pdk42
Moderator
I had that lens years ago when I ran Canon gear. It was a good performer.
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.
Sold my 70-300, help me chose a replacement!
- Thread starter pdk42
- Start date
Quentinquirelino
Well-Known Member
Ha, maybe. But I only give my honest thoughts on what I know from your posts.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Did you pre-order the lens already ? I'm contemplating to do so... or wait until some user reviews will come online. I have no idea if it will get sold out immediately in April or how many people are waiting in line to get this lens.
pdk42
Moderator
I've put a "soft" pre-order in (i.e. I've not paid anything!). But I've been looking at example raw files from the DPReview site and also at MTF charts, both of which tell me that it's not a particularly sharp lens. Look at these:
Those edge figures are pretty weak, hovering at around 1000 lpmm, and actually much worse than the centre at f22, which is well into severe diffraction territory.
And look at this 100% edge crop from one of the DPR samples:
Translate that to some foliage at the edge of the frame and I think it'll look like mush. But, it's in poor light, hand held, ISO 1250 - so maybe it's an unfair conclusion.
Or this one from the Digital Camera World review - 28mm, f4, ISO 100:
Not only very mushy, but there's purple fringing aplenty!
It's strange looking at reviews because most are hugely positive, including about sharpness. The PetaPixel review (Jordan & Chris) is an outlier, where they basically say it's very compromised so far as sharpness is concerned. My sense is that most reviewers are "creators" who are judging it mostly for video where I'm sure its sharpness is absolutely fine. But I think for photography on a hi-res sensor its limitations will be all too obvious. I really hope I'm wrong, but until I can do some "proper" tests I won't know. It's annoying that all these samples are just random snapshots - ISO all over the place, lack of clarity on where the focus point is, handheld, ...
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
All the samples I've seen haven taken with S5ii(x), I think on your S1R things might fall indeed apart. But a 7x zoom won't be without it flaws, it's the price you pay for convienence. The samples on preview (have not checked the raws) on first glance looked promising full screen on a 42.5" 4K monitor at 100%
I don't understand why you've no need for the 70-300 but would use 70-200 and 100-400, it makes little sense. I don't think you need any of them above 105mm judging by what you say. I think you've just got LBA 
It should be easy to sell the 70-300 as it seems they are hens teeth, nowhere has them in stock and I never got mine. I can't remember ever waiting so long on any product ever and why?
It should be easy to sell the 70-300 as it seems they are hens teeth, nowhere has them in stock and I never got mine. I can't remember ever waiting so long on any product ever and why?
In Germany you get the 70-300 everywhere.
But there were also the great deals only in the UK. Maybe they just sold too many of these kit-deals and now have problems to get more lenses directed to the UK. The other countries will not give their share to the UK and if lenses have to be shipped from Japan, there is still the issue with the Huthis who shoot on the ships.
Blame the Houtis
I'd imagine they fly the light stuff in? I've no idea but they're blaming Big Mac prices on the Panama canal, but Paul is right... It's Brexit
Richard Wong
Well-Known Member
Paul, the DPR sample looks a bit out of focus to me. But no matter what If you want a very sharp lens, i think the 28-200 isn't for you.
All-in-one lens by nature is a huge compromise in terms of optics design. Even the sharpest all-in-one lenses I've tested are just more or less as good as the kit lens it replaces at the same focal length. Those all-in-one are also quite a bit bigger and heavier than this tiny Lumix 28-200.
No matter what brand, you almost certainly will get better image quality with multiple zoom lenses as each lens only needs to be optimised for a smaller focal length range.
All-in-one lens by nature is a huge compromise in terms of optics design. Even the sharpest all-in-one lenses I've tested are just more or less as good as the kit lens it replaces at the same focal length. Those all-in-one are also quite a bit bigger and heavier than this tiny Lumix 28-200.
No matter what brand, you almost certainly will get better image quality with multiple zoom lenses as each lens only needs to be optimised for a smaller focal length range.
CharlesH
LMF-Patron Gold
I shoot quite a bit of video and the last thing I want is lens blur. If you can see it in those DPR shots you will see it in video. And imagine with the S5IIx if you shoot with 6K and zoom it in to 4K in post the blur will really stand out.
Thanks for looking closer at the 28-200. It's attractive because of the small size. But for now I have low expectations.
I thought Lens Buyers Addiction/Anonymous was well known, maybe more in the USA?
I think some are forgetting the 28-200 is most suitable for when you definitely can't or simply don't want to change lenses or in general are not a corner pixel peeper and happy with the central sharpness which the test chart shows minimum 2000 level depending on aperture. I'm thinking of people needing a lens for a safari trip or something similar and not a pro landscaper.
Personally I like the 24-105 and constant f4 with the 70-300 somewhere out there. The IQ, reach, faster speed, better bokeh, better sunstars and far better ghosting performance can't be replaced by a brilliant little super zoom.
RuleOfThirds
Well-Known Member
Why I would replace the 70-300 for 28-200 (or most probably add, you can't have too much lenses can you ) is :
a) when traveling I don't want the bulk and extra heft
b) also when traveling, I have my family with me. They are not so patient waiting for me to change lenses all the time. That is annoying for them
c) In case when you already know that lens changes are not possible because of climate/location (i.e. beach)
In short term for me I guess that 28-200 is optically good enough although a hefty price. But why I am really interested in Paul's testing is to see how this lens behaves on a high megapixel sensor for future proofing. If I would go down this route to add such versatility to my lens kit I still would replace the 70-300 for a 100-400 or 150-600. But anyway I have limited hobby funds.
) is :a) when traveling I don't want the bulk and extra heft
b) also when traveling, I have my family with me. They are not so patient waiting for me to change lenses all the time. That is annoying for them
c) In case when you already know that lens changes are not possible because of climate/location (i.e. beach)
In short term for me I guess that 28-200 is optically good enough although a hefty price. But why I am really interested in Paul's testing is to see how this lens behaves on a high megapixel sensor for future proofing. If I would go down this route to add such versatility to my lens kit I still would replace the 70-300 for a 100-400 or 150-600. But anyway I have limited hobby funds.