Panasonic Announces 12-35mm Lens (24-70mm equivalent)

Panasonic has launched a new Optical Image Stabilized 24–70mm-equivalent lens, the Lumix G X Vario 12–35mm ƒ/2.8 Aspherical, for Micro 4/3 (currently available for pre-order).

Although some are calling it pricey at $1,299, it's sure to become a bread-and-butter all-purpose middle-of-the-range lens for those who have switched to Micro 4/3 as their main camera system. And if the format is more or less half the size of "full" frame, consider that the new Canon EF 24–70mm ƒ/2.8L II USM zoom costs $2,299—not double the cost, but the better part of it.

It seems to me that actual tests of non-specialized lenses are becoming less and less necessary as time goes by—the ethos is now something like "assumed to be of fine quality until proven otherwise." By the time pre-orders are filled, there will probably be plenty of tests on the 'Net, and I'd have some time to try it before my return privileges expired. I would have never said such a thing twenty years ago, but I'd probably buy this sight unseen if I'd been waiting for a lens of this spec.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2012 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Comments

[David Dyer-Bennet]

I keep hearing that smaller sensors make various things easier for lens designers. If this were an f/2, at that price it might be tempting.

[John Krumm]

This is one lens I'd be very patient for if you pre-order. DPR says it will be available in August. If that's correct, some folks might order it today, and wait for a month or two past August before they see it.

[Dave Van de Mark]

Mike, You are so right about "sight unseen" these days. Did so myself with Fuji X-Pro 1 and all 3 lenses before there was much out. Don't regret the decision though it can be a quirky SOB (images quality is stunning). As for fixed aperture optics, the computerized lens designers of today would have to be asleep at the wheel to crank out something really lousy. Have my doubts this 12-35 would be one of them!

[PWL]

Blast, THIS comes out after I've bought the 12mm, 25mm, and 45mm lenses for the EM-5 I'm STILL WAITING for. This is the lens I really wanted.

Haste makes waste, I guess?

[William Barnett-Lewis]

As someone who always went with primes and only went digital with m43 last Christmas, I can honestly say this is the first zoom I want. If I had the money, I'd buy it and an OM-D body in a heartbeat. But my E-PL1 will have to "make do" with my kit lens & Nikon F/LTM adaptor mounted lenses for the foreseeable future.

I'd still probably rather actually have the money for the Panasonic/Leica 25/1.4 as someone who always loved my normal primes but that's not likely to happen unless I were to a) sell my beloved Leica IIIf & Summitar or b) win the lotto alas...

[Dan]

Mike - this looks to be a nice piece of kit, but a bit of a departure for micro 4/3 right now as so many large aperture primes are rolling out. It seems like one could get the Panasonic 14 and 20 and the Olympus 45 for less than the cost of this. Will the optics of this lens be superior to any or all of those? I just don't think a single item can be viewed in a vacuum, but rather, what does the same money buy you and does it address the same issues or, perhaps, do so even better?

[Mark Kinsman]

I find the Pre-order trend unsettling. I feel like we are driven to order before it's too late (or is it ...."or else!" Or else what?) I do desire a quality zoom in this range but that' still a bit steep cost wise. I feel like I'm back in the Canon/ Nikon cost world. Too many products in this pre-order cycle seem to be premature releases that may or may not get fixed post release. Time to exercise restraint of desire.

[Alan Halfhill]

The price is not certain. Panasonic may have given the dealers a price but the price of this lens has not been published publicly. DPreview and the other sites have not said what the suggested list price is. Only PhotograpyBLOG has said $999.00 US. The dealers will try to get what they can. I feel the price will near the $1000 to stay competitive. The 7-14 started high but has lessen with time.

[John Camp]

With Nikon and Canon, they'll issue nice lenses, but often you can't figure out why they issued any one particular lens. I mean, they have unfilled holes in the line-up that need updating, and they update a lens that's already very good. You just can't figure it out. With Panasonic and Olympus, though, it feels like there's a plan at work. With the 7-14 and now the 12-35, it seems like Panny is going for the basic fast zoom lens set that a lot of photojournalists (and by extension, most general shooters) rely on. Makes good sense to me.

