I must agree that it would be nice to talk "focal length" without having to qualify with "35mm equivalency". So my FZ1000 says on the outside of the lens 25mm-400mm, which is exactly what it is after having taken the cropping issue into account. So why couldn't Panasonic take their 100-300mm lens (used on my Pan. GX85)and print onto it 200-600mm instead; since that is how the camera sees it?
I know that Canon Rebels have a 1.6X cropped sensor, and my Panasonic GX85 has a 2X sensor. But does the FZ1000 (25-400mm) bridge camera utilize a cropped sensor, or is the 25-400mm exactly that.....as it would be on a full frame camera or 35mm camera? I know that the FZ1000 has a full 1" sensor if that's important to you.
I suggest that you at least look at the Panasonic GX85 and 12-32mm kit lens. I have it, and sold away my Canon DSLR gear. Haven't looked back yet. Also have the Panny 100-300mm II (SUPERB), and an Olympus 40-150mm ($99 NEW). GX85 capable of dual IS too.
Yes, of course. A parked car.
What is a good stable camera support when shooting from inside a car. Specifically something to use when shooting from the drivers side car window.
Thanks
I recently entered the world of mirrorless with a Panasonic GX85 and 12-32mm kit lens. I also purchased a 100-300mm II lens as well for my wildlife subjects.
But now I'm wondering if I should be considering a 3rd lens to sort of fill in the gap between 32mm and 100mm. And a lens that would also be considered a walk