Author Topic: Panasonic 12-35mm f/2 and 35-100mm f/2 expected next year (Read 4873 times)

voyager · « **on:** August 26, 2011, 09:13:30 AM »

Now let's just hope they don't cost as much as their Four Thirds counterparts.

adash · « **Reply #1 on:** August 26, 2011, 09:16:55 AM »

The 7-14 F/4 is much cheaper than Oly 4/3 7-14 F/4, but also it lacks Oly's weather resistance, AFIK.
So, my assumption is that these will be cheaper, but may lack weather resistance too.

Psynema · « **Reply #2 on:** August 26, 2011, 10:24:18 AM »

Quote from: voyager on August 26, 2011, 09:13:30 AM

Now let's just hope they don't cost as much as their Four Thirds counterparts.

It's ok if they are, they can AF and have OIS unlike Olys

lisandra · « **Reply #3 on:** August 26, 2011, 11:06:02 AM »

They'll be officially announced first or second week of january, prices will be lower than we all expect. No idea what that means though...
That's all I got, its better than nothing and more info than most!

Cotillion · « **Reply #4 on:** August 26, 2011, 01:47:22 PM »

Thank you, that's some very useful information!

count_zero · « **Reply #5 on:** August 26, 2011, 10:33:57 PM »

Looks like we won't get the 12-60mm f2.5 from Panny. If you can afford this pair, then you have the ultimate kit.

voyager · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2011, 03:15:50 AM »

cosinaphile · « **Reply #7 on:** August 27, 2011, 05:29:42 AM »

they are not huge look agt it next to the tiny 14-45, micro 4\3 is showing its size advantage over slrs glass and apsc sensors in spades

adash · « **Reply #8 on:** August 27, 2011, 08:47:45 AM »

These are ~1/4 of the size of Oly's 4/3 counterparts!

jap · « **Reply #9 on:** August 27, 2011, 10:36:55 AM »

The size should be lower because of the lessened requirements for telecentricity. However, I am surprised that Oly ZD is the one running with these zooms, although they may come out with their own versions. Not only are these zooms based on their own 4:3 lenses, I just would expect them to do a better design.

Cotillion · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2011, 10:37:51 AM »

Are we sure about the f/2 part? Shouldn't this be f/2.8?

voyager · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2011, 01:41:21 PM »

Why would it be f/2.8?

lisandra · « **Reply #12 on:** August 27, 2011, 03:14:32 PM »

Theyll be faster than 2.8. The debate in panasonic is between f2 and f2.5. Youd think the difference is negligible, but apparently f2 zooms are way more costly to make, difficult to control size and aberrations. Still, my fingers are crossed for f2 (I wont die if its 2.5).
Minimum focusing distance on the 35-100 is a confirmed 2.8 feet and on the 12-35 its 0.8 feet on the wide end. Thing like internal zooming is unknown.

lisandra · « **Reply #13 on:** August 27, 2011, 03:16:54 PM »

theres a 97% probability Ill get an email later on with the length of both lenses so fingers crossed

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #14 on:** August 27, 2011, 06:05:44 PM »

F/2.5 is good, it's only 1/3 stop or so...and if they can make a better IQ lens at a slightly slower speed. Good... It will help keep the cost/retail down as mentioned. And perhaps they will sell more than expected units. So many are "Biting at the bits" for HG (X) m4/3 Zooms in the "Working Photographers" needed range...

adash · « **Reply #15 on:** August 27, 2011, 11:59:18 PM »

F/2.8 will be just fine too, as long as they keep the price down. Much cheaper than the previously announced $2100 mark, I mean.

voyager · « **Reply #16 on:** August 28, 2011, 12:53:53 PM »

If they're over $1000 then we might have an issue, but they probably will be.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #17 on:** August 28, 2011, 02:10:25 PM »

i think panny will wisely keep these at or about 1000 dollars or maybe lower

they will be demanding to make as high quality but with the image circle of micro 4\3 the makers have a distinct advantage over the makers of lenses of
apsc image circle lenses

as a guide the 251.4 pannyleica 43 came in at about a thousand and the micro version 599 [usa funds] a 40 percent savings

so 40 % of 2500 dollars is a thousand bucks , so 1500 dollars ....still alot , maybe they could shave a bit more and make it 1200

i dont think lenses need to be at that price point because of manufactering
its because of marketing ... they decide to sell a small number of units at
a high price to recoup r and d fast and make a profit of the production numbers , but if they decided that they wanted better penitration into the marketplace they know theres a limit to the price they can ask

its better to sell 1 million units at 900 dollars a pop than to sell 100 thousand
at 1800 dollars eachthe more are produced the cheaper it is to make

voyager · « **Reply #18 on:** August 28, 2011, 02:12:19 PM »

Can you imagine if they sold these lenses for $999? Everyone would buy them.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #19 on:** August 28, 2011, 03:04:55 PM »

They should sell the 14-42 X for $399.95. It should on par with the IQ of the 4/3 14-45 f/2.8, just slower..

