I recently acquired a lightly used Oly OM-D (Thanks, JR). Like the camera very much though I'm still learning my way around it. Since I shoot 1D(s) professionally my fingers already think they know what they are doing. Of course, they're wrong
I have a Pany 20mm f/1.7 on it and it makes for a small, nice IQ camera. I'm looking for something in the way of a fast zoom for more flexibility and have been considering the Pany 12-35 f/2.8 as it would be a fast "normal" zoom. Photozone likes the lens well enough but is critical of its edge sharpness and higher than normal CA. On a Pany cam this is largely corrected in camera, but of course the Oly doesn't do this. Their conclusion was that it is a nice lens, but doubted that it was really worth its lofty price.
So, are any of you using this in real world work? I recognize that Photozone largely does a technical analysis so it's possible that their concerns aren't important in the field. I did examine their full size images and even when shot with a Pany cam the CA is visible in some situations and the shot of the cathedral is distorted at least to my eye.
Would really appreciate feedback from users as on paper the lens is exactly what I need.
Been using mine on my GH-2 for a while now and as an owner of a D800 + a lot of excellent FX glass (primes and zooms) I must say that I'm very very happy with it.
I bought mine for use as a light weight/compact system for when the FX gear is either overkill or just too big/heavy. The sharpness is great at all focal lengths on my copy and it's pretty even across the frame. CA is a non-factor as it gets corrected by the RAW converters quite well. The OIS works pretty well and the lens works very well in video mode too (though I don't use it much for video).
Overall extremely happy with it, especially when I got it for $200 off when bundled with a new deeply discounted GH-2 a while back . . .
Certainly nothing to sneeze at in these examples. Really like the fist pix. LIke you I'm looking for lightweight, portable, carry always. Strapping a 1D on is a bit like going to war.
Robert, I certainly like mine This photo was taken last autumn shortly after I received the lens. When rendered by the latest Photo Ninja beta, the CA painlessly goes away and the detail just pops. I really think that this lens on an E-M5 is better in every way than my former Canon 24-70 f/2.8L on a 1Ds Mark II. This is a full-width crop, not a stitch. Prints nicely at 10x18. I'm sure it will look the same at 12x22 when I get new paper, and I'll have it in a frame for my holiday shows later this year.
Cal,
D*mn. I used to do a lot of shooting with a 24-70 on a 1DsII (now on a 1DsIII) so I know what the combo can do. Frankly it was one of the all time best. So this is impressive. I getting closer to pulling the trigger.
Been using one in the office for product photography and it does a stellar job. It was used for all the shots in this gallery, for instance (on the GH3):
If it helps, I used to shoot with 5D Classic/7D with the 24-70mm/2.8 L for work. Now I shoot with OMD with the 12-35mm/2.8, and never looked back. Just as happy with it. Buy and enjoy!
I went through exactly the same thought process. I bit the bullet and bought an OM-D and a 12-35 the other day...I haven't taken a lot of shots with it yet, but what I have taken so far clearly shows that "pop" (commonly referred to as microcontrast) that PhotoZone doesn't measure. CA is an issue, but one that can be fixed in postprocessing. This is a lens that is better in real life than on paper (as opposed to the Panasonic 20 f/1.7, which I found better on paper than in real life).
I'm waiting for some decent weather so I can take some real shots, but meanwhile, here's the first pic I took (of some gear I'm selling to recoup the cost), straight out of camera. Shot RAW, default settings in UFRaw, saved as JPEG in Gimp.
Never shot the 5D but I like many people (including Cal above) really like the 24-70 f/2.8. Both of you are reporting equal or better results with the 12-35 on full frame cameras. That's real positive.
Adam,
I think your shots along with Cal's are clinchers. It would be really hard to criticize your shots on any level. Sure they're in a controlled environment, but that merely shows off what the lens (and camera) can do. Photozone makes no bones about the limits of what it does which is why they're valuable, but I kept suspecting that there was more to this lens than the numbers. CA can generally be fixed without a lot of work. PZ claims the fix will be "lossy" but I wonder if that will really matter much. Do those of you who are shooting this find softness in the corners wide up at either extreme? PZ's measurements suggest this, but again, what does it feel like in real light?
