The PanLeica 12-60mm f/4 Lens

[Cinegain]

Jup, from both Panasonic and Olympus themselves. http://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/camera-accessories/others/dmw-ma1e.html & https://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/c/lenses/adapters_converters/adapters/mmf_3/index.html

Not sure if either has an advantage over the other (-- guess the Oly is dust & splash proof and doesn't have that oldschool styling of the Panny). Pretty sure I've seen like perhaps a 3rd party one from maybe Kipon or something on eBay once (-- ah, and e.g. Commlite & Viltrox as well)

[noone]

I would love a fast zoom to play with though not something I need.

I think there are the two four thirds f2 zooms, the two APSC 18-35 1.8 Sigma, the 50-100 1.8 Sigma and the FF Sigma 24-35 f2.     ALL would be useable on M4/3 for stills at least with fast AF and keep the fast aperture (just with 2 stops more DOF against FF) and smart adapters..     The two four thirds lenses would depend on camera used I think.

I look for a bargain Sigma 24-35 f2 from time to time to try adapted to FF and M4/3 (not quite as useful on M4/3 to me but might still be fun).

[Grimor]

How worse are the new kitter 12-60 panasonic (3'5-5'6) vs the premium new Leica?

If you can trade kit for leica, how much did you pay for the leica one?

[Philip Lipetz]

38 minutes ago, Grimor said:

How worse are the new kitter 12-60 panasonic (3'5-5'6) vs the premium new Leica?

If you can trade kit for leica, how much did you pay for the leica one?

I have shot both. The kit lens is a very good kit lens and you will be happy with it until you see the Leica 22-60 at work. Much better flare and contrast. 

[Grimor]

Thanks @Philip Lipetz .

I have panaleica 25 and im really loving it.

[Jonny]

On 3/20/2017 at 6:56 PM, jonpais said:

For those absolutely determined to pick up a zoom lens in addition to or as a replacement for their Olympus or Panasonic wide zooms, I’d go for either the proven Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 v.2, the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO, or the Olympus 12-100mm f/4. And for the more commonsensical among you, the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 would be an even wiser decision.

I agree. I recently purchased the 12-100mm for doco work because of its versatility. It makes swapping lenses a thing of the past, as long as there is enough light.

I considered the 12-60mm but concluded the extra reach of the Oly outweighed the extra stop on the wide end, and I use primes for low light environments anyway. 

Still, I think if size and weight are a major concern, the 12-60 would be a good choice if you don't already have the 12-35/40 2.8 zooms.

[JazzBox]

Is the 12-60 going to work any better then the 12-35 (or Olympus 12-40) for handheld video/steadicam like shots? In that case I would consider it, otherwise I would prefer f/2.8.
Thank you!

[Cinegain]

Than the 12-40? Yes, obviously (it's a Panasonic's home game where you'd gain hybrid IS). The 12-35mm? Well. Supposedly you'd get the new one for weathersealing (freezeproof), cosmetic changes and the improved iris control only. I thought the old one would only be Dual IS compatible, not Dual IS 2. But he de-bunked me on that one earlier (see video), so...

Guess with either of the 12-35mm f/2.8 you're good too. Unless you like the 12-60mm range and don't mind the fall-off to f/4. Both support Power OIS + Dual IS 2.

[Chrad]

40 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Than the 12-40? Yes, obviously (it's a Panasonic's home game where you'd gain hybrid IS). The 12-35mm? Well. Supposedly you'd get the new one for weathersealing (freezeproof), cosmetic changes and the improved iris control only. I thought the old one would only be Dual IS compatible, not Dual IS 2. But he de-bunked me on that one earlier (see video), so...

Guess with either of the 12-35mm f/2.8 you're good too. Unless you like the 12-60mm range and don't mind the fall-off to f/4. Both support Power OIS + Dual IS 2.

Dual IS 2 for the original 2.8 zooms is cancelled : (

[Cinegain]

16 minutes ago, Chrad said:

Dual IS 2 for the original 2.8 zooms is cancelled : (

Do you have any sources for that?

Acc. that video (4:26) & e.g. this thread and mentioned document (p.21): https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4102483 , it's not yet supported (also not mentioned yet at: http://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/dual_is.html ). But support should be there when new firmware is out this year?

[Chrad]

48 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Do you have any sources for that?

Acc. that video (4:26) & e.g. this thread and mentioned document (p.21): https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4102483 , it's not yet supported (also not mentioned yet at: http://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/dual_is.html ). But support should be there when new firmware is out this year?

Unfortunately not.

 

[Cinegain]

In other words... 'we had already lined everything up and were good to go, but then marketing figured out that we were giving out freebies and stopping people from buying our new stuff'.

[JazzBox]

14 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Than the 12-40? Yes, obviously (it's a Panasonic's home game where you'd gain hybrid IS). The 12-35mm? Well. Supposedly you'd get the new one for weathersealing (freezeproof), cosmetic changes and the improved iris control only. I thought the old one would only be Dual IS compatible, not Dual IS 2. But he de-bunked me on that one earlier (see video), so...

Guess with either of the 12-35mm f/2.8 you're good too. Unless you like the 12-60mm range and don't mind the fall-off to f/4. Both support Power OIS + Dual IS 2.

Pardon me: I just mash up requesting 12-35 stabilization vs 12-60 and 12-40 images quality vs 12-35/12-60! 
Of course the 12-40 has no stabilization

What about 12-35 stabilization (I would prefer 2.8 in case) and overall quality?

