Panasonic S Pro 70-200mm F/4

[ron777]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Received the above lens early this morning and have been taking some test shots with it mounted to the S1R.  It's not a lightweight, but despite the extra 2" in length, it doesn't feel that much heavier than the Leica 24-90mm when it is sitting on the camera.  But here's shocker, preliminary images—no technical measurements here—viewed as RAW files at 100% mag in Capture One Pro 12.3, reveals that at 90mm, the S Pro lens is sharper than the 24-90.  The images were taken handheld, in low light and the required ISO was 6400 for both and, of course. both at same aperture.  It is, however, possible that the S Pro's OIS combined with the camera's IBIS may have contributed to the sharper images.  More extensive testing is in order, but the initial findings are encouraging.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ron777]

A brief addition to the ongoing testing of the 70-200mm F/4.  I managed to find a patch of sunlit landscape to photograph this afternoon and went through the entire focal range ... Panasonic has really done a good job with this beast, as it is sharp and contrasty throughout its range.  Still more to test under varied lighting conditions but, so far, it appears to be a keeper.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Don't tempt me.

I held one yesterday. It's biggish but vastly more portable than the 90-280. I seems a weird focal length to pair with a 24-105 on the initial release. So a 24-70 will be coming, I suppose. FWIW at 90mm the 90-280 is also sharper than the 24-90. It seems that 90mm is ever so slightly the weak point on the Vario Elmar.

Gordon

[Stuart Richardson]

For reference, the 30-90mm zoom for the S is also weaker on the long end...I think it is probably Leica's design intention...sacrifice a little on the long end of their general zooms, as more often then not they are used for portraits at that length so edge to edge sharpness is not quite as critical. That does not turn out to be my usage case, but it is common enough for people using the lenses for more general purposes.

[ron777]

Interesting. My initial impression of the 70-200mm is that it is sharp at each focal length. I have yet to encounter any real variability but it is still in the early stages of evaluation.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

1 hour ago, ron777 said:

Interesting. My initial impression of the 70-200mm is that it is sharp at each focal length. I have yet to encounter any real variability but it is still in the early stages of evaluation.

Leica's 90-280 also has little variation. It seems for some reason that medium tele zooms can be more consistent than the wider standard zoom. This is also the case with Canon and Nikons DSLR offerings. Sony's GM zooms seem to be a bit more consistent in the mid zoom range but I don't particularly like the blur. Mind you, I don't think the 24-90 is "bad" at 90mm, unlike the S zoom which is poor in the corners, even stopped down. The 24-90 is very usable at 90 and improves stopped down. It's just the 90-280 is better and a stop faster at 90mm.

Gordon

[ron777]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would like to own the 90-280 but for the variety of imaging that I do it would be a seldom used extravagance . I actually thought that the  long end of the 24-90 was very good until I’d received the S Pro lens . But in their own right, without a side by side, they’re both very good. I was just surprised by the price/quality ratio of the Panasonic lens.

[AlanYWM]

5 hours ago, ron777 said:

Would like to own the 90-280 but for the variety of imaging that I do it would be a seldom used extravagance . I actually thought that the  long end of the 24-90 was very good until I’d received the S Pro lens . But in their own right, without a side by side, they’re both very good. I was just surprised by the price/quality ratio of the Panasonic lens.

Thanks for the honest feedback on this Panasonic zoom lens vs the Leica. Much appreciated.

[helged]

8 hours ago, ron777 said:

Would like to own the 90-280 but for the variety of imaging that I do it would be a seldom used extravagance . I actually thought that the  long end of the 24-90 was very good until I’d received the S Pro lens . But in their own right, without a side by side, they’re both very good. I was just surprised by the price/quality ratio of the Panasonic lens.

