What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Latest "that system has it so why don't we?" thread

Travis Butler said:
But the options are not clear to the novice buyer. Isn't that what we're talking about? How to get more novice buyers into the system?
Click to expand...
If you see it that way, the solution would be taking lens options from the market and not releasing new ones.
Travis Butler said:
...what makes you think lenses above $2000 will attract a novice buyer? I told you of my experiences talking to people thinking of getting into photography, and how they thought $2000 lenses were crazy. What are you basing your price ranges on?
Click to expand...
I made completely different experiences. For most people I know, spending that amount of money in a hobby isn't out of the world.
Travis Butler said:
The point about '1 in 10,000' is that 10,000 people considering something a halo product is a lot better than 1 person considering something a halo product. Not 'you sell more the more you drop the price.'
Click to expand...
I think it's not 1 in 10000. It's more something in between 1 in 10 and 1 in 100.

Look how Canon build their RF System with great success. Look at the pricing of Nikon Z or Sony E. Those systems working successfully and they all have those expensive lenses, more than we have in L-Mount. And those expensive lenses from Canon, Nikon and Sony are selling good.
 
xaviergut said:
I think that the 50mm f1.4 S PRO is the elite of Lumix FF lenses. But the elite lenses in the L-mount system are the APO Leica lenses, because they are perfect.
Click to expand...
"the elite" is the part I have a problem with - there can be more than one! :) You can agree that the APO Leica lenses are at the top of the heap, and still think the S Pros are top-line lenses that are among the best manufacturers can do.

Also, I just wanted to make it clear: I don't have a problem if you or anyone else wants one for yourself! I don't have a problem with wanting more of them, either.

But this sub-thread started when people talked about bringing more novice photographers into L-mount, and there I think the S Pros are a) not going to bring in novice users, and b) if that's important to you, they should have a lower priority than lenses that will.
 
Oíche said:
That would be an interesting test with exteme peeping on different subjects from close to infinity at same apertures.
Click to expand...
Would they think to do that, though? More to the point, would they even notice the difference? :)

I'm only half-joking; I've seen novices ignore problems I notice right off, until I point them out. It takes time and experience for many people to develop the eye.

Oíche said:
I'd imagine even a novice would have a good idea that the more expensive larger heavier lens at 1/2 the zoom reach would be the better lens pure IQ wise but may not know about aperture and the advantages of constant lower aperture.
Click to expand...
A lot of people need to have the reason why primes have better IQ explained to them, after all! :) As for size/weight and price - like with zoom range, the obvious bits outweigh the subtle improvements until you learn enough to know better. I've seen people complain about the size/weight of a high-end lens, because the difference in IQ isn't obvious to them and the greater weight is.
 
Travis Butler said:
I've seen people complain about the size/weight of a high-end lens, because the difference in IQ isn't obvious to them and the greater weight is.
Click to expand...
Agree 100% the compromise doesn't matter to them... Hence the 28-200 which some peepers complain about... Which is the IQ compromise. If you are a good photographer you can do great stuff with it so good enough for the non enthusiast who just had £2000 burning their pocket with a safari holiday booked Z04 Carrot

£2000 or so = S5ii & 28-200 kit last year

Plus best FF stability on the market, especially video
 
Travis Butler said:
interested in bouncing some ideas around?
Click to expand...
I honestly have zero clue about lens design and optical formulas. All I know is when I see something that I like. Quite often, a little bit of CA seems to be present in the images produced by those lenses. Whether that has something to do with it, I do not know. Some of those include the m4/3 PL 25mm, Sigma 30mm f1.4, and Lumix S 50mm f1.4. Quite a few shots from some of the Leica lenses are not immune from it either. I can't remember exactly where I saw the review, but I do remember being quite surprised seeing it when lots of "lesser" lenses get a hammering for it.
 
