• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Hurray ... the 12-100mm f/4 PRO is finally here ...


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#21 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,373 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 01 May 2017 - 08:14 AM

Pro lenses need the ability to separate the subject. This f8 FF equivalent lens does not have that. For the rest it appears to be pretty good.

 

The DoF question isn't really applicable here - there are no wide-range FF zooms either (yes, f/5.6 but that doesn't cut it).


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#22 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,172 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 01 May 2017 - 08:17 AM

Wonder how long such lenses would maintain their optical quality.
The more complex the lens design, the more you have moving elements the more your lens is prone to deterioration with use, a ten year old prime, can be easily found in mint condition, this is much harder for a zoom lens (although very possible with proper care)
A lens with such a design complexity which is intended as carry on and travel lens (translates heavy stress) should be having a tough job keeping its optical quality with years.

#23 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:43 PM

I'm going to jump into a MILC. Where I'm struggling is whether to go APS-C or MFT. The Sony a6300 with the 16-50 retractable lens cost $50US more than a Pany GX85 with the 12-32 pancake lens and is only 20g heavier. The size difference is also negligible. Overall performance, iso, focus, resolution, etc, definitely goes to the Sony. 

 

For a small easy to pocket/travel MFT kit I could add the Pany 35-100mm f/4.0-5.6 pancake lens and a 20/1.7 prime. While the zoom optics may not be great, this kit is appealing. Then stick to my Canon SLR gear for everything else.

 

The only downside to the Sony is once you add a medium zoom. The Sony 55-210 is twice as long retracted and 2.5x the weight. I keep feeling if Sony decides to come out with a retractable ~50-200mm lens for the alpha, it could put a last nail in the MFT coffin.

 

I think it is about time people realize that there are different cameras ans systems for a purpose. They each have their own, Currently, for sports photography you'd likely go for Nikon D5, Canon 1DX, etc. MFT is great fro video (Panasonic GH5), and stills plus best weathersealing (Olympus OM-D E-M1 II). There also are size and weight differences which become more and more relevant too. Do note that quite a few pro photographers lately have been switching to MILCs, and photogs for NatGeo often use MFT cameras (they used to use FT a lot as well).

 

So nail kin the MFT coffin? <ROFL> Dslr is where the coffins are being built right now. Give it another 10 years ands most if not all manufacturers will no longer make dslrs.

 

BTW, I see a lot of youngsters who want to get beyond photography with mobile phones getting into MFT. Why? Because of the possibilities (120+ lenses available), small, compact and light compared to dslrs, and stylish.

 

Kind regards, Wim



#24 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:51 PM

Back to the 12-100mm.  If I remember, I think Tamron came up with the first 10x zoom lens for a DSLR.  The 18-200mm.  I got one, and I eventually sold it because I wanted to buy some other lens, but it wasn't that bad.  Still, don't the laws on lens snobbery exist anymore?  Can you really call a 10x zoom a PRO lens?  It makes me wonder if they aren't really packing these tiny MFT lenses with super technology that just might not be doable on much larger FF lenses do to their large size.  If a 10x zoom has PRO quality that is saying something.  I think Canon has released a really large zoom x factor "L- lens", but I sort of ignored it.  I figured it was just a fad.

 

OK, this is the lens: 

EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

 

This is interesting to me only in the fact that Canon should not call this kind of lens L, should they?  See!  I'm a lens snob and I'm not really even a good photographer.  I just like taking pictures!  (I have access to Tamron's 28-300 Piezo Drive VC, but haven't really used it much.  It is compact, I will give them that!)

 

To tell the truth I don't even think the

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM L IS

 

Should be an "L-lens" because of the variable aperture.

 

On the other hand

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 USM L IS II

 

Most definitely deserves L status.  You have to have some exceptions.  A lens with this zoom range has size constraints.  I don't the the 70-300 is long enough, I mean, it's non-L variants have the same demographics!  I've heard it is better than it's numbers suggest (meaning its review numbers), but it seems like a hard sell to me!

 

Well, those lenses are L lenses regardless, considering their build and optics, compared to similar lenses available in non-premium builds.

 

As to the 12-100, it is an 8.3 times zoom, not 10 :). It is a PRO series zoom because of the way it is constructed, and because of the excellent optics. There is no real comparison with the consumer varieties of these lenses, like the Oly 14-150 and Panny14-140.

