I had one for a week for review (my review is on my site). Great lens. Really sharp at all focal lengths and all focus distances. Softens very slightly at MFD, but still very good.
I like your shots. Your processing on them is beautiful...clean and rich.
I read your review before buying the 12-35; being new to m43, I was torn between the primes and the zoom. At the end of the day, the zoom fit my needs better although I did grab the Oly 45
Beautiful shots. A couple of questions: What camera are you using? How does the lens handle on a small body? It seems to be quite a large lens compared to the bodies of MFT cameras.
Keith; OM-D body and I do not find the lens large or heavy. It balances quite nicely on the OM-D however I always use the horizontal part of the grip inplace. I'm also coming from Nikon and using the 24-70/70-200 on those so the OM-D with pretty well any native lens is pretty small and light!
In all honesty, I was able to get great results from both of them. The 12-35 is a lot lighter and a lot cheaper for pretty comparable quality (IMHO). Does that help
The Nikon 24-70 has a stellar reputation and I believe that the Pany will have the same rep for m43 once people get past the price and see what it can really do. It is one of those "special" lenses, at least from my observations so far.
Thanks String, I have a Nikon D7000, a Sony Nex 5N, and a Panasonic GF-3 (though I don't use it that often though mostly due to its somewhat outdated sensor). I was just asking for opinions for people who have both used a Nikon 24-70 and a Panasonic 12-35. While I have always like the pictures I've seen from other people with the Nikon 24-70 or the Nikon 17-55 f2.8 for DX, I have hard time seeing myself going out to take casual pictures with lenses that large and heavy. I've thought of adding in more to my m4/3 system with the advent of cameras such as Olympus OM-D and lenses such as Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 and Olympus 75 f1.8. I was just curious on well the Panny 12-35 f2.8 stacked up against a full frame 24-70mm f2.8 lens.
jonrock wrote:
Thanks String, I have a Nikon D7000, a Sony Nex 5N, and a Panasonic GF-3 (though I don't use it that often though mostly due to its somewhat outdated sensor). I was just asking for opinions for people who have both used a Nikon 24-70 and a Panasonic 12-35. While I have always like the pictures I've seen from other people with the Nikon 24-70 or the Nikon 17-55 f2.8 for DX, I have hard time seeing myself going out to take casual pictures with lenses that large and heavy. I've thought of adding in more to my m4/3 system with the advent of cameras such as Olympus OM-D and lenses such as Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 and Olympus 75 f1.8. I was just curious on well the Panny 12-35 f2.8 stacked up against a full frame 24-70mm f2.8 lens. ...Show more →
jonrock,
I've been shooting with the Nikon D700 and the 24-70mm f2.8 for the past several years. Recently decided to give m43 a go. I have the OMD E-M5 and several of the best lenses available, including the 45mm Oly, the 25mm PanLeica, the Lumix 12-35mm and since last Friday, the 75mm Oly. I did a quick comparison today using my reliable mannequin as a subject. In short, the 12-35 compares very well to both the 45 and 75 (didn't test it with the 25mm). There is very little to pick between the three lenses when shot at f2.8.
As far as comparison with the Nikon and 24-70, the OMD focuses so much better it's difficult to compare for portraits. (I shoot weddings and portraits so the landscape stuff is beyond my scope.) Funny thing is, I switched to Nikon 3 years ago (from Canon) because of the Nikon's focus accuracy. The current stumbling block for me is the higher digital noise of the OMD, at all ISOs, when compared to the D700. That gives the files a "different" look. Seems kind of "plastic" looking to me. Right now, I still prefer the look of the D700 files, but the OMD has some compelling positives. Not to mention that the OMD/12-35mm combo weighs less than the Nikon 24-70 alone! And, it has images stabilization. I can hand hold the 12-35 down to about 1/5 sec. The Oly IBIS is really remarkable.
Thanks rmarko, I really appreciate your views and opinion. I think IBIS in the OM-D is quite a killer feature as it allows image stabilization in all prime lenses since most prime lenses with the exception long telephoto lenses and some of the new primes just introduced by Canon lack it. I just bought the image stabilized 50mm f1.8 for the Sony Nex and the image stabilization in there is quite helpful along with the fast aperture.
I do have a question about image stabilization of the 12-35mm with the OM-D. Is the 5 axis IBIS of the OM-D that much better than the O.I.S of the Panasonic lens. Originally, I read that in lens image stabilization was supposed to be superior than IBIS. However, I've read several reviews of the 12-35mm with the OM-D where the users just rely on the OM-D IBIS than turning on O.I.S in the Panasonic lens. .
I've been shooting with the Nikon D700 and the 24-70mm f2.8 for the past several years. Recently decided to give m43 a go. I have the OMD E-M5 and several of the best lenses available, including the 45mm Oly, the 25mm PanLeica, the Lumix 12-35mm and since last Friday, the 75mm Oly. I did a quick comparison today using my reliable mannequin as a subject. In short, the 12-35 compares very well to both the 45 and 75 (didn't test it with the 25mm). There is very little to pick between the three lenses when shot at f2.8.
As far as comparison with the Nikon and 24-70, the OMD focuses so much better it's difficult to compare for portraits. (I shoot weddings and portraits so the landscape stuff is beyond my scope.) Funny thing is, I switched to Nikon 3 years ago (from Canon) because of the Nikon's focus accuracy. The current stumbling block for me is the higher digital noise of the OMD, at all ISOs, when compared to the D700. That gives the files a "different" look. Seems kind of "plastic" looking to me. Right now, I still prefer the look of the D700 files, but the OMD has some compelling positives. Not to mention that the OMD/12-35mm combo weighs less than the Nikon 24-70 alone! And, it has images stabilization. I can hand hold the 12-35 down to about 1/5 sec. The Oly IBIS is really remarkable.
JeffG wrote:
so glad i'm not the only one who notices the iso 200 noise from the camera.
Jeff, from what I have seen, the OM-D has a tendency to underexpose by about a half stop (sometimes more). Noise can be really pronounced when the image is underexposed, especially in a blue sky.
