zerocool22 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Hello, How come that these panasonic L lenses are so light weight? All my canon L glass is heavy as *@#$, same as sigma ART lenses and tamron lenses. Those light weight lenses are a lot funner to carry around 😄 I thought perhaps it was a mirrorless thing, but these Canon RF lenses are heavy beasts as well. Cheers Belle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSMW Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 The 85mm f1.8 is actually lighter than air. So is the 20-60mm. I prefer the new Sigmas however, particularly the f2 35mm and 65mm siblings, plus the 45mm f2.8...which I have no use for owning the new 28-70mm f2.8. Heavier yes, but that's because they are made out of a substance called metal and not recycled recycling receptacles. They look ace, they feel ace, they render ace. zerocool22 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerocool22 Posted March 19, 2021 Author Share Posted March 19, 2021 21 minutes ago, MrSMW said: The 85mm f1.8 is actually lighter than air. So is the 20-60mm. I prefer the new Sigmas however, particularly the f2 35mm and 65mm siblings, plus the 45mm f2.8...which I have no use for owning the new 28-70mm f2.8. Heavier yes, but that's because they are made out of a substance called metal and not recycled recycling receptacles. They look ace, they feel ace, they render ace. Well I was canon, sigma or tamron. I would def release non metal versions at least and call it the TRAVEL version, same optics, same performance, a third of their weight. Could be that they are not weatherproof, but honestly I dont care because if there is a storm my ass is indoors anyhow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stab Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Plastic vs metal. The expensive Panasonic lenses, the one with the red S on it, are partially metal and partially plastic. But I believe the newer, cheaper glass is completely made from plastics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
currensheldon Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 I think the Sigma "i" series or the Zeiss Loxia series are the perfect combination of size, build quality, and speed. f2 is my favorite aperture on full-frame and even if I get f1.4 lenses, I tend to stop them down to f2 for easier focusing and less of the blurred-to-oblivion look. But, most manufacturers neglect their f1.8, f2, and f2.8 lenses and make them cheap with plastic and are often loud-focusing and just aren't as well-made or as sharp as their f1.4 lenses. I get it - cheap lenses are great for budgets, but it's annoying how manufacturers neglect quality just because it's a slower aperture. Enter LOXIA. So beautiful. All metal. Solid. Small. Incredibly well-made. Just beautiful. But, no AF. Enter SIGMA i - these lenses are amazing. Metal, small, lightweight, great AF, and just beautiful. Wish the 24mm was at least an f2.8, but the 35mm and 65mm at f2 are pretty perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leslie Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 9 hours ago, zerocool22 said: Well I was canon, sigma or tamron. I would def release non metal versions at least and call it the TRAVEL version, same optics, same performance, a third of their weight. Could be that they are not weatherproof, but honestly I dont care because if there is a storm my ass is indoors anyhow. i have some m42 lenses from yesteryear. I actually don't like thinking about how old they are as i can relate to that age. Still they work flawlessly, not sure if these modern plastic lenses will give the same longevity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noone Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 It is all relative. I would ask how come the Panasonic S FF cameras are all so heavy! I put up with two lenses that are heavy (to me) simply because they are as light as they can be for what the are really (Canon 17 TS-E is massive for a 17mm f4 lens but nothing else like it really (ok the new Laowa 15mm shift and Nikon 19mm PCE are similar now) and my ancient Tamron 300 2.8 which I am starting to grumble about do I take it at a bit over 2kg (though I think it is still the lightest 300 2.8 made). Other than that, I can have my 55 1.8 Sony Zeiss AND 24 1.4 FD L AND a small hotshoe flash and my (now aging) FF A7s and be about the same weight as some of those FF S Panasonics with one lens. SOME Canon lenses I have had are pretty small I really liked the little 40 2.8 which is a decent little FF lens that weighs next to nothing and of course the APSC kit lenses are very light but then they are pretty much all plastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerocool22 Posted March 20, 2021 Author Share Posted March 20, 2021 7 hours ago, noone said: It is all relative. I would ask how