[Cinegain]

I have the E-M1, so the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO came with it. It's a very well-built lens and I love the MF de-clutch and optical solid character. From what I had gathered back then, there wasn't that much reason to be getting the 12-35mm f/2.8 apart from the stabilization, so I never gave it a whirl, really. The new Leica? I don't really like the fall-off to f/4 and I believe it's not really up to the quality and character of the recent Leica gems (mainly primes). With the G80 I went with the kit, because importing it from the UK, I basically got it with a free 12-60mm Lumix lens (which is weathersealed btw), 64GB card and battery grip for body only mainland EU prices. The Lumix 12-60mm provides a very useful range and does okay in daylight for like photography. Even for video it's not terrible, as you do gain that Dual IS compatibility, but you might not use if for more than homevideos. The Leica. Well, not sure, the range is nice, but if it doesn't have those Leica qualities and falls off to f/4, then I hardly have better use for it than the cheaper Lumix. Since I don't own the 12-35mm f/2.8... it seems that for the GH5, it would make sense to get the newer version, of course, I could just still be using the Olympus, as now we have sensor stabilization. But having had the oppertunity to try out Dual IS, I can't deny that it's really really good compared to sensor stabilization alone. Of course, if you have the older one, you still get Dual IS, just not Dual IS 2, which shouldn't make the world of difference.

[jonpais]

Have a peek at my comparison between the Leica DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4 and the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 v.1 at f/2.8 on the Lumix G85.

 

[Fritz Pierre]

20 hours ago, Philip Lipetz said:

I have shot both. The kit lens is a very good kit lens and you will be happy with it until you see the Leica 22-60 at work. Much better flare and contrast. 

Have to wait months for my GH5...I got the Leica 12-60 last night though!...I have much more of a lens than camera problem!!...for a metal body the Leica is unbelievably light!

@Philip Lipetz...as you have the kit lens also, I thought I'd ask...I'm thinking of getting the G85 as a walk around camera too, because my GH5 will go into a rig...the Panny 12-60 is offered as a kit with the G85...without the 12-60 kit lens, the body is only $100 less...the Leica will have to earn it's keep, so strictly for work use...would you say as a family movies/travel lens the Panny 12-60 is a no brainer to go with the G85?...I have the 14-140 but never really go longer than 60mm anyway, because without a tripod I can't hold a lens that long still...

 

[jonpais]

1 hour ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Have to wait months for my GH5...I got the Leica 12-60 last night though!...I have much more of a lens than camera problem!!...for a metal body the Leica is unbelievably light!

@Philip Lipetz...as you have the kit lens also, I thought I'd ask...I'm thinking of getting the G85 as a walk around camera too, because my GH5 will go into a rig...the Panny 12-60 is offered as a kit with the G85...without the 12-60 kit lens, the body is only $100 less...the Leica will have to earn it's keep, so strictly for work use...would you say as a family movies/travel lens the Panny 12-60 is a no brainer to go with the G85?...I have the 14-140 but never really go longer than 60mm anyway, because without a tripod I can't hold a lens that long still...

 

I'm 100% certain that any of these kit lenses will be fine for shooting family around the house. The limitation won't be the lens; it'll be the low light sensitivity and AF-C.

[webrunner5]

Well figuring the cheapest 14-35mm f/2 ED on Amazon used is like 1400 bucks, sort of way out of my limit. And it would suck focus wise unless yu used a Olympus EM1 like I did with my 12-60 2.8-4.0.

[Dude_ger]

Just got my gh5 with the 12-60 kit as i will use the speedbooster with canon glass, so it s just that i have a lens while waiting.

It ´s surprisingly good! Kinda annoying because the Leica feels so much better, but also was 400 euros more. So for "normal" video use its completely useable as far as it s not that dark.

[jonpais]

I just finished watching a lighting tutorial over at Max Yuryev's YouTube channel where he shows the difference between using a slow kit lens vs. a moderately fast prime. He was limited to f/5.6 on the variable aperture zoom, meaning he had to crank up the ISO to 1000, whereas with the prime, he was able to record at ISO 200 at f/1.8 (or something like that). And unsurprisingly, not only was the image cleaner at the lower ISO setting, but he was able to throw the background slightly out of focus. I also see many other vloggers with nice production values routinely using fast primes, including Hugh Brownstone, who used the Leica 25mm f/1.4 wide open on a recent episode. I also tested the Leica 12mm f/1.4 at f/2.8 using single point focus for one of my YouTube videos, but it would have been even better at a wider aperture. And if vlogging from home is something you're considering, I would still recommend either avoiding slow variable aperture kit lenses altogether or picking up a fast prime as well. Several posters here have talked about Hollywood filmmakers preferring to shoot at f/4 or f/5.6, but we're not Hollywood. If you host a YouTube channel about photography and your face is on the screen for 30 minutes, pixel peepers will without question be looking at every hair and wart on your face and will want to know which lens you were using, for better or worse. Another factor aside from mere resolution worth considering is the lens's color rendition. The variations of color reproduction between different manufacturers' lenses can be dramatic.  And in my opinion, the Leicas have a more pleasing color than the yellowish looking Panasonic lenses. In any case, a fast lens gives you the option of shooting wide open or at a narrow aperture, whereas a slow lens is going to dictate the aperture and ISO settings to you. And even with the fastest kit lens, a maximum aperture of f/2.8 at 12mm does not offer a wealth of creative possibilities for playing with depth-of-field.