 

It is not a hard sell at all, considering it was sold out in no time everywhere in the world, after being released at the same time more or less as the E-M1 II. They are becoming available again right now.

 

If you look at reviews everywhere, it appears to be quite the lens. Oh, and with that lens on an Olympus IBIS body you get another stop of IS. Not a sports lens obviously, but 6s to 20s handheld shots is nothing to sneeze at :).

 

Kind regards, Wim



#25 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:52 PM

Wonder how long such lenses would maintain their optical quality.
The more complex the lens design, the more you have moving elements the more your lens is prone to deterioration with use, a ten year old prime, can be easily found in mint condition, this is much harder for a zoom lens (although very possible with proper care)
A lens with such a design complexity which is intended as carry on and travel lens (translates heavy stress) should be having a tough job keeping its optical quality with years.

 

As long as any other PRO lens, like the Canon and Nikon variants, if not longer considering Olympus' past.

 

Kind regards, Wim



#26 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,172 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 01 May 2017 - 04:06 PM

As long as any other PRO lens, like the Canon and Nikon variants, if not longer considering Olympus' past.

Kind regards, Wim

Well at least in Canon world, ALL canon L lenses (and some high quality lenses like 17-55f2.8 IS) have the easy possibility of being readjusted, as soon as you remove the mount of any Canon L lens you have shims that are made for readjusting lens centering, it's advised to check centering and adjust it every couple of years, if the Olympus has that then it's truly a pro lens otherwise I wouldn't pay that amount on it, being a pro also has to do with longevity and possibility of advanced service.

#27 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 01 May 2017 - 05:28 PM

Well at least in Canon world, ALL canon L lenses (and some high quality lenses like 17-55f2.8 IS) have the easy possibility of being readjusted, as soon as you remove the mount of any Canon L lens you have shims that are made for readjusting lens centering, it's advised to check centering and adjust it every couple of years, if the Olympus has that then it's truly a pro lens otherwise I wouldn't pay that amount on it, being a pro also has to do with longevity and possibility of advanced service.

 

Of course Oly PRO (and non-PRO) lenses can be adjusted. Actually, you can adjust AF as well, in-camera, certainly in teh E-M1, and AFAIK, in most other bodies as well.

 

Olympus does offer a PRO service as well, since the end of last year.

 

The question is whether you'd want to pay twice as much or even more, for a similar lens in FF. And please no equivalence arguments. Although equivalence wise a lens may have the DoF of a FF lens at twice the aperture number, it still is a lens at that aperture.

 

The only reason to go FF is for more noisefree images in difficult circumstances, or for very high resolution. However, MFT suffers much lens from banding and blotching than most DSLRs do, so from that POV up to 1600 iso and 3200 iso the cameras are easily as usable as with dslrs. In addition, IS with any of these cameras i smore advanced than any other system, so you can easily handhold shots at shutter speeds which are unheard of with non-MFT cameras. As mentioned higher up, no substitue for sports shooting (although the E-M1 comes very close), but certainly great for all kinds of images which do not have a lot of movement.

 

Kind regards, Wim



#28 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,172 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 01 May 2017 - 05:55 PM

Of course Oly PRO (and non-PRO) lenses can be adjusted. Actually, you can adjust AF as well, in-camera, certainly in teh E-M1, and AFAIK, in most other bodies as well.

Olympus does offer a PRO service as well, since the end of last year.

The question is whether you'd want to pay twice as much or even more, for a similar lens in FF. And please no equivalence arguments. Although equivalence wise a lens may have the DoF of a FF lens at twice the aperture number, it still is a lens at that aperture.

The only reason to go FF is for more noisefree images in difficult circumstances, or for very high resolution. However, MFT suffers much lens from banding and blotching than most DSLRs do, so from that POV up to 1600 iso and 3200 iso the cameras are easily as usable as with dslrs. In addition, IS with any of these cameras i smore advanced than any other system, so you can easily handhold shots at shutter speeds which are unheard of with non-MFT cameras. As mentioned higher up, no substitue for sports shooting (although the E-M1 comes very close), but certainly great for all kinds of images which do not have a lot of movement.

