For the same money surely everyone considering this lens would buy the 14-140 instead? I can't think of one reason why you would want half the range for the same amount of bucks???
if we see the 12-35mm 2.8, the internal elements are also small, maybe it could be f2.0
if sigma can do, panasonic could do also, but this way no prime lens would sell anymore...
The internal lens elements are very small, I think they could do this lens at fixed f4 aperture, but it would hurts selling the 12-35 2.8 and the 35-100 2.8...
100 bucks too much ...next years kit lens
To dim indeed. Panasonic was dim witted to make these lens instead of a faster f4 lens. If Nikon can do f4 for a full frame lens with that focal range then Panasonic sure can for m4/3!!!
Pointless to you maybe, but I can totally see myself replacing my 14-42mm II with this lens, the extended range is really useful as a hiking lens.
Pretty pointless lens, can pick up a 14-42 or 14-45 for less than £60 these days which over pretty much same coverage, desperatley need a stabilised 25mm 1.4/1.7 lens
Official now, added photo and PR to first post.
It is not the source, source address is present on image.
Same old same old.
new kit lens ?
It is too dim.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!