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.

Lumix 28-200

Nevyn72 said:
I just found this review, posted two days ago... Interesting part is the resolution vs aperture chart. I already wanted this lens, that hasn't lessened with this review, quite the opposite.
Photo Review

Do in mind: I mostly do video with my S5iix (and S5). I see this as a travel lens, for other situations I have better options.
Click to expand...
An interesting review. I'm noticing that reviews are not consistent. Richard Wong's review was positive, Jordan Drake's negative - for instance. I'm wondering if this is a lens with a lot of copy variation?

In terms of this review, I'm very encouraged by this:

Performance
Our Imatest tests showed the review lens to be a good performer for an extended-range zoom lens, even with the in-camera optical corrections disabled. While centre resolutions on JPEG files either met or came close to expectations for most aperture settings and measurements taken roughly mid-way between the centre and edge of the frame remained relatively high, edge softening was present throughout the focal length range.

RW2.RAW files converted into 16-bit TIFF format with Adobe Camera Raw delivered higher resolutions across the board in our tests. This is to be expected. The highest resolution measured was at f/6.3 with the 35mm focal length and diffraction only began to affect resolution from about f/11 onwards.

In essence, this lens scored Grade A ratings across all our assessment criteria. The graph of our test result below shows potential purchasers can use this lens with a fair degree of confidence in obtaining good results, whatever the focal length and aperture settings they choose.
Click to expand...

S-R28200_Res-vs-FL_graph.jpg
 
pdk42 said:
An interesting review. I'm noticing that reviews are not consistent. Richard Wong's review was positive, Jordan Drake's negative - for instance. I'm wondering if this is a lens with a lot of copy variation?
Click to expand...
Jordan Drake's portion of the PetaPixel review on video performance of the lens was very positive. It was Chris Niccols who was negative about lens sharpness although to be fair, he was reasonably positive in recognition that the 28-200 is an all-in-one travel lens so is somewhat of a bag of compromises.
 
Pete_W said:
Jordan Drake's portion of the PetaPixel review on video performance of the lens was very positive. It was Chris Niccols who was negative about lens sharpness although to be fair, he was reasonably positive in recognition that the 28-200 is an all-in-one travel lens so is somewhat of a bag of compromises.
Click to expand...
Both Jordan and Chris have a bit of a history in not being particularly positive in regards to Panasonic lenses. The Lumix S 18mm f1.8 being another.
Reviews in general tend to be rather inconsistent in their findings also, not just picking on them.
 
Markuswelder said:
Both Jordan and Chris have a bit of a history in not being particularly positive in regards to Panasonic lenses. The Lumix S 18mm f1.8 being another.
Reviews in general tend to be rather inconsistent in their findings also, not just picking on them.
Click to expand...
They will point out flaws that they find (sometimes ones that aren't present seemingly in other reviews :)) but overall especially if you listen to the podcast they are very positive generally about Panasonic lenses and bodies for video.
 
inspiredtimothy said:
They will point out flaws that they find (sometimes ones that aren't present seemingly in other reviews :)) but overall especially if you listen to the podcast they are very positive generally about Panasonic lenses and bodies for video.
Click to expand...
I've never listened to their podcasts, but yeah, they are pretty positive in regards to Panasonic video capabilities.
Although, I think it was them, that were reviewing some Fujifilm body for video, and the AF performance was absolutely atrocious. Nothing was mentioned at all, yet Panasonic got totally trashed on every single review for DFD performance. Which is kind of why I take very very very little notice of camera reviews.
 
And on much the same note, I had to laugh at the G9II review on DPreview. Most have been very complimentary of the new phase detect AF, but as someone pointed out, in their cycling test, it was really no better than the original G9. I think there's quite a bit of good old fashioned placebo going on in camera review land
 
I'm disappointed with the spec of this lens...
Just to compare:
Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD Lens (Sony E)
Filter Size 67 mm (Front)
Dimensions (ø x L) 2.91 x 4.6" / 74 x 116.8 mm
Weight 1.27 lb / 575.5 g

and panasonic:
Filter Size 67 mm (Front)
Dimensions (ø x L) 3 x 3.7" / 77.3 x 93.4 mm
Weight 14.6 oz / 413 g

Tamron is just a bit heavier and longer but way more faster with way better picture quality.
And $100 cheaper...
 
