NerdyTimelapser
Member
Sounds like a very nice combo as well! I do mostly tripod work and long exposures, so in my case a fast lens isn't that important. Just want it light and compact since I carry it around all day usually.
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.
Lumix 28–200mm f/4–7.1 Sample Images
- Thread starter jomppak
- Start date
CharlesH
LMF-Patron Gold
True. I had the 20-60mm with me as a backup that day in San Francisco, but I never had to change lenses.
I gave in, and ordered one today. Bulk version (lenses removed from camera/lens combo boxes) for€ 699, brand new and 5 years warranty. If it’s OK, I sell the 24-105. If not then it goes back. My 24-60 (and 100 macro) can replace the 24-105 anyway.
This album on Flickr shows that if you get a good sample, in capable hands and good editing skills, you can get very nice pictures out of this lens with the s5ii
I think my copy has severe decentering. First is the left-side of the center, when turned the camera 90 degrees to the right. Same picture taken but then taken 90 degrees to the left, so the right side of the lens. These are 100% crops. After noticing it In casual snaps I did this twice, same result.
left side lens
Right side of the lens.
left side lens
Right side of the lens.
If the lens performed like the bottom picture, I would really like it. Maybe I reorder it. I already mailed it back.
GeorgeHudetz
Well-Known Member
Mine does not have obvious signs of decentering, although at 170+mm I do need to stop it down a fair amount to keep good pixel-level sharpness. Out of curiosity, what focal length & aperture were you using in the above test shots?
This was 200 wide open, through my window on a building at infinity. But this is not about absolute sharpness but about the difference between left and right side of the lens. If it was like the 2nd picture I would be ok with the lens.
But I had taken some snapshots earlier and some of them included a brick wall and noticed the difference immediately. Then I shot a paper 200@f8 at mfd and noticed again sharp in the middle and sharp enough at the right, but softer on the left. Then I took these shots to confirm my suspicions. Twice.
I really like the lens at is concept, but not this sample. I’m contemplating what to do… just order a new one, or go there and try myself at the spot under pressure. Or just let it go.
But the 24-105 is objectively the one with the better image quality of the two, which to me is no surprise. In my view the 28-200 is good enough though, if it was like the 2nd picture for the whole image.
But weight and size vs quality and versatility the 28-200 is the winner and good enough.
But I had taken some snapshots earlier and some of them included a brick wall and noticed the difference immediately. Then I shot a paper 200@f8 at mfd and noticed again sharp in the middle and sharp enough at the right, but softer on the left. Then I took these shots to confirm my suspicions. Twice.
I really like the lens at is concept, but not this sample. I’m contemplating what to do… just order a new one, or go there and try myself at the spot under pressure. Or just let it go.
But the 24-105 is objectively the one with the better image quality of the two, which to me is no surprise. In my view the 28-200 is good enough though, if it was like the 2nd picture for the whole image.
But weight and size vs quality and versatility the 28-200 is the winner and good enough.
Last edited: