Jump to content

Any experience with Lumix 24-105 f4 and 16-35 f4 lenses on an SL?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

I expect I'll do quite a bit of real wold shooting over the weekend. If I manage an interesting keeper or two with this lens, I'll post them. 

Hay, New England rocks (love your image).   LOL.  We all just need to walk about, take photographs, observe, review, learn, and take more.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bought 1635f4 panasonic, on paper, this lens should be good. But I am very disappointed with its performance cross range before f8. and decenter at 14mm doesn't help. This is one of most expensive f4 WA zoom on the market but QC is as bad as Sony glasses I had.

It is on its way back. I don't want play lottery so I just keep 14-24 Sigma. Bigger, no filter but best SWA lens I ever used.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jplomley said:

How can you tell it is decentred?

Shoot infinity cross the horizon from bottom left to upper right corner. If one side is noticeable blurred, that is decentering. 
plus, it is not that important anymore even I don’t see much decenter at 24mm and 35mm, it is still well behind other WA lenses I own. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, jplomley said:

Interesting, thank-you. I have the 16-35 SL lens, but between 16-19mm, I find the right hand side corners a bit softer and always wondered about that attribute. I will do the test you describe for a more thorough evaluation.

Super wide angle lens is usually hard to test right. It is still tricky given the lens are mostly slow glass with very deep DOF at infinity. However, lots of time, you don't even need take any picture. Just put the camera on tripod, 45M of SL2 would be even better. Let horizon (better at infinity or further away brick wall) cross your image diagonally. Focus the best sharpness at center then zoom to extreme corner to review corner sharpness and compare to both corner. Or just focus at one corner to achieve the best sharpness, then zoom to other corner to review and compare. 

During this process, you will learn a lot more about the lens such as field curvature, decenter, or how to use lens wisely(what aperture is enough for cover the scene or how to focus at corner or center, focus at front 1/3 or back 1/3 of the scene) without taking a single image. This is a must process for using SWA wisely IMHO. 

Edited by ZHNL
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2020 at 9:03 PM, Danno_photoguy said:

This is the left edge of the f8 4 to 1 comparison......

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Why is one f8 and the other f5.6 ? And 18 vs 19mm ... and obviously not the same light conditions ...     What do you want to achieve ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ZHNL said:

Super wide angle lens is usually hard to test right. It is still tricky given the lens are mostly slow glass with very deep DOF at infinity. However, lots of time, you don't even need take any picture. Just put the camera on tripod, 45M of SL2 would be even better. Let horizon (better at infinity or further away brick wall) cross your image diagonally. Focus the best sharpness at center then zoom to extreme corner to review corner sharpness and compare to both corner. Or just focus at one corner to achieve the best sharpness, then zoom to other corner to review and compare. 

During this process, you will learn a lot more about the lens such as field curvature, decenter, or how to use lens wisely(what aperture is enough for cover the scene or how to focus at corner or center, focus at front 1/3 or back 1/3 of the scene) without taking a single image. This is a must process for using SWA wisely IMHO. 

Absolutely agree! For instance, using the Sigma 14mm f1.8 ART for astrophotography, I typically focus on a bright star (or the Moon) about 1/3 off center, wide open. This gives a good focus compromise between center and edge/corner sharpness. The wonderful thing with the SL/SL2 (and similar) EVFs are that you actually see the sharpness; no guesswork or fingers crossed needed...

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, caissa said:

Why is one f8 and the other f5.6 ? And 18 vs 19mm ... and obviously not the same light conditions ...     What do you want to achieve ? 