It is correct that the SL 24-90 is not as bitingly sharp/high resokution towards 90mm as at the shorter focal lengths. This does not mean that the 24-90 is weak at the long end, but you (may) see the difference if you compared the 24-90 at 90mm with the best of the best 90mm out there, like the SL 90 Cron or the SL 90-280 @90mm (I can not talk about the Pana S Pro, but it is good to hear that it is an excellent performer!). 

[frame-it]

13 minutes ago, helged said:

It is correct that the SL 24-90 is not as bitingly sharp/high resokution towards 90mm as at the shorter focal lengths. This does not mean that the 24-90 is weak at the long end, but you (may) see the difference if you compared the 24-90 at 90mm with the best of the best 90mm out there, like the SL 90 Cron or the SL 90-280 @90mm (I can not talk about the Pana S Pro, but it is good to hear that it is an excellent performer!). 

doesn't that mean its weak ?

[helged]

41 minutes ago, frame-it said:

doesn't that mean its weak ?

Depends on the eyes that see, I guess... I have used the 24-90 since it was announced, and it compares favourably to most primes, which is quite something. And it is the single best 24mm lens I have tested when it comes to astro photography (aberration, astigmatism, coma, etc.) into the corners and wide open. Quite imoressive!

If I bring one lens, the 24-90 is the first pick, and it delivers. Also at 90mm. So I would definitely not characterise the 24-90 as weak, rather the opposite, actually...

[frame-it]

4 minutes ago, helged said:

Depends on the eyes that see, I guess...

you're absolutely right..and finally it does depend on the print on the wall or book etc...in which case i doubt anyone would see the difference.

[BernardC]

On 4/18/2019 at 5:56 PM, Stuart Richardson said:

For reference, the 30-90mm zoom for the S is also weaker on the long end...I think it is probably Leica's design intention...sacrifice a little on the long end of their general zooms, as more often then not they are used for portraits at that length so edge to edge sharpness is not quite as critical. That does not turn out to be my usage case, but it is common enough for people using the lenses for more general purposes.

It's not so much a "design intention" as it is an optical fact of life.

This Lens Rentals blog posting mentions that (almost) all wide-angle and standard range zooms are sharpest at the wide end, softer at the longer end:

https://wordpress.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/03/rogers-law-of-wide-zoom-relativity/

[Stuart Richardson]

It reminds me how Peter Karbe responded in an interview when asked about why most of his zooms were variable aperture. His response was that all zooms were variable aperture, and that ones that are not are restricting the light to the wide end in favor of a constant aperture. This is from memory only, but I found it pretty interesting, and it makes perfect sense based on Leica's optical philosophy...

[Leicaiste]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

It's not so much a "design intention" as it is an optical fact of life.

This Lens Rentals blog posting mentions that (almost) all wide-angle and standard range zooms are sharpest at the wide end, softer at the longer end:

https://wordpress.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/03/rogers-law-of-wide-zoom-relativity/

According to Erwin Puts, the Vario R 28-90 and 35-70/2,8 are sharper at their longer end. 

http://photo.imx.nl//leica/lenses/page88.html

[Andrew Gough]

https://www.aphotovid.com/leica-r-28-90mm-sample-images/

my review of the 28-90mm

Edited April 24, 2019 by Andrew Gough

[tom0511]

any further experiences to share with the 70-200?

[ron777]

1 hour ago, tom0511 said:

any further experiences to share with the 70-200?

Not yet, but will report back when I have further comments 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[tom0511]

Thanks, I am quite interested.

[JeffWright]

On 4/20/2019 at 8:55 AM, Leicaiste said:

According to Erwin Puts, the Vario R 28-90 and 35-70/2,8 are sharper at their longer end. 

http://photo.imx.nl//leica/lenses/page88.html

You'll never see the words "empirical reasoning" or "data driven" used to describe Erwin Puts. That's not meant as a sign of disrespect, or even a refutation of his praise of the 28-90/35-70f2.8 (both of which I've previously owned). Roger Cicala is the antithesis to Puts' more impressionistic approach to evaluating lens performance.