adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.48 #11 · p.48 #11 · Official Panasonic S1 series thread - rumors, tech specs and photos | |
flash wrote:
The SIgma 12-24 Art is great. But not as good as the 16-35SL, at any focal length (excet 12-15mm  ). It's huge, a PITA for filters and although it's sharp it doesn't have the *bite* of the SL zoom. I find my copy close to the Canon 11-24, which a good friend owns so I can compare. I think I have a good one. Distortion is low. AF is actually pretty OK with the MC21. It controls flare waaaaay better than the Sony 12-24. If I hadn't seen what the Leica can do I'd be thrilled with the Sigma.
The 16-35SL is the best wide zoom I've owned (and I've been through most of them, at some point). I also had some real buyers regret when I got it as I think it's a waste to have so much overlap with the 24-90. However after taking it on a recent trip (where I dropped it....) I really changed my mind about it.. Optically and build it's the best wide zoom there is. It's about as good as the Hasselblad XCD45mm at 35mm but a bit behind the spectacular 30 and 21mm HB primes. For a wide zoom I think that's high praise. I especially appreciated the weather sealing and the fact it doesn't extend during zooming in Europe. And it shares filters with the other zooms.
So, the Sigma is a good lens but I'm going to be happy when my 16-35 is back.
A few from the SL 16-35. I have posted these before. All handheld. The last one was massively underexposed to try and save the highlights and then recovered. About 4 stops.
Gordon...Show more →
Just to confirm you don't have the new 12-24 DN DG lens that's native L-mount (and a different optical formula)?
That's the lens I was curious about, and I'm curious if it's going to be a MUCH better performer than the DSLR version.
I like the 16-35SL, it does have "bite" maybe not SEM level bite but it's there.. I think my issue with is is that again it's not a full frame lens, it's stretched to meet full frame, about as bad as the 24-90 is, but not anywhere near as bad as the Q/Q2. I don't really mind that for a 16-35SL however because I would rarely shoot people with it and if I did it wouldn't be anywhere near the edges of the frame. So all in all I'm happy enough with the 16-35SL and I also like the size/fact that it doesn't extend while zooming. I haven't had a chance to go shoot epic landscapes with it or anything, but I have a trip in the works where I'm trying to decide between the 16-35SL and the 24S (obviously with S007 camera vs S1 camera)
The Hasselblad 45 is the worst lens in the system  the 30XCD is awesome though and something I find hard to sell even though I'm considering getting rid of the X1D kit altogether.
|