Robert, the corners in my 12-35 are noticeably better than the corners were in my 24-70 on full frame. I purchased the 24-70 when I was using a 20D, and later used it on a 1DII. It was a shock to see how bad the corners were when I got the 1DsII. Of course it is possible that my 24-70 was poorer than some, but at the time it seemed acceptable to me, and the new owner is happy with it. Thus my comment above that the 12-35 appears to be "better in every way." (Excepting that the depth of field is different, of course, before someone jumps on me for that!) But yes, there is some minor, generally unobjectionable, loss of resolution in the corners with the 12-35. For what it may be worth, of course, the 12mm Oly, 25mm Pany, and either 45mm prime are all better than the 12-35. But for travel and walk-about the 12-35 is convenient and clearly (I believe) better than any other m43 "normal" range zoom.
In my experience, there is VERY minor softness as you move away from center--but it wasn't worse than my 24-70. Cal said his 12-35mm was better than his 24-70; mine wasn't better, but it was the same as my 24-70mm. Which is still saying something..! I loved it, and now I love my "mini" 24-70mm that I could put in my jacket pocket easily.
The 12-35 is an excellent lens and matched with the 35-100 f/2.8 makes for a wonderful lightweight system. I use both a lot with my Panny GH3 which probably has the same sensor as the OM-D. My simple summary is that my GH3 with 12-35 is the equal of my older Nikon D700 with 24-120, but a bit behind the IQ of the newer FF Nikons. However, I am happy to forgo a small bit of IQ for a much reduced bulk to carry. My only complaint about the 12-35 is that I find it a bit short after using the longer Nikon 24-120. It would be great if it was 12-60 Here a few recent pictures with the 12-35 and more can be found here http://www.pbase.com/bassrock/gh3 and here http://www.pbase.com/bassrock/my_life
OntheRez wrote:
Adam,
I think your shots along with Cal's are clinchers. It would be really hard to criticize your shots on any level. Sure they're in a controlled environment, but that merely shows off what the lens (and camera) can do.
For me, the shock was not so much what the lens can do, but what the lens can do in the hands of a photographer with limited product photography skills on a completely unfamiliar camera! I'm excited to see what this combo can do for me once I really learn how to use it...maybe I'll get shots as good as some of the others in this thread.
For my next trick, I'll find a daily messenger bag that has a padded space for the camera...I found a nice backpack that can hold my entire kit including a tripod, but I'm not carrying that around all of the time.
BassRock wrote:
The 12-35 is an excellent lens and matched with the 35-100 f/2.8 makes for a wonderful lightweight system. I use both a lot with my Panny GH3 which probably has the same sensor as the OM-D. My simple summary is that my GH3 with 12-35 is the equal of my older Nikon D700 with 24-120, but a bit behind the IQ of the newer FF Nikons. However, I am happy to forgo a small bit of IQ for a much reduced bulk to carry. My only complaint about the 12-35 is that I find it a bit short after using the longer Nikon 24-120. It would be great if it was 12-60 Here a few recent pictures with the 12-35 and more can be found here http://www.pbase.com/bassrock/gh3 and here http://www.pbase.com/bassrock/my_life
Okay, it's all you guy's fault but I coughed up every reserve I had and ordered from B&H yesterday. I found sellers in Japan and HK that priced it at about $975USD + expensive shipping and decided that having a USA warranty and B&H's reputation was persuasive. It should arrive about Thursday. I'll post some of my first experiences with it.
Thanks a lot guys for putting me back in the lens poorhouse
Enjoy it when you get it! Like yourself, I had considered ordering from overseas to save money as well, but opted to go through B&H with their stellar reputation. Post pics when you can!
Hi, FlyPenPly (great name !). Thank you for the compliment. I agree the details are a bit lost. This is the first time I used the Lee Big Stopper on the GH3 and 12-35. I had focussed on the small building (look out post) but it was a very cold day and I didn't spend enough time and attention getting set up, and the tripod properly stable, so there probably was some movement. Also, the high compression for the low rez jpg doesn't help maintain the details. I keep meaning to got back out with the Big Stopper and experiment some more. Here is another from the same day, same spot but looking to the right.
This photo was taken last autumn shortly after I received the lens. When rendered by the latest Photo Ninja beta, the CA painlessly goes away and the detail just pops. I really think that this lens on an E-M5 is better in every way than my former Canon 24-70 f/2.8L on a 1Ds Mark II. This is a full-width crop, not a stitch. Prints nicely at 10x18. I'm sure it will look the same at 12x22 when I get new paper, and I'll have it in a frame for my holiday shows later this year.