come the Panasonic S FF cameras are all so heavy! I put up with two lenses that are heavy (to me) simply because they are as light as they can be for what the are really (Canon 17 TS-E is massive for a 17mm f4 lens but nothing else like it really (ok the new Laowa 15mm shift and Nikon 19mm PCE are similar now) and my ancient Tamron 300 2.8 which I am starting to grumble about do I take it at a bit over 2kg (though I think it is still the lightest 300 2.8 made). Other than that, I can have my 55 1.8 Sony Zeiss AND 24 1.4 FD L AND a small hotshoe flash and my (now aging) FF A7s and be about the same weight as some of those FF S Panasonics with one lens. SOME Canon lenses I have had are pretty small I really liked the little 40 2.8 which is a decent little FF lens that weighs next to nothing and of course the APSC kit lenses are very light but then they are pretty much all plastic. The s5 is low weight though, which is the reason I picked it over the s1h. noone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noone Posted March 20, 2021 Share Posted March 20, 2021 10 hours ago, zerocool22 said: The s5 is low weight though, which is the reason I picked it over the s1h. Yeah, sort of anyway. Again, it is all relative as the S5 is still heavier than some other FF cameras WITH a lens. It is not so heavy (or large in dimension) that i would baulk at taking it though. Emanuel 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Video Hummus Posted March 20, 2021 Share Posted March 20, 2021 I think a lot of companies are getting better and better at making the lens elements out of plastic composite materials without sacrificing optical quality. I do like the build quality of the Canon RF lenses. They are made out of "engineering plastic" but they feel super solid and survivable if tossed around. Plus the tear downs of some RF lenses by Lens Rentals shows they are pretty solidly constructed. I don't think I miss metal all that much. Although I sold it, the MFT Panasonic Leica 50-200mm f/2.8-4 was sexy and built well...even better than the PL 10-25mm f/1.7. I was a bit disappointed when I got that lens in my hand and compared it to the 50-200. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barefoot_dp Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 On 3/19/2021 at 11:54 PM, zerocool22 said: Well I was canon, sigma or tamron. I would def release non metal versions at least and call it the TRAVEL version, same optics, same performance, a third of their weight. Could be that they are not weatherproof, but honestly I dont care because if there is a storm my ass is indoors anyhow. Doesn't Sigma kind of do this with some of their telephoto lenses? They have a 'Sport' and a 'Contemporary' version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kye Posted March 22, 2021 Share Posted March 22, 2021 After deep reflection, I've concluded that I want my lenses to weigh almost nothing, and yet have diameters like saucers and be almost 100% full-by-volume with bulbous glass elements. If anyone has seen that then please let me know immediately. noone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leslie Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 kye, in keeping up with the spirit of your reply. May i suggest, light as air, Flares like a beast, takes that digital edge right off, sadly no aperture. A man of your talents should have no problem mounting it to your camera of choice. 😉 noone and kye 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kye Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 2 hours ago, leslie said: kye, in keeping up with the spirit of your reply. May i suggest, light as air, Flares like a beast, takes that digital edge right off, sadly no aperture. A man of your talents should have no problem mounting it to your camera of choice. 😉 It's even got a nice pincushion distortion as a slight nod to the vintage anamorphics of old... I love it! If we fill it with Helium then it can be even more uplifting, raising the entire production value! It is weather resistant? noone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noone Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 28 minutes ago, kye said: It is weather resistant? For Leslie it is probably more important if it is wether resistant? leslie and kye 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leslie Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 1 hour ago, noone said: For Leslie it is probably more important if it is wether resistant? Nice play on words no0ne 😀 Bizarrely I am considering how I might accomplish such a thing. First thought was a ex meth lab flask 😉 with maybe a simple lens at the end to help focus and a pinhole to top things off. Food for thought. Perhaps the next challenge should have a home made component to it. noone 1 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.