Which lenses are you missing?

[GeorgeHudetz]

A modern, light, variable aperture 24-105. Would slot perfectly between the 14-28 & 100-500 (or Sigma 100-400).

Nikon just introduced such a lens - 24-105 f/4.0-7.1. 350 grams! It has the control-ring control, like the LUMIX 24-60. And, as far as I can tell, it does not have OIS, which is just further reinforcement that modern IBIS is “good enough” for out to 105m and perhaps 200mm. At least, the lens manufacturers seem to thinks so recently.

 

[Pete_W]

A modern, light, variable aperture 24-105. Would slot perfectly between the 14-28 & 100-500 (or Sigma 100-400).

Nikon just introduced such a lens - 24-105 f/4.0-7.1. 350 grams! It has the control-ring control, like the LUMIX 24-60. And, as far as I can tell, it does not have OIS, which is just further reinforcement that modern IBIS is “good enough” for out to 105m and perhaps 200mm. At least, the lens manufacturers seem to thinks so recently.

This is a great idea!
I love my 24-105 F/4 but would like a lighter option. The variable aperture would suit me fine. I have no issue with variable apertures on my 14-28 and 70-300.

 

[sergun80]

I also saw the Nikon announcement. It's a great compact 350-gram zoom with a price tag of $550. But the nikonists themselves are indignant about this release and talk about it as a plastic plug, they say they already have an excellent 24-120/4))

 

[xaviergut]

I also saw the Nikon announcement. It's a great compact 350-gram zoom with a price tag of $550. But the nikonists themselves are indignant about this release and talk about it as a plastic plug, they say they already have an excellent 24-120/4))

It joins:
24-50 f4-6.3
24-70 f4
24-70 2.8 (i and ii)
28-75 2.8
24-120 f4
24-200 f4-6.3
28-400 f4-8

I think the Z mount is already a bit saturated... It has macro capabilities and will eventually become affordable. And I think it's larger than the Lumix 28-200mm.

In any case, I think that cheap and lightweight things generally sell, but that plastic mount gives me the creeps... hahaha

 

[The Lens Shouter]

Insanity is wishing for a better lens, receiving it and expecting better results but not finding them or finding different faults, then finding yourself back at square one wishing for a better lens?
Boy do I know that feeling....

 

[pdk42]

After my experience with the Panasonic 70-200 f4, I'm going to be taking a good look at Nikon !

 

[PJD]

After my experience with the Panasonic 70-200 f4, I'm going to be taking a good look at Nikon !

I’m sure you’ll make the best decision for you, because you seem to be the kind of person who does a LOT of research.

I wonder if Nikon (and Canon, if you research them too) provides convenient & cost-effective repair of their current & recent camera gear, if they offer extended warranties (for free or low-cost), how their cameras & lenses compare in terms of image quality cost/weight/size, etc.? Jeez, sounds like a lot of work!

And since it all gets down to money & time, is completely changing systems cheaper & less time-consuming than, for example, “simply” buying a new/used L-mount lens to replace your dead LUMIX 70-200mm zoom?

Gives me a headache just thinking about it.

 

[CharlesH]

for example, “simply” buying a new/used L-mount lens to replace your dead LUMIX 70-200mm zoom?

KEH in the US has two of these available, $913 - $979.

 

[Pete_W]

After my experience with the Panasonic 70-200 f4, I'm going to be taking a good look at Nikon !

While I am sure it's super annoying Paul, I wonder if one dead lens is enough of a sample to resolve that the brand is too risky and to sell all your gear? Given that you purchased it used, there's no telling what may have happened to it before you acquired it.

Unfortunately a lot of products in many industries are considered uneconomical to repair these days. Perhaps labour costs are just too high. In which case the manufacturers probably should offer better replacement deals to keep customers onside.

 

[pdk42]

I’m sure you’ll make the best decision for you, because you seem to be the kind of person who does a LOT of research.

I wonder if Nikon (and Canon, if you research them too) provides convenient & cost-effective repair of their current & recent camera gear, if they offer extended warranties (for free or low-cost), how their cameras & lenses compare in terms of image quality cost/weight/size, etc.? Jeez, sounds like a lot of work!

And since it all gets down to money & time, is completely changing systems cheaper & less time-consuming than, for example, “simply” buying a new/used L-mount lens to replace your dead LUMIX 70-200mm zoom?