Norman said:
I'm disappointed with the spec of this lens...
Just to compare:
Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD Lens (Sony E)
Filter Size 67 mm (Front)
Dimensions (ø x L) 2.91 x 4.6" / 74 x 116.8 mm
Weight 1.27 lb / 575.5 g

and panasonic:
Filter Size 67 mm (Front)
Dimensions (ø x L) 3 x 3.7" / 77.3 x 93.4 mm
Weight 14.6 oz / 413 g

Tamron is just a bit heavier and longer but way more faster with way better picture quality.
And $100 cheaper...
Click to expand...
I sort of agree. If the Tamron lens were available in L-mount, I'd already have it.

But, I'm not sure we can say with certainty that the IQ will be "way better". It may well be - but based on all of the reviews I've seen of the Lumix 28-200 so far, the IQ is still a bit uncertain in my mind. I'm holding out for a surprise, but I suspect I'll be disappointed.

Also remember that the Tamron doesn't have OIS.
 
Last edited:
It is a lens for a different purpose.
I would not buy the Tamron, heavier, bigger and no OIS.

And for my travel video purposes the lumix might be almost perfect.

But i can imagine that the Tamron would be better suited for Paul, who shoots almost only landscape.
 
Tamron does not need OIS and relies on the body IS -it is fast. 2.8!
Panasonic - very, very slow. It must have extra OIS to keep ISO low. That gives the same extra 2 stops as Tamron already has :)
On the other side, at least what is visible, Panasonic has a huge issue with the low optical resolution on the edges and on 200mm.
probably, it is ok for video but a big issue for the rest.
 
Norman said:
heavier - extra 162 gr
bigger - 23.4 mm ...
:)
and you have 2.8 - 5.8 instead of 4.7-7.1 and - $100. Worth it?
Click to expand...
And No OIS. My S5iiX had very good stabilisation but on 200mm I would really like to have OIS (I do mostly video).
 
There are different design goals of Panasonic and Tamron et alii.

I think both have a enough know-how to design excellent optical designs.

But before you design a lens, you are sitting in a meeting room with the decision makers and designers and discus what you want to offer and why. It is always a compromise between different criteria.

You agree on a specific price goal for the end user, a budget for R&D to design the lens and the main criteria for which target group that specific lens shall be designed, with the key features etc.

Panasonic said from the beginning that they are targeting witz L-Mount the hybrid shooter with an emphasis on videography. This is an alliance and you pick the eggs which you think you are more capable than others.

As far as I can see it, all Lumix fixed focal lenses up to 100mm are designed with the videographers in mind. All have the same weight, size snd filterthread. All are very good at focus breathing.

Even the 20-60 zoom and now the 28-200 zoom have a similar size and weight. Great for videographers. That does not mean that you can not use these lenses for photography.

But it explains, why Panasonic makes different compromises for L-Mount than others with most lenses.

Tamron (and Sigma et alii) is not focused on videographers. So they make different compromises.

Pick the right tool for the job. If the Lumix 28-200 is not really what you would like to have, wait until someone else from the alliance will offer it.
 
Nevyn72 said:
It is a lens for a different purpose.
I would not buy the Tamron, heavier, bigger and no OIS.

And for my travel video purposes the lumix might be almost perfect.

But i can imagine that the Tamron would be better suited for Paul, who shoots almost only landscape.
Click to expand...
He only uses f8
 
Oíche said:
He only uses f8
Click to expand...
Definitely not... But this a travel lens. I have other lenses like the 35/50/85mm 1.8 if I want real bokah balls

What I like about this lens is that it's made for a purpose... What fit's very well for my travel trips... In need i might even do without a nd-filter, although very unlikely .
 
Nevyn72 said:
Definitely not... But this a travel lens. I have other lenses like the 35/50/85mm 1.8 if I want real bokah balls

What I like about this lens is that it's made for a purpose... What fit's very well for my travel trips... In need i might even do without a nd-filter, although very unlikely .
Click to expand...
It could have done me well today in the wind and rain in the mountains, I had the 24-105 on the S5ii and I had the 70-300 with me but I couldn't change it in the conditions. I needed more reach for the lambs, perfect photography opportunity, the classic Ireland in April with rain and lambs.

BTW both these zooms can do beautiful bokeh.

Today weather sealing and O.I.S was a must have as I was using a polariser and up to f11-f13. Obviously that Tamron is less suitable for what I was doing today and the Lumix would have been better.

I'll try and post some later in the April thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top