Markuswelder said:
I honestly have zero clue about lens design and optical formulas. All I know is when I see something that I like.
Click to expand...
<nod> Yeah, I don't know a whole lot - basically on the level of that LensRentals article. Simplified picture of how the lens design process works, three breakthroughs in the last 50 years that revolutionized lens design, and how that led to today's designs.
Markuswelder said:
Quite often, a little bit of CA seems to be present in the images produced by those lenses. Whether that has something to do with it, I do not know. Some of those include the m4/3 PL 25mm, Sigma 30mm f1.4, and Lumix S 50mm f1.4. Quite a few shots from some of the Leica lenses are not immune from it either. I can't remember exactly where I saw the review, but I do remember being quite surprised seeing it when lots of "lesser" lenses get a hammering for it.
Click to expand...
Yeah. As I was implying earlier to @xaviergut, I'm not really a fan of bland, utterly neutral rendering; I prefer a lens to have a voice. Vivid colors, strong contrast, edges that stand out from microcontrast, maybe even a bit of spherical aberration - any of those to give it some personality. The PL15 and 20-60, or the Panny 20, had it on M4/3; the Konica lenses I've used tend to have it as well.
 
I really don't see much space between the Lumix "basics" such as the f/1.8 primes and the S-Pro lenses like the 50/1.4 or 24-70/2.8. For "elite" stuff where you're paying more for the name than anything else there's Leica and that's not going to change. Leave them to it. For the mid-level there's Panasonic and Sigma and, as of very recently, for the lower tier there are the emerging Chinese brands such as Meike, Viltrox, 7Artisans etc (which are better than first tier OEMs just fifteen years ago). What the L-mount needs is a fleshing-out of the mid and lower levels beyond the basics - 40mm f/2, 50mm f/2.8 macro, 135mm f/2.8, a fisheye zoom, more f/4 zooms, a decent travel zoom that starts at 24mm etc etc.

What we're seeing currently is bigger and more expensive exotic optics from Sigma, mostly zooms, and the Chinese brands just producing lower-cost alternatives to the basic 35, 50 and 85mm f/1.8s. There's some room for the former but most people don't want lenses that big, heavy and expensive, and for the latter, while they open up the L-mount to a lot more people and are very welcome, I understand they need to walk before they can run but with the quality being produced I think at least Meike and Viltrox are ready to expand beyond the basics.
 
I would like to see a good wide angle tilt shift lens. Like the Canon 17mm F4 TS-E or the Nikon 19mm f4 E ED.
This would be nice and unique. So far the only close native option as a modern mirrorless lens exists at Fuji GFX with 30mm (0.78crop).
 
NFec said:
I would like to see a good wide angle tilt shift lens. Like the Canon 17mm F4 TS-E or the Nikon 19mm f4 E ED.
This would be nice and unique. So far the only close native option as a modern mirrorless lens exists at Fuji GFX with 30mm (0.78crop).
Click to expand...
I'm with you there.

It is worth noting that, although neither of these are WA, Venus Optics now has two TS lenses for L-mount (or at least: "Coming Soon" on B&H). A 55mm and a 100mm. And they are both 1x macro. Dustin Abbott has a review of the 55 and talks very highly of the IQ.
 
Define pro: for me that would be someone who earns money with either the art of photography, video, or a combination of both.
For them a lens or body is a tool which needs to last at least as long as it take to write it off in the books. Any longer is more margin. Also they need a tool which can produce results a client is happy with. And here is where the things get a bit fuzzy for most prosumers and hobbyists.

Some of the non-professional lenses are optically almost equal compared to pro lenses, but are not that rugged required for someone like a war photographer. And often they have are a bit faster because their environments are less predictable. Same for bodies. A pro needs to have something reliable in all circumstances, no matter the environment.

But pro's can also be divided in groups, you have product expert pros and you have art expert pro's. So the pro's I talked about above are people who get paid by output of their equipment. We also have pro's who can output decent to very nice media, earn their money with it, but do not depend on rugged stuff. These are known as influencers. And they influence us because they want to get paid by views, by souls won for their brand. They influence us that a S Pro lens gets better results then normal S lenses, or that Leica lenses are always superior because, well hand made and ridiculous expensive.

But in the end, the real money earning pro based on merit of his media outcome, can wipe the floor with us hobbyist with a S28-200, because they figure out how it can be used to make money, and nice pictures. Fix the output of it with really good editing skills in pro-software if needed and there mega talent. Because it is their job. Not because the lens used.

As a hobbyist photographer I probably would have been better of with Nikon because of more inexpensive lenses from more 3rd party. Lumix is the most hybrid oriented manufacturer and they release products are intended for this dual use. I got also in Lumix because I had the idea that I might want to go make movie-clips some day. That might or might not happen. But that is the reason why other systems have stuff we as Lumix uses don't have and vice versa. We also have stuff they do not have. S Pro lenses are intended for Pro's who earn money with it and need the ruggedness. Or some stupid hobbyist like me who like the range of a 16-35 more then their consumer offering of the 14-28 and is willing to pay for it.
 