And Sell the 45-175 X for $699.95..It is a slow lens after all...

tamoio · « **Reply #20 on:** August 29, 2011, 11:11:54 AM »

Lots of discussion over at DVXuser about these. It seems unlikely by their size (which I admit is difficult to judge) that they are F2. At first I thought they were the Olympus 4/3 lenses re-housed, but they must be a new design?

. . .I think I'll sell my 14-140 sooner than later

Centauri27 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 29, 2011, 01:24:46 PM »

My seat-of-the-pants estimate based on looking at the pictures is that they will NOT be f/2 zooms. I would expect f/2 zooms to be monstrous, whereas these are merely "big".

cosinaphile · « **Reply #22 on:** August 29, 2011, 09:19:18 PM »

Quote from: Centauri27 on August 29, 2011, 01:24:46 PM

My seat-of-the-pants estimate based on looking at the pictures is that they will NOT be f/2 zooms. I would expect f/2 zooms to be monstrous, whereas these are merely "big".

i got the same vibe ....they have to be humongus, but recently i saw a 4\3 lumix panny leica with an adaptr on a gf1 , well the iq is beautiful but its kind of big,,,, i looked it up at heres a comparison between it and the micro 4\3 version of the same lens

4\3 25mm 1.4 micro 4\3 25mm 1.4

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

length = 75mm length = 55mm 2.15"
diameter diameter = 63mm 2.48"
weight = 510 g weight = 200 g 0.44 lbs
filter = 62mm filter = 46mm -------
orig cost 1100 US DOLLARS launch price 599 US DOLLARS

NOW I WILL SPECULATE on what a micro 4\3 version of the olympus high grade 35-100mm f2 lens might be

firstly the quality will not be the same it will be good im sure but not the weather sealed beauties of the high grade oly line

now some speculation..
..band h photo lists the 35-100mm f2 oympus lens thus...

length 122.9mm could this become 80mm?? in m4\3 mount
diameter 86.1mm could this become 55mm??
weight 900 g 1.98 lbs could become 350 g?
filter 77mm could become 58mm?
cost currently 2300 US DOLLARS could be and should be 1150 US DOLLARS !!!!!

THATS JUST PURE SPECULATION , but hopefully it means a f2 constant lens can be compact and sensibly priced

years ago pentax made a 2.8 constant apt 20mm -40 mm zoom for their 110 slrs , the image circle is virtually identical to micro 4\3 and its a very small elegant lens , the size of a small rangefinder lens

Edit by a mod: removed like 100 newlines from your post

lisandra · « **Reply #23 on:** August 30, 2011, 03:34:35 PM »

Quote

firstly the quality will not be the same it will be good im sure but not the weather sealed beauties of the high grade oly line

you hit the nail in the head here, Its gonna be cheaper than we think, and that is gonna be the reason. It was the first thing I was told by my not so official informer, that the prices are gonna be lower than most expect, and that comparing them to the olys models shouldnt be done, despite the similarities. This is the guy that was dead on on the price of the 25mm 1.4 so im gonna believe him. He also send me the length of these lenses in inches. This is pretty official unless something changes in design in the next months which has happened but its unlikely.
Give or take 1/10-1/15 of an inch
3.20 for the 12-35mm
4.30 for the 35-100mm

I dont have diameter info (hint hint) but from the looks of the photos this sounds about right. The 14-45 is 2.36 inches (60mm) and the 12-35 seem like almost an inch longer while the 35-100 looks a full inch or maybe a bit more longer than the 12-35.
Ill post every crumb of info I get. BTW, for reference, the 14-140 is 3.31 inches long

peterb666 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 31, 2011, 02:33:12 PM »

Quote from: lisandra on August 27, 2011, 03:14:32 PM

Theyll be faster than 2.8. The debate in panasonic is between f2 and f2.5. Youd think the difference is negligible, but apparently f2 zooms are way more costly to make, difficult to control size and aberrations. Still, my fingers are crossed for f2 (I wont die if its 2.5).
Minimum focusing distance on the 35-100 is a confirmed 2.8 feet and on the 12-35 its 0.8 feet on the wide end. Thing like internal zooming is unknown.

You would generally increase the cost by a factor of 4 for each whole stop increase.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Author Topic: Panasonic 12-35mm f/2 and 35-100mm f/2 expected next year (Read 4873 times)

Related Topics

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery