RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Why would you give up dat much versatility? Out of curiosity I’m contemplating to keep both first.
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.
Rumors Panasonic 24-60 f2.8 or f2.0
- Thread starter Quentinquirelino
- Start date
Vale46
Well-Known Member
Because F4 sometimes is a little limiting for me and the 24-70 2.8 were to heavy.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
I pre-ordered it. The 24/1.8 will go, als the 24/2.8 is fast enough. Instead of the 24/1.8 I am contemplating go for the 100/2.8 macro. Also to copy old slides with it (1:1).
That leave the 24-105. Not sure. I really like my copy on 24mp and it is also very nice to have around as a one do it all lens. It’s so damned versatile. Love to walk around with it without a bag pack.
But then If I have the 24-60, which I expect to be “much” better as the 24-105, then I might sell the 24-105 and buy a 28-200 for zoom fun. For fun.
That leave the 24-105. Not sure. I really like my copy on 24mp and it is also very nice to have around as a one do it all lens. It’s so damned versatile. Love to walk around with it without a bag pack.
But then If I have the 24-60, which I expect to be “much” better as the 24-105, then I might sell the 24-105 and buy a 28-200 for zoom fun. For fun.
GeorgeHudetz
Well-Known Member
...and this is how it starts...
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
starts what
the accumlation of lenses already started longggg time ago. Today I looked at the Photography blog examples again but this time not on a ipad but on my pc with a 42" 4K monitor, full screen to max 100% (what I would normally do, I rarely pixelpeep to higher percentages). And it looked even nicer. Together with the other samples I've seen I stand by my choice of the 24-60 over the 28-70. At least it can go a bit wider and and it zooms the right way and it is fully weather sealed, and makes the 24/1.8 obsolete, and if it is really good, even the 35 and 50 dare I say.
I have a 2 week vacation trip half juni or a week later (destination still unkown, with a roadtrip to Tuscany as backup) with my son coming up to celebrate finishing high school. So I "need" the 24-105 anyway if the 24-60 is not in time. Altough I have enough lenses to have a photography blast anyway
GeorgeHudetz
Well-Known Member
Just a joke about the 28-200. Starts for fun, but then you realize how liberating it is to have such a broad focal range in one lens, and then you realize that the IQ problems at the long end disappear when you downsample for social media, then you just keep using it, LOL. In all seriousness, when you are looking for top-tier IQ, you will reach for another lens, but the 28-200 is addictive for me.starts what
Sounds great. They are all good lenses. And, I agree with you about the zoom direction thing. I'm eager to hear more about the 24-60.
It's been a long time since I've been in Tuscany - in fact, it was back when they still used the Lira for currency. Things were so affordable in Italy (as an American) back then. It is of course a beautiful area that reminds me of my native Oregon. But with older buildings.I have a 2 week vacation trip half juni or a week later (destination still unkown, with a roadtrip to Tuscany as backup) with my son coming up to celebrate finishing high school. So I "need" the 24-105 anyway if the 24-60 is not in time. Altough I have enough lenses to have a photography blast anyway
Nevyn72
LMF-Patron Gold
That lens than a harsh destiny.... Is than sold for the third time
in his short life...(Cameranu, myself and than you)
But we all agree.... It is such a nice lens
Worse: might be replaced for the second time for the 28-200
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Yes, maybe. Maybe not.That lens than a harsh destiny.... Is than sold for the third time
(Cameranu, myself and than you)
But we all agree.... It is such a nice lens
Worse: might be replaced for the second time for the 28-200
It is a very good one! I don’t have to rush it at all. And I think I used it a lot more more often then you ever did
I would not pick the 28-200 without a good 2.8 standard zoom starting <= 24, or as only lens. Or at all.
Bit off topic and more about why.
At the moment I’m rethinking my lens strategy, and therefore the tryouts with the 28-70/2.8 + 24/1.8 (all basically free of charge. Some postage costs.)
1) In a mirrorless camera a faster (prime) lens is not only beneficial to the picture quality but also to the experience. As soon as it gets darker outside (after sunset) or inside, the evf gets a bit grainy and laggy, I really don’t like that. Yes compared to dslr you can brighten it. So a 2.8 or faster lens will always be beneficial using the camera whatever f-stop you use after composing. The 28-200 will be way worse in this regard except for 28mm compared to an f4 lens.