As you may know, the file data when using manual lenses is not accurate beyond the identification of the lens.  The were both at f8 and I did my best to have the same frame/focal length.   In regards to what I achieved, I own both lenses and wanted to compare them for my personal use.  In my view, for my use, I was impressed with the performance of the Lumix more than I expected.  I am just sharing that, for what it may or may not, be of use to others.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caissa said:

and obviously not the same light conditions

Sorry, I forgot to address the lighting condition comment.  As you can perhaps see from the full frame comparison (from which the left side comparison enlargement was taken), there was no change in the lighting conditions as they were taken about one minute apart.  I believe that lens vignetting differences are what we are seeing.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Danno_photoguy said:

As you may know, the file data when using manual lenses is not accurate beyond the identification of the lens.  The were both at f8 and I did my best to have the same frame/focal length.   In regards to what I achieved, I own both lenses and wanted to compare them for my personal use.  In my view, for my use, I was impressed with the performance of the Lumix more than I expected.  I am just sharing that, for what it may or may not, be of use to others.

It is possible mine is bad due to copy variation. However, 14-24 dg dn is so much better compare to Pana. I just have no time to play this buy and return game. And It is really quite bad that make me don’t want try it again. 
 

I still need a WA take filter, so I will revisit this lens down to the road after I can access a few more review. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not noticed any obvious de-centering, but I'm shooting with the lens, not testing it. I have noticed and mentioned previously some extreme corner softness.  As its a zoom, and there are 47MPx to play with, if it becomes too troubling, I'll shoot with this in mind and crop in post. I'm also seeing a tendency to blue CA at times. But I wasn't expecting a Vario-Elmar and, surprise, I didn't wind up with one. My general impression so far is that it's competent. I'm not wowed by the results in the same way I am with the SL-75, nor the Sigma 135 ART. As a stop gap until my order for an SL-35 and pre-orders for the SL-24/21mm show up, it fills the need and provides added width beyond once those do arrive. And compared to nearly every other optic available for native L-mount, it is reasonably light and compact.  In sum, neither astonishing, nor horrific, but somewhere a bit north of middle. Pretty much what I expected. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did promise some other samples last week, but sadly weather and schedule were uncooperative. Here's another from a walk around town this week. Intentionally in a larger size to get give a better notion of the detail on offer. 

35mm f8 ISO50 1/4"  Focus on the tree in foreground. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

I did promise some other samples last week, but sadly weather and schedule were uncooperative. Here's another from a walk around town this week. Intentionally in a larger size to get give a better notion of the detail on offer. 

35mm f8 ISO50 1/4"  Focus on the tree in foreground. 

Very nice picture.  And certainly the lens looks competent.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of more from today's local walk about. This lens reminds me a bit of shooting with the 645Z. Files come out a little flat and uninspiring, but a bit of tugging and pulling in post and this liven up quite a bit. Rather dreary day, but hopefully these suggest that its a pretty good optic. I don't own the 16-35mm VE, so I cant say how it hold up to its output, but at 1/4 the cost, it's not a bad option.

24mm f8

16mm f7.1

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, finally some real world out and about shooting in Providence RI. 

16mm, f8 1/15"

17mm, f8 1/15":

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

At 1/4 the cost AND half the weight of Leica's 16-35, that little Panasonic looks like a good buy.  Checking online buyer reviews, I do find some complaints of copies received that didn't work, and some complaints of corner softness that is different in different corners.  This might be a purchase to make with a local shop where you can try more than one copy.

The Sigma 14-24 is now shipping, but it is harder to find examples and reviews from actual use.  It also costs vastly less than the Leica 16-35, and weighs a bit less, but much more than the Lumix 16-35 and it is bigger than the Leica.  Has anyone got experience to share with that one?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

The Sigma 14-24 is now shipping, but it is harder to find examples and reviews from actual use.  (...) Has anyone got experience to share with that one?

I have one and already showed a picture taken with it. Until now I had too less time for a deep review, but the center sharpness and the microcontrast seems fairly good. But I can't compare it with the pana or the leica sww.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rim_light said:

I have one and already showed a picture taken with it. Until now I had too less time for a deep review, but the center sharpness and the microcontrast seems fairly good. But I can't compare it with the pana or the leica sww.

I liked that one.  I'm glad to see that touch AF over Fotos worked well.  I assume you were at 14 mm but what aperture did you use?

It was also interesting to hear some of the pointers from a competitive archer.  Here's yet another style:

L6003145 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...