Kind regards, Wim


Thanks Wim, usually I am not the guy that argues, when I ask a question it's for learning not arguing.
If Olympus service is capable of correcting acquired decentering and the lenses are designed with long term use in mind then professionals would be more interested in MFT.
Despite not offering the best low light capabilities, nor the highest dynamic range, nor low prices. Many professionals aren't moving away, what's the main reason? It's the good service, quality of the products, when before buying a lens you know that you will be able to use it with high quality images for years, You will be encouraged to gt it. And most important you will be afraid investing in other systems.

#29 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,715 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 01 May 2017 - 06:13 PM

Of course Oly PRO (and non-PRO) lenses can be adjusted. Actually, you can adjust AF as well, in-camera, certainly in teh E-M1, and AFAIK, in most other bodies as well.
 
Olympus does offer a PRO service as well, since the end of last year.
 
The question is whether you'd want to pay twice as much or even more, for a similar lens in FF. And please no equivalence arguments. Although equivalence wise a lens may have the DoF of a FF lens at twice the aperture number, it still is a lens at that aperture.

Aperture is a size, usually measures in mm. an 100mm f4 lens has an apparent aperture (opening seen from the front) of 25mm diameter. A 200mm f4 lens an opening of 50mm diameter. Indeed, the lens (it) still only has that 25mm diameter aperture.
 

The only reason to go FF is for more noisefree images in difficult circumstances, or for very high resolution.

That, of course, is simply not true. The only real reason to go for FF is the ability to use more shallow DOF.

However, MFT suffers much lens from banding and blotching than most DSLRs do,

That seems like, well, nonsense. Pulled out of thin air.

so from that POV up to 1600 iso and 3200 iso the cameras are easily as usable as with dslrs. In addition, IS with any of these cameras i smore advanced than any other system, so you can easily handhold shots at shutter speeds which are unheard of with non-MFT cameras. As mentioned higher up, no substitue for sports shooting (although the E-M1 comes very close), but certainly great for all kinds of images which do not have a lot of movement.
 
Kind regards, Wim



#30 Arthur Macmillan

Arthur Macmillan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 01 May 2017 - 09:52 PM

I like that camera size link, Klaus!  It's fun looking at your fantasy set-ups.  It was a shocker to see the EF 85/1.2L is over a kilo!  And apparently the Sigma Art 85 is much heavier still!

 

Right!  Well I thought I would add another devil to the why sales are down phenomenon.  Someone mentioned that phone cameras are getting good enough for a lot of people.  But what I have been seeing here is there seems to be a lot of people buying compact fixed lens cameras with anything from single focus range to 10x or more zoom ratio.  These cameras are very inexpensive, and some have pretty decent IQ.  My own experience with them is that they are slow, have short battery life, break easily, and are unpredictable.  But I developed my dislike of them years ago.  They may be better now.  But they are big with the hiking crowd.  I hope I never have to use one again!

 

Just as an aside I tried to use my iPhone to take a photo of a golf ball.  I was free to pick a shady or sunny area.  It made no difference.  The dimples were impossible to capture.  It was an eye opener.  With an actual camera, it would have been a simple shot even with the cheapest lens!



#31 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,373 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 03 May 2017 - 02:27 PM

RAW distortions at 12mm ... 6.8% 

 

:D


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#32 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 03 May 2017 - 04:28 PM

I like that camera size link, Klaus!  It's fun looking at your fantasy set-ups.  It was a shocker to see the EF 85/1.2L is over a kilo!  And apparently the Sigma Art 85 is much heavier still!

 

Right!  Well I thought I would add another devil to the why sales are down phenomenon.  Someone mentioned that phone cameras are getting good enough for a lot of people.  But what I have been seeing here is there seems to be a lot of people buying compact fixed lens cameras with anything from single focus range to 10x or more zoom ratio.  These cameras are very inexpensive, and some have pretty decent IQ.  My own experience with them is that they are slow, have short battery life, break easily, and are unpredictable.  But I developed my dislike of them years ago.  They may be better now.  But they are big with the hiking crowd.  I hope I never have to use one again!

 

Just as an aside I tried to use my iPhone to take a photo of a golf ball.  I was free to pick a shady or sunny area.  It made no difference.  The dimples were impossible to capture.  It was an eye opener.  With an actual camera, it would have been a simple shot even with the cheapest lens!

