Lens buying advice

[Ericopp]

I’ve recently sold quite a few lot of Fuji gear to move completely into the full frame LUMIX lineup. It started with an s9 as an everyday carry camera, but liked the raw files and log video a ton. I also had a Fuji x-h2s video autofocus issue that cost me a re-shoot with a client.

My new kit: S9, s1iie, 18-40, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8

My paid use case: it’s not my full time income, I do about 1 job per month. Senior portraits, headshots, corporate or church talking heads or interviews, hybrid event coverage.
My personal use case: landscape and travel. I do lots of local hiking, and a couple backpacking trips per year. I print a lot of images.

I still have about $1500 in credit from my Fuji gear. After a local vacation and doing a senior shoot last week with the 35 and 50, I really miss telephoto. I purposefully waited to see if the solution would present itself after use, and here are what I’m considering.

LUMIX 24-105mm - image quality looks great, and I think this could live on my s1iie for lots of my needs. 100mm at f4 would cover my desire for compression in portraits, handle my video jobs, and give me a versatile zoom for my personal stuff.

LUMIX 28-200mm + a portrait prime - lighter and versatile zoom range could be great for my leisure, and an 85 or 135 paired with my 35 would be a better 2 lens setup for seniors.

Sigma 28-105mm Art - image quality looks amazing…but I don’t think I’ll ever take it hiking. If I did more pro work it’d be a no brainer.

I also have a nice set of Kase Wolverine magnetic filters (CPL, ND, VND, and 1/4 mist), but they’re in 72mm, so could only use them on the 28-200 and primes.

Any thoughts on any of these? Will my prints suffer using a 28-200? What affordable portrait primes do you recommend? Do I just need to stop waffling and make a decision?

 

[xaviergut]

100mm at f4 would cover my desire for compression in portraits,

I have used the Lumix 100mm f/2.8 macro for portaits and it was very good. The Lumix 85mm f/1.8 is very good too. And for hiking you already have the 18-40mm, right? I don't know how much weight you want to carry, but another option I you only want to bring one lens could be the Sigma 20-200mm. There are many examples of very good photos made with this lens in this forum taken by Paul @pdk42 .

 

[Ericopp]

I have used the Lumix 100mm f/2.8 macro for portaits and it was very good. The Lumix 85mm f/1.8 is very good too. And for hiking you already have the 18-40mm, right? I don't know how much weight you want to carry, but another option I you only want to bring one lens could be the Sigma 20-200mm. There are many examples of very good photos made with this lens in this forum taken by Paul @pdk42 .

I hadn't considered the 100mm macro....that's really intriguing. I'll look into that one a bit more.

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

The 28-200 gets soft over 170mm or so, but if you stop it down to F11 it does OK.

How big do you print?

The Sigma 20-200 should also be on your list.

 

[Ericopp]

The 28-200 gets soft over 170mm or so, but if you stop it down to F11 it does OK.

How big do you print?

The Sigma 20-200 should also be on your list.

The largest I’ve done is a 20x30 for our bedroom, I think it was at 150 or 200 dpi. That was from a 26mp Fuji sensor and a 16-55 mk ii zoom lens, so a pretty sharp lens. I did see a few good reviews on the signs 20-200mm. FroKnowsPhoto really likes it, and he’s my not my favorite creator but I trust his lens reviews.

 

[Pete_W]

Any thoughts on any of these?

Of the lenses you mentioned, I only have the Lumix 24-105mm.

It's my most used lens primarily because the focal range is so versatile. I've found it to be great for what I shoot and the dual stabilisation you get on a Lumix body is really good.

 

[Snowlexx]

If sharpness is important to you, then the 28-200 is not the best choice.
I have it, and it’s my most frequently used lens. Besides the obvious advantages, such as the focal length range and weight, few people pay attention to another advantage — this lens has a very decent blur pattern, which is usually not typical for lenses of this class.

• Panasonic DC-S5M2
• ƒ/6.6
• 159mm
• 1/250s
• ISO 400

I also use the Meike 85/1.8 Pro for portraits — it’s a fairly good lens for a very modest budget.

• Panasonic DC-S5M2
• ƒ/1.8
• 85mm
• 1/30s
• ISO 100

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

The largest I’ve done is a 20x30 for our bedroom, I think it was at 150 or 200 dpi. That was from a 26mp Fuji sensor and a 16-55 mk ii zoom lens, so a pretty sharp lens. I did see a few good reviews on the signs 20-200mm. FroKnowsPhoto really likes it, and he’s my not my favorite creator but I trust his lens reviews.

Yes, I had the 16-55 as well (mk i). When I transitioned to L-mount, via the first-gen S1R, I found the pixel-level detail level of the 24-105 to be comparable to the 16-55 on a 24 MP body. And that was on a 47 MP sensor. So I do think the 24-105 will treat you well in that regard.

As Snowlexx said, the 28-200 isn’t the best lens if you like to pixel peep (as I do). But I’ve learned not to care when I use that lens. But yes, the 20-200 seems to be the better lens in the overlapping focal lengths, for the most part - especially for landscape where sharpness reigns supreme. It is soft on the wide end, as I understand it. But then if you have an UW zoom to cover the wider end, it’s not such a big deal. But, again referencing Snowlexx, I don’t know how the two lenses compare from a blur pattern perspective. For some kinds of images that is more important than absolute sharpness.

From my perspective, I’ve decided to standardize on Panasonic zooms, since I want the twist direction of the zoom barrel to be the same on all my lenses. I also think that Panasonic is more consistent from a controls layout perspective than Sigma across their respective lens lineups. And, since I don’t think of my superzoom as an "instrument of acutance," I don’t care if the Sigma is a little shaper. If I want a highly detailed image I have other lenses for that. But if I could only have one zoom lens in that focal length range, I’d probably pick the Sigma. Probably.

