okamata Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Hello everyone, I'm new around here.I am looking for a better lens than my current kit lens. Though it's awesome in every way I feel I need a bit more. The low light is good but I would like something that works better in low light. I would also prefer a bit wider coverage and also better stabilization.My camera store recommended I get the Vario 12-35 f 2.8. What do you guys think? Thanks for reading! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Doesn't the stabilization on the 12-35 kind of suck? When it comes to stabilization it's not much if any better than the kit is it? I'd recommend the 1.7 42.5mm. It'll allow you to get shallow depth of field, let you shoot in lower light, and the stabilization is no worse than what you've got. The only thing is it's a portrait lens and won't let you go wider. Or the new Mitakon 25mm .95 for $399- it's manual focus but you'll be able to shoot in very low light and easily get shallow depth of field. No stabilization though. Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted September 29, 2015 Super Members Share Posted September 29, 2015 The Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is a long time favourite of mine.The Sigma 19, 30 and 60mm f2.8 are also good and cheap. IronFilm and Flynn 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinad Amir Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 If image stabilisation priority then go for 12-35 f2,8 Vario G want more light and shallow deptSigma 18-35 tho u need Speedbooster for that cause Apc size lens hope it helps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 All the above good suggestions: the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 is crisp and lightweight, and the Sigma Art line offers great value. The Panasonic 42.5mm and Mitakon 25mm f/0.95 are not wide options; moreover, the Mitakon is unlikely to give as sharp results as the other recommendations above. But if you really want wide coverage and low light performance, I would also go with either the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 + Speed Booster XL 0.64. The newer Tokina 11-20mm is even better, but not sure if it is compatible with the Speed Booster. If you value stabilization above all else, only the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 has OIS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 I'd recommend the 1.7 42.5mm. Me too. Best for your described needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Me too. Best for your described needs.Except the whole "wide angle" part.+1 on the 12-35mm. I'll be picking one up later this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 All the above good suggestions: the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 is crisp and lightweight, and the Sigma Art line offers great value. The Panasonic 42.5mm and Mitakon 25mm f/0.95 are not wide options; moreover, the Mitakon is unlikely to give as sharp results as the other recommendations above. But if you really want wide coverage and low light performance, I would also go with either the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 + Speed Booster XL 0.64. The newer Tokina 11-20mm is even better, but not sure if it is compatible with the Speed Booster. If you value stabilization above all else, only the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 has OIS. The 42.5 1.7 has stabilization. Also, I think it will allow him to experiment more with shallow depth of field than the 12-35 and that's often important to people starting out with m43. And it'll be better in lowlight. It's faster and much cheaper than the 12-35. But it won't give them the wide angle. I think the 20 1.7, the 42.5 1.7, and using the kit for wide angle would make for a good combination. I'd much rather have 1.7 than 2.8 on m43 and 42.5 1.7 makes for a good portrait lens. Those three lenses would be cheaper than the 12-35, especially if he gets the 20mm used. I'd also consider getting an adapter and going with some cheap vintage lenses. The Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is a long time favourite of mine.The Sigma 19, 30 and 60mm f2.8 are also good and cheap.Didn't you shoot your recent G7 vid with affordable vintage lenses? I think that might be the best way to go if you don't have to have stabilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted September 29, 2015 Super Members Share Posted September 29, 2015 Didn't you shoot your recent G7 vid with affordable vintage lenses? I think that might be the best way to go if you don't have to have stabilization.Its pretty much all I ever use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Its pretty much all I ever use.They're a tiny fraction of the price of new lenses, even compared to the cheap Sigmas, and have so much character. I would encourage the OP to check out the G7 vid Mattias posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 The 42.5 1.7 has stabilization. Also, I think it will allow him to experiment more with shallow depth of field than the 12-35 and that's often important to people starting out with m43. And it'll be better in lowlight. It's faster and much cheaper than the 12-35. But it won't give them the wide angle. I think the 20 1.7, the 42.5 1.7, and using the kit for wide angle would make for a good combination. I'd much rather have 1.7 than 2.8 on m43 and 42.5 1.7 makes for a good portrait lens. Those three lenses would be cheaper than the 12-35, especially if he gets the 20mm used. I'd also consider getting an adapter and going with some cheap vintage lenses.Didn't you shoot your recent G7 vid with affordable vintage lenses? I think that might be the best way to go if you don't have to have stabilization.But they're not wide angle on M4/3. It feels like you guys aren't getting this.The 12-35 is the best option if you want wide and stabilized. Otherwise, a used SLR Magic 10mm or 12mm is a good option if you really want to go wider. jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 But they're not wide angle on M4/3. It feels like you guys aren't getting this.The 12-35 is the best option if you want wide and stabilized. Otherwise, a used SLR Magic 10mm or 12mm is a good option if you really want to go wider. I think they believe the OP asked what their favorite lens is You will without a doubt be very happy with the 12-35mm f/2.8, but it really isn't a great deal wider than what you've already got. And after a while, the relatively slow aperture of f/2.8 could be limiting. It took me a long while, but I just had to accept that most of the lenses I wanted for my GH4 weren't stabilized, so I went ahead and got them and never looked back. For the really wide lenses, stabilization isn't quite the problem it is with longer focal lengths anyway. Just pick up a Gorilla Pod or something to help stabilize the lens. Some of the clips shot with vintage lenses are pretty cool, but I would never recommend them as a primary lens. Buy the best you can afford, and if you like, add some inexpensive vintage lenses to your kit later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Otherwise, a used SLR Magic 10mm or 12mm is a good option if you really want to go wider. It feels like you aren't getting this. He said he wants something that offers better stabilization.I think they believe the OP asked what their favorite lens is I think you're mistaken if you think anyone believes the 42.5 1.7 is their favorite lens. Just trying to offer some helpful suggestions, something you haven't done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 It feels like you aren't getting this. He said he wants something that offers better stabilization.I think you're mistaken if you think anyone believes the 42.5 1.7 is their favorite lens. Just trying to offer some helpful suggestions, something you haven't done.Flynn, hold your horses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Flynn, hold your horses.Well, it was nice of you to edit your comment and offer a helpful suggestion instead of just snark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 It feels like you aren't getting this. He said he wants something that offers better stabilization.I think you're mistaken if you think anyone believes the 42.5 1.7 is their favorite lens. Just trying to offer some helpful suggestions, something you haven't done.He asked for faster, wider, better quality than the kit lens, and better stabilization. The SLR Magic lenses provide the first 3 and the 12-35 addresses all 4. I'm not trying to rip on you. If you have a suggestion I've forgotten, please bring it up. I just don't think the 42.5 is an applicable suggestion in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Flynn, cool down, will you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Wow...it's just a lens suggestion, dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damphousse Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 My camera store recommended I get the Vario 12-35 f 2.8. What do you guys think? Not to be a jerk to local small businesses but you can save up to $400-$470(if sales tax avoided) on that lens buying it off of ebay. Looks like you can get it new for $350 off from asian sellers. $900 or $1,000 for that lens is a rip off. And plus if you get it and decide it doesn't meet your needs well congratulations now you get to take a $400 hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Not to be a jerk to local small businesses but you can save up to $400-$470(if sales tax avoided) on that lens buying it off of ebay. Looks like you can get it new for $350 off from asian sellers. $900 or $1,000 for that lens is a rip off. And plus if you get it and decide it doesn't meet your needs well congratulations now you get to take a $400 hit.$350??? Where, as that doesn't sound right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.