Botton line the answer to question of the OP and this thread title is that you bought Lumix for what is available at the moment you bought yourself into the system and for your use case , without promises of getting more lenses, but of course with hope that new stuff arrives. Other manufacturers target different users/use cases, so they manufacture different lenses for their target audience. If other systems have all the lenses and equipment you need and L-Mount has not, then you should not have bought into the L-Mount system.

To my eyes, Leica, Nikon and Canon came from mostly Photography, Sony has always been a hybrid. Lumix entered with 4:3 and m4:3 in de digital era together with Olympus. Where Lunix had the focus on hybrid and Olympus more on photography.

All systems have the stuff I need so I chose Lumix because of price, and the 20-60 (which I sold :cool: ). I think on paper the Sony 20-70/F4 is what I really wanted, but at that time just released and too expensive. And I liked ergonomics and the default colours / rendering of Lumix :) so less editing needed. And I really think that also due to Leica the photography heritage is stronger in Lumix products then it is with Sony (and their carl Zeiss relationship).
 
RuleOfThirds said:
If other systems have all the lenses and equipment you need and L-Mount has not, then you should not have bought into the L-Mount system.
Click to expand...
Excellent summary. I just have the impression that the L-mount system is generally more affordable than Canon and Sony, the 2 systems that have all possible gear, but if you want you can spend a lot more on Leica stuff...
 
Quentinquirelino said:
That's not that cheap for a 50mm 1.8. sometimes you can get the Panasonic 50mm 1.8 for not much more than that.
Click to expand...

Used, not new.

xaviergut said:
Excellent summary. I just have the impression that the L-mount system is generally more affordable than Canon and Sony, the 2 systems that have all possible gear, but if you want you can spend a lot more on Leica stuff...
Click to expand...

I think in general L-mount is more affordable because the S5 series have always been attractively priced for their feature set but until very recently there weren't any real budget options so the only way to get lenses at the prices that Sony had them (including Tamron offerings) was to get them as part of a kit when you get your camera.

Almost anything is cheaper than Canon as they threaten with legal action anyone that makes an RF lens they haven't given permission for.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
Botton line the answer to question of the OP and this thread title is that you bought Lumix for what is available at the moment you bought yourself into the system and for your use case , without promises of getting more lenses, but of course with hope that new stuff arrives.
Click to expand...

I find this mindset so foreign. That one should not express their desires about what they want the future to become. Just accept things the way they are and allow others - or the past - to dictate the path forward.

Are you saying that people should not use public forums to express their wishes to Panasonic? That we should not have discussion and debate about what we would like to see in the future? Is this the sage advice that you have?

No system is a perfect fit for any given photographer/videographer. It's perfectly reasonable for people to speak up and say "I'd really like to see an L-mount lens or body like Sony/Nikon/Tamron etc. has." In my experience, (good) companies listen to their customers as they evolve their product plans. People should speak up. And in fact, I think such voices have even more value in L-mount, given the number of manufacturers in the L-mount alliance. If Panasonic won't make it, perhaps Sigma or somebody else will.

So, I say, the bottom line answer to the OP is - great job! This kind of discussion needs to happen on a regular basis, and I applaud you for starting the thread.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
Botton line the answer to question of the OP and this thread title is that you bought Lumix for what is available at the moment you bought yourself into the system and for your use case , without promises of getting more lenses, but of course with hope that new stuff arrives. Other manufacturers target different users/use cases, so they manufacture different lenses for their target audience. If other systems have all the lenses and equipment you need and L-Mount has not, then you should not have bought into the L-Mount system.
Click to expand...

I think buying into a system you always have to hedge your bets on what will come along in the future. Of course, if you really need something very specific then that's different - you should buy into a system that already has it, even if that means waiting a while for it to be released. It's not the same as buying a camera and hoping for firmware updates to add features later on, for which there's no guarantee at all or even reasonable expectation in most cases. Even the biggest systems are still growing.
 
Quentinquirelino said:
No, I meant new. From time to time you can get it for under 300 € brand new. Also the lens is often kited with lumix S cameras, and you can get it like new from a kit for around 200 € very easily.
Click to expand...
I've never seen a new one for anything like that price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top