 

[Mmichaelhh1234]

I tested the 24-105 f/4 against my 24-60 f/2.8 and it held up great. I could not really differentiate but I decided to keep the 24-60 because it’s faster. However, I have the 100-500 which is not that heavy but still not something I would recommend to you. I also have the 100 macro which is great for lightweight and compact. I also love its images for video b roll mainly, but it’s a fantastic lens and would be great for portraits.
Obviously a zoom is ideal for travel and reach is nice there also, however, if you consider that as being of equal importance to your portrait photography, the 24-105 is a pretty decent sweet spot except like most lumix lenses that aren’t 67mm, your going to get 77.

The 100/2.8 is 67mm but there’s a long step from 50-100, so probably not wise to buy a lens based upon your current filter size.

I would stay with a native lumix lens and when I have the 100 on, it’s good for that one thing, and the focal length is limiting; wanting for wider perspective at times. After all, the way we generally see the world is arguably around 50mm.
All that said, I would absolutely buy the 24-105.
1. Great range for travel
2. Flexibility and great video capabilities
3. Decent f/4 minimum aperture
4. Macro capabilities
5. Great image quality
6. Reasonable size and weight
7. Image stabilization
8. It’s sexy
9. It’s native
And 10. Your lumix cameras can turn it into a great reaching telephoto giving you 24-328mm when using hybrid zoom taking photos in the 98% use case to be viewed on a screen that supports 3-8mp.

Oh, it’s actually comparably priced in the used market against the 100 macro. Even less I think.

 

[pdk42]

After having two Panasonic lenses fail on me, I now try to buy other brands (esp Sigma) if I possibly can. If you are not aware of my Panasonic lens woes, read on …

I had a 70-200 f4 that just completely died from one use to another (complete electronics failure), and then my 24-105 started making buzzing sounds during which photos were heavily blurred so it was clear the OIS was dying.

Both lenses were outside warranty and since Panasonic offer no spare parts for their lenses, the result was two expensive paperweights sitting on my desk.

Then there are many long threads on DPR and other forums about breakdown of cement within composite elements leading to fungus like fogging in many of their higher end lenses.

My attempts to get Panasonic to offer some goodwill for my lens failures resulted in derisory discounts on full official price. People with the fogging problems also found that Panasonic did nothing to redress the situation.

So all in all, I now have very little trust in Panasonic lenses at all. I still have a number of them (and they perform well), but when they die, if there is a Sigma alternative, then that’s what I’ll replace them with.

 

[Mmichaelhh1234]

After having two Panasonic lenses fail on me, I now try to buy other brands (esp Sigma) if I possibly can. If you are not aware of my Panasonic lens woes, read on …

I had a 70-200 f4 that just completely died from one use to another (complete electronics failure), and then my 24-105 started making buzzing sounds during which photos were heavily blurred so it was clear the OIS was dying.

Both lenses were outside warranty and since Panasonic offer no spare parts for their lenses, the result was two expensive paperweights sitting on my desk.

Then there are many long threads on DPR and other forums about breakdown of cement within composite elements leading to fungus like fogging in many of their higher end lenses.

My attempts to get Panasonic to offer some goodwill for my lens failures resulted in derisory discounts on full official price. People with the fogging problems also found that Panasonic did nothing to redress the situation.

So all in all, I now have very little trust in Panasonic lenses at all. I still have a number of them (and they perform well), but when they die, if there is a Sigma alternative, then that’s what I’ll replace them with.

I just looked up the two lenses that have been known to have issues, the 70 to 200 F4 not being one of them although I do have that lens, but the 50mm 1.4 and the 24-105 f/4 I do have and are known from the period between 2019 and 2022 to have issues with some kind of fogging or delamination; Purportedly.

The 24-105 is from 2019 and my 50/1.4 is from 2001, both falling into the window where LUMIX has reported issues.

I hope my lenses don’t have issues and so far they have been great.

Maybe someone else can comment on this.

 

[Hythloday]

Both lenses were outside warranty

When bought new, large Dutch camera shops give a warranty of five years. This reduces the risk of having a paperweight within 5 years.

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

I just looked up the two lenses that have been known to have issues, the 70 to 200 F4 not being one of them although I do have that lens, but the 50mm 1.4 and the 24-105 f/4 I do have and are known from the period between 2019 and 2022 to have issues with some kind of fogging or delamination; Purportedly.

The 24-105 is from 2019 and my 50/1.4 is from 2001, both falling into the window where LUMIX has reported issues.

I hope my lenses don’t have issues and so far they have been great.

Maybe someone else can comment on this.

It sounds like you know about the fogging issue. It’s a known issue, and got a lot of attention a year ago or so. Panasonic helped some folks out, even though they were out of warranty, but not everyone. I’ve not heard much on this issue lately, so perhaps all the lenses that were going to fail in that mode, have failed. Not sure.

Paul had a different issue with his 70-200F4, which he purchased used, and failed outright. Panasonic refused to fix it, and offered him a discount on a new one. There are other stories as well.

Everyone has to choose how they respond to this history in terms of their future lens purchases. I’ve decided it’s not going to affect my purchasing decisions, and I have in fact bought a used 70-200F4 myself, which I adore. As well as a new 24-60, and will almost certainly buy a 100-500. There is risk no matter who you purchase from, and I’ve decided to buy the lenses that suit my needs. Note that I have nothing against Sigma and heartily recommend them as well. I have a number of their primes, and the 28-45 as well. But, like I said, I’m going to buy the lenses that best suit my needs and if I get unlucky, oh well.

Life is short, get what you want. Chances are, your lenses will work fine, regardless of the manufacturer.