[mike]

Lately I provided a few comments vs competing lenses.

 

The Leica 12-60mm is MUCH smaller than the Olympus 12-100mm ... but then ... it's 40mm shorter.

 

Yes, a comment I omitted from my Pen-F post is that I seem to like the Panny lens offerings better than Oly's. A lot of it is physical size and weight, followed by closely by focal lengths that suite me better (or maybe vice versa; lol).

 

I really like this focal length, the slow version of this was very tempting, and the speed is a nice compromise to keep it a manageable lens. Looking forward to the review.

[Guest]

so 30mm longer (30%) and 77mm vs 67mm but a lot heavier. Oddly the 12-60 is quite a bit lighter than the 12-40 but otherwise just about identical size. Seems like it is a clear winner over the 12-40 (if optics meet expectation - i do realize it is a bit slower on long end). Hum. choices choices. Maybe too many choices - i do wonder how these companies stay in business - it just doesn't seem like enough bodies are out there to support these lenses (in sales).

Well ... 

 

http://camerasize.com/compact/#594.613,5...4.412,ha,t

[thxbb12]

It's also interesting to add the Pany 12-35 f2.8 in the comparison which is the smallest of the bunch:

 
http://j.mp/2r2gSc4

[toni-a]

couldn't controle myself from posting this

this is how MFT users see SLR users

 

[thxbb12]

couldn't controle myself from posting this

this is how MFT users see SLR users

 

 

Couldn't be more accurate indeed!! ahahah    :lol:    

[mike]

couldn't controle myself from posting this

this is how MFT users see SLR users

 

 

Yes! I'm looking forward to not figuring out what to do with my DSLR every time I stop for a beer on vacation

[Klaus]

Even worse. There's the phenomenon that DSLRs are getting bigger & heavier the higher you climb up a mountain!

 

Back in the days I once carried an EOS 3, a Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 and 100-300mm f/4 across a 5000m pass in the Himalayas - 3Kg or so. I think I had balls of steel back then. But no longer ...   :lol:

 

I'm still wondering how many mummies with (D)SLRs are hidden in the ice there because they didn't make it!

[JJ_SO]

At least the batteries stay fresh.

[Guest]

In advance of your review - this article compares the relatively expensive PanaLeica 12-60 to the cheapo kit Lumix 12-60. As far as I can tell from this review, there's virtually no difference in AF and IQ between them (ignoring other factors that influence price). That sounds a bit surprising and disappointing so your review/opinion and comparison between these 2, and the just tested Oly 12-100 will be very interesting indeed.

 

http://mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-fo...omparison/

 

 

 

 

I just unpacked it. Nice.

[wim]

In advance of your review - this article compares the relatively expensive PanaLeica 12-60 to the cheapo kit Lumix 12-60. As far as I can tell from this review, there's virtually no difference in AF and IQ between them (ignoring other factors that influence price). That sounds a bit surprising and disappointing so your review/opinion and comparison between these 2, and the just tested Oly 12-100 will be very interesting indeed.

 

http://mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-fo...omparison/

 

Actually, the price difference is less than with lenses which are similar from other manufacturers (they're often a factor 2.5 to 3 going from consumer grade to pro lenses). Essentially the 12-60 PL is a professional grade lens, 2/3 to a full stop faster, has switches for IS and MF, unlike the consumer version, and is weatherproofed.

 

Also, if you study the image samples carefully, you may find that contrast with the PL is better than with the Lumix.

 

All in all, the price difference is not unreasonable IMO.

 

Kind regards, Wim