaper my standard of excellence for all around useful lenses. It was pretty sharp across the frame but a bit soft at the extreme edges. The close focus made this such a versatile lens I have yet to run a lens like it and I’ve pwmed the the 24-105, 12-60, 12-35 and 24-70.

    The 12-35 f/2 is not a fair comparison. Optically a class of its own and worth every penny in spite of its limitations. It’s AF was just so-so and close focus was the worst of the bunch.

    If Panasonic pulls this off and delivers a super-versatile sharp across the frame lens that has quick (not necessarily fastest) AF and short close focus distance, then I’d gladly pay my hard earned money. If the lens is another 12-50 dog of a lens, I’ll just buy another E-M5 (same price) and then instead of zooming I’ll have one body with the 12/2 and another with the 25/1.4. That’s not a bad setup. Still lighter and cheaper than one 5D II/III with 24-70mm.

  • I couldn’t wait for the 12-35/2.8 so I bought a used Olympus 14-54/2.8-3.5 with M43 adapter. I wasn’t initially impressed with the Oly but I often find myself shooting at the long end for portraits. Also, the AF and speed are pretty good. Not much difference between f/2.8 and f/3.5, and the Oly could be around f/2.8-3 at 35mm focal length. Thus, the 12-35 might not be a good investment, unless I wanted a slightly wider angle.

    The 12-35/2.8 seems reasonably priced, considering the Canon EF 24-70/2.8 is $1400 at B&H. I think what’s vital for Panasonic is to finally announce a fast pro zoom, which might enhance serious AF100 and GH2 users, and perhaps attract others to the M43 realm.

    • Gabi

      I did the same, but I was impressed from the bgeinning by the overall sharpness of this 14-54 lens.

  • Chris

    £1000!!!! for a lens, what planet are Panasonic on, in this time when cuts are in and spending is low how can anybody spend that much on a lens.

    • Easy, don’t tell the wife.

  • Chad

    I’m with the people that say this lens is too expensive.

    Comparing prices of m/43 lens to canon/nikon lens based on its performance/cost to make is irrelevant. I say this because canon/nikon DSLRs will always be the preference amongst real pros that work in the photography business. In that sense for most m/43 users (enthusiasts/semi pros), there will be a psychological barrier to pay over 1K for a lens. That is because we don’t make money from photography (if you did, again you would probably be using a canon/nikon). I’m sure there will be a niche market and people with deep pockets within the m/43 users who will pay for that premium to get the absolute best, but the majority I don’t believe can justify the purchase. Again it’s not about not having the money but more so about justification for spending that money. I have the 12mm f2.0, am happy/love it, but I would say $800 for a lens is the max I’d pay for a m/43 system regardless of the lens performance.

    • Jason

      Unfortunately you paid $800 for lens that is worth maybe $400. 12 mm is a great focal length, but the IQ does not even close to justify the price. You paid too much.

      • Chad

        I actually paid around 700 for the 12mm (ebay). Having said that that is exactly my point, comparing the cost based on performance is irrelevant as there are many DSLR lens that cost less but performs better. We pay a higher price for the m/43 lens because we like the m/43 system, but there is a certain point where paying anymore would justify going more pro and using a nikon/canon system instead and for me thats $800 bucks.

  • Anonymous

    Does anyone think this could be a kit lens with the gh3 for $ 1,999? Both are expected to be weathersealed and could be released around the same timeframe. Others have mentioned how the 12 – 35 f/2.8 would be ideal for video, and as the gh3 should be quite video-oriented, this combination seems to me as a likely fit.

    • MK

      maybe 1600-1700. but not 1999. im not playing those pricing games with panasonic or olympus. release a camera for 1500 the next year its 900 with lens. loltastic

Back To Top

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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.