Gives me a headache just thinking about it.

I'm sure I'll calm down. I've done too much system switching in my time and I don't want to do it again.

I think I'll just sulk over the dead 70-200 and survive with my new 20-200. If one day I feel I need a fast 70-200 then I'll buy the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. I was sorely tempted to buy it when I got the 70-200. Image quality is stellar; probably better than the 70-200 f4. On top of that, I have more trust in Sigma lenses now.

However, I was sort of thinking "perhaps, maybe" about the Lumix 100-500, but I won't go near that now.

 

[CharlesH]

However, I was sort of thinking "perhaps, maybe" about the Lumix 100-500, but I won't go near that now.

And this has reminded me to register my new 100-500; I haven't done that yet.

 

[HarisO]

It’s a shame that the 5 year warranty program is a product of this year, because it would have been godsent in such cases.

 

[xaviergut]

After my experience with the Panasonic 70-200 f4, I'm going to be taking a good look at Nikon !

Well, many photographers own several systems at the same time. I still have my Nikon Df, which I'll never sell, because that sensor is magical, and I've been keeping an eye on the Nikon Zf since it came out, because the final image quality is very good.

For landscapes, I wouldn't opt for a stacked or semi-stacked sensor; that is, I'd rule out the Z9, Z8, and Z6iii. But for low-light situations, the Zf and the new Z5ii are very good, and if you want resolution, there's always the Z7ii with its 45.7 megapixels. Even all the previous models are good for landscapes and are now very affordable: Z5, Z6, Z6ii, or Z7. The 24-70mm f/4 also seems to be very good and in expensive

 

[Jonathan-Mac]

Well, many photographers own several systems at the same time. I still have my Nikon Df, which I'll never sell, because that sensor is magical, and I've been keeping an eye on the Nikon Zf since it came out, because the final image quality is very good.

For landscapes, I wouldn't opt for a stacked or semi-stacked sensor; that is, I'd rule out the Z9, Z8, and Z6iii. But for low-light situations, the Zf and the new Z5ii are very good, and if you want resolution, there's always the Z7ii with its 45.7 megapixels. Even all the previous models are good for landscapes and are now very affordable: Z5, Z6, Z6ii, or Z7. The 24-70mm f/4 also seems to be very good and in expensive

My understanding is that it's just the Z6III and older that lose some dynamic range to get that extra readout speed, other sensors are better.

 

[pdk42]

Well, many photographers own several systems at the same time. I still have my Nikon Df, which I'll never sell, because that sensor is magical, and I've been keeping an eye on the Nikon Zf since it came out, because the final image quality is very good.

For landscapes, I wouldn't opt for a stacked or semi-stacked sensor; that is, I'd rule out the Z9, Z8, and Z6iii. But for low-light situations, the Zf and the new Z5ii are very good, and if you want resolution, there's always the Z7ii with its 45.7 megapixels. Even all the previous models are good for landscapes and are now very affordable: Z5, Z6, Z6ii, or Z7. The 24-70mm f/4 also seems to be very good and in expensive

In fact I had a dalliance with Nikon Z - a Z7 with 24-70 f4 and a 14-30. Both were excellent lenses. I really missed the zebras on live view though and there were a few other things about the camera’s operation that I wasn’t wild about. But there is a workaround for the zebra problem now and the later bodies have fixed some of the earlier limitations so I’d probably get on well with the Z7ii. The 24-120 looks an excellent landscape lens.

 

[GeorgeHudetz]

I also saw the Nikon announcement. It's a great compact 350-gram zoom with a price tag of $550. But the nikonists themselves are indignant about this release and talk about it as a plastic plug, they say they already have an excellent 24-120/4))

Yes, I’ve been watching the responses as well. My only comment is that there can be a lot of elitism & gatekeeping in the photographic community as a whole. I mean, if it helps get people onto the Z platform, what’s not to like about it?

But, getting back to L-mount, the way I look at it is that if Sigma can make a 20-200 that weighs 550g and does decently well for landscape, then it seems that a light, variable aperture 24-105 should also be very doable. Perhaps it needs to weight 450 grams instead of 350 to match the IQ of the 14-28, etc. If so, fine. But the existing 24-105 - while an excellent early lens for L-mount - was designed before many of the advancements that have occurred in recent years in terms of keeping lens weight down. Probably a good time for a redesign, or perhaps a complimentary lens.