[Lynn Burdekin]

There's a test of the lens here http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dslrmagazine.com%2F, including bokeh samples and photos of the lens mounted on an OM-D, and alongside the equivalent full frame Tamron 24-70mm.

Looks like Panasonic has a winner with this lens.

[Lynn Burdekin]

Dpreview has also posted a hands on preview with sample images http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05/21/Panasonic-12-35mm-F2-8-preview.

Interesting that two review sites have featured this lens mounted on an OM-D. Admittedly it does look very nice on that camera, and it makes sense as both are weather sealed. Panasonic might not object as this lens may tempt buyers away from the recently released (also weatherproof) Oly M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ.

[T N Args]

300g weight for a quality 24-70mm f2.8 with image stabilisation and seals. $1000 (for patient buyers).

The only equivalent FF lens (Tamron) weighs 825g. The APS-C Canon equivalent is 630g.

I reckon m4/3 proves its worth with lenses like this.

[Mart]

Although we double the focal length for 35mm equivalence, a 4/3 sensor is closer to only 1/4 the surface area of full frame. Does that matter?

[Poagao]

Now it's time for Olympus to up the ante and release a 12-25 f2 in a smaller package without the stabilization. One can hope.

[ctein]

Dear Mart,

No. Almost all metrics of image quality scale with the linear dimension of the sensor (or film), not the area.

(Assuming all other things equal, of course. Which they rarely are.)

pax / Ctein

[Ed]

Eh, the GH3 will be weathersealed I guess.....and I bet you there will be combodeal in the making......Photokina, here I come! No wait, should wait till the GH4 arrives in about 2 years, then pick up one deadcheap from the Internet :-).

Greetings, Ed.

[Ed]

@ Mart,

DOF is increased as is pixel count per mm squared and the rest is Pythagoras. Now DOF sure matters, the look of a 2.8 Pana picture is bound to be different from the look of a 2.8 Nikon FF picture (or Canon or Leica or any other FF camera).

The pixelcount matters not so much, at least not at base ISO, if you increase the ISO however a FF sensor is bound to be less noise free then a u 4/3 sensor.

But a u4/3 camera usually is a feather weight against the heft of D4 or a 1D or even a 5D. So that is the benefit of the equation. To put in short terms, it works for me :-).

[David Vatovec]

Mike, does the "HD" marking on the lens qualify for a ludicrous intensifier?

[Emmanuel Huybrechts]

At last! I was growing tired of the 3.5-5.6 zooms for mirrorless cameras. m43 is really the best overall mirrorless system for now. Although I'd prefer to go with the Nex-7 the Sony lenses are nowhere near what's available for m43 and will probably remains so for the near future (m43 was the first mirrorless system and there is two manufacturers backing it).

[Paris]

$1300 does seem pricey to me, but I guess that's how much analogous lenses from Canikon cost. Maybe the savings from smaller lens elements is canceled by the higher precision required by smallness?
Anyway, this is what the "kit" lens for the OMD should have looked like, except that kit would have been $2300. Ouch.

I would guess that most camera buying is "sight unseen" nowadays, since all the camera stores have closed. Except for Best Buy and Costco. Ouch again.

[Nicholas Condon]

Most of my shooting falls into two categories: Indoors in crappy light and outdoors in good light. With PENs, the former calls for f/1.7, ISO 800 (or even ISO 1600, if the light's really bad and my subject is moving), while the latter is usually f/5.6 or f/8, ISO 200. This lens is useless to me for the former case (too dim), and sorta pointless for the latter case. It's rare that I find myself really wishing I had an f/2.8 zoom.

If I had an OM-D (and still had k$1.3 to spare), I'd be singing a different tune; f/2.8, ISO 3200 doesn't sound too bad at all.

The thought of a smaller, non-stabilized, f/2 midrange zoom from Oly (such as the sort Poagao suggests) makes my bank account hurt. They could skip the weather seals if it would make it cheaper...