 

You might want to read the post I just posted here: Cell phone IQ and the future of camera systems


--Florent

Flickr Page


#33 borisbg

borisbg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 444 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 03 May 2017 - 11:01 PM

RAW distortions at 12mm ... 6.8% 

 

:D

In line with 12-40 f2.8?



#34 Arthur Macmillan

Arthur Macmillan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 05 May 2017 - 11:56 AM

Hi Thxbb12!

 

I look forward to reading it!  I hope they aren't going to go too off the deep end with claims like having sharper lenses by far than those of dslr's.  And I think I have a pretty good idea of the what the future of camera systems is.

 

And I have nothing against highly capable small mirrorless cameras...possibly embedded into our own eyeballs! 

 

I know that future cameras will be great.  I just want to give already existing dslr's their props for being as amazing as they already are.  And despite what seems to be constant improvement I will still see photos taken with my Canon Rebel XTi and think, "I'd have a hard time getting a better picture even today!"  That is real value!  If you have a digital camera that is still pretty good from ten years ago.  Of course, today's cameras are better, but I looked at some interesting Flickr statistics.  Interesting because of the spin Flickr puts on what is supposed to be statistical information.  You can get there by clicking on a camera listed as being used to take a photo.  Then it rates cameras first which are the most popular cameras, then if you choose a camera maker, it lists the cameras in order of highest to lowest within a certain brand.

 

I sort of hate when numbers are bastardized in this fashion.  It one point I would have called Flickr a photography and photographer oriented community...Now, get ready for this.  The number one best camera manufacturer is not Canon, Nikon, Ricoh, Olympus, Sony, Panasonic, Fujifilm, ...the list goes on.

 

The number one camera manufacturer is Apple, maker of the iPhone.  Arrrrrgh!  That's just wrong!

 

Anyway, I like to read about new technology.  Just so long as we all know Apple does not make the best cameras in the world!

 

It's was also interesting to know that in terms of the number of items uploaded.  I believe Canon 5D Mark-ii and Canon Rebel XTi /400D were no.1 and no.2 respectively. Then Rebel T3i/600D, Rebel XT/350D , and in 5th was Rebel T2i.

 

So what you ask?  Well just look how old those cameras are!  They list about 200 models from Canon including all of the point and shoots, and all of the mirroless Canons.  The first Non-DSLR canon ranked by numbers of uploads was Canon Powershot SD1000 at position #20.  The first Canon MILC was EOS M at somewhere around 90 or 100.  I don't feel like counting, and while Flickr will sort the cameras by different criteria it still uses different formulas to determine what the most popular cameras are.

 

For my purposes I just wanted to point out that the Canon cameras that are uploading the most photos were

1- Canon 5D Mark-ii

2-Canon Rebel XTi

3-Canon Rebel T31

4-Canon Rebel XT

5-Canon Rebel T2i

 

And were the XTi not stolen I would own 3 out of the 5!  I can easily back it up with numbers by virtually no pictures are being uploaded by any non dslr 10 years old.

 

Anyway, those stats are just for fun!  I'm not being a Luddite.  I'm just really grateful for the service my dslr's have given me.  My sister still uses her Canon D60!  (Not 60D!  D60 comes before 20D!  it has a 6MP sensor).  And actually, I was pretty surprised how much use they get on Flickr.

 

Flickr also sorts them by number of Flickr members who uploaded any photos with a certain model camera.  A completely different order:

 

1-5D Mark iii

2-6D

3-5D Mark ii

4-Rebel T3i (600D)

5-70D

(A considerably more modern list.  But still I don't now how them come up with "Most popular", yet another ranking...you get the idea)

 

My final point I guess is how we rate a camera is highly subjective.  For me longevity is way up there!  I still have the first interchangeable lens I ever had.  At it is Canon EOS, and it still works quite well!



#35 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,373 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 05 May 2017 - 12:21 PM

Ah, I miss the EOS 3. Awesome camera.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#36 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,172 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 05 May 2017 - 12:37 PM

Ah, I miss the EOS 3. Awesome camera.

Without drifting away the subject, yes you can make some good work with virtually anything, just with modern gear, you make it easier.

Of course you know I am reusing EOS 30 (and yes from time to time I do use EOS 30D or even 300D)






3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de