Ah... finally something after two weeks without a review. I've read it even though I'm not a µ4/3 user. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Thanks for calling it like it is. Hard to get excited with the optical results.
The Olympus equivalent looked even worse. I kinda understand Klaus who got himself a Leica 14-150 instead. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> But this Panasonic doesn't look like a scaled down version of the Leica, unfortunately.
[quote name='Rover' timestamp='1319182352' post='12404']
The Olympus equivalent looked even worse.
[/quote]
Unfortunately you are right <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mellow.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':mellow:' />
However, the Panasonic is almost twice as expensive as the Olympus.
I'm rather disappointed by the performance of this lens. Especially, the amount of distortion and vignetting, I think it sets a record in itself!
I find it surprising that the lens is not really smaller or lighter than the Pentax DA 18-250 (or equivalent Tamron) which is an APS-C lens and a 13x zoom instead of 10x. Same thing about IQ, it seems the Pentax/Tamron is better in most regards too.
[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1319206633' post='12405']
Unfortunately you are right <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mellow.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':mellow:' />
However, the Panasonic is almost twice as expensive as the Olympus.
[/quote]
Largely due to included OIS in the former I think.
By the way, should we expect the 45/1.8 test soon?
[quote name='Rover' timestamp='1319230579' post='12408']
Largely due to included OIS in the former I think.
By the way, should we expect the 45/1.8 test soon?
[/quote]
Well, I can't await it to get one sample - but it's pretty hard to get one :-(
Is the Pana 100-300 review in sight?