2) Although I really love primes I don’t use them often because of my laziness and the good quality of the zooms. However I know that my pictures get a lot better if I am using just a prime. Because I have to think how to make it work instead of trying different zoom from the same vantage point. Sometimes I have to force myself to walk around wirh a prime. And looking back to pictures taken with different primes, the best pictures, to my eye, taken with a prime was with my GR3x. 40mm equivalent. Why ? because it was hard for me to adept. In the end I gave in and got the GR3 with my beloved 28mm.
3) I got the 24/1.8 because of the 28-70. Why not immediately a 24-70 dg dn II ? Because of size. Outside 28mm compared to 24mm is not that big of a deal contrary to some believe. Inside however it does. So if the 24-70 is big (82mm front) and heavy, for me an even faster 24 + lightweight 28-70 made a lot of sense. The 24-60 however addresses the size issue, giving in 1 1/3 of a stop at 24mm, and 10mm in the long end. But in one package that zooms in the right direction and fully weather sealed.
4) where do I go from here, I think about adding the 100/2.8 which will be very nice to have as a faster short telephoto. I can use it to copy old film slides with 1:1 macro. If I want to have more reach I can take it with the 24-60.
I’m not sure if I need the 35/1.8 or the 50/1.8 either, they are for fun and small DoF. 50mm is like my GR3x, very difficult to use for me, but rewarding in the end if it clicks.
I did like the 24/1.8 at a conceptual level. That lens is to my eye to compromised for photography, and film only. The bokeh is often too harsh, and the outside part of the image is wide open softer then the 24-105. You need to stop it down anyway. It was ok, and good enough for me, but I don’t have hard feelings to let it go either. It was brilliant in the dark. If I can get a good deal on a 18/1.8 I might do it. It will complement the 24-60 with less weight and a lot faster then the 16-35.
So 18 / 35 / 50 / 100 primes and 16-35 / 24-60 / 70-300 and really no need for a 24-105 or 28-200. Except only if I want to walk around with just lens and body without a bag with an extra lens.
Remind: I will never ever lug all around. I pick one, two or max 3 for a day out. 3 only with light lenses. So the three zoom lenses would not end up together in a day out bag, too heavy.
Nevyn72
LMF-Patron Gold
I agree, I also have a lens strategy, depending on what I'm doing.
1) Video interviews:
35mm, 50mm, 85mm, all F1.8
2) Vacation photo + video (including vlogging):
Sigma 16-28 F2.8 + Lumix 28-200
3) Street photography: for now the S5iiX with 16-28mm, on the future perhaps the S9 + 18-40
(Wheny wouldn't use it).
That's why I sold the 24-105, i didn't have use for it. I used it for a wedding and interviews, but I have rhe primes for that now.
Actually I also use the 20-60 not anymore... But yea won't sell for a good price.
1) Video interviews:
35mm, 50mm, 85mm, all F1.8
2) Vacation photo + video (including vlogging):
Sigma 16-28 F2.8 + Lumix 28-200
3) Street photography: for now the S5iiX with 16-28mm, on the future perhaps the S9 + 18-40
(Wheny wouldn't use it).
That's why I sold the 24-105, i didn't have use for it. I used it for a wedding and interviews, but I have rhe primes for that now.
Actually I also use the 20-60 not anymore... But yea won't sell for a good price.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
I’ve been to mainland Italy up to and including Pompeii. But Tuscany is a black spot in my Italy travels. Have been in Rome, Naples, Milan, Genua, Bergamo, Venice, Pescara, and even Triest.It's been a long time since I've been in Tuscany - in fact, it was back when they still used the Lira for currency. Things were so affordable in Italy (as an American) back then. It is of course a beautiful area that reminds me of my native Oregon. But with older buildings.
In USA:
Oregon is the only western state in mainland USA where I’ve not been. Really would love to go there someday.
Actually the list of States in mainland USA where I’ve not been is shorter then where I have been. But those states where I’ve not been are in the middle like from Minnesota to Louisiana, and Wisconsin to Mississippi. Add some south east states as well, except for Florida and Georgia (Atlanta). North Carolina (Charlotte) was the most southern state I visited from a round trip starting in nyc. North east I’ve been together with eastern Canada
For Canada the same, have been in British Columbia, Alberta, Yukon, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island. And the through the north east of USA back to Toronto. Missing out on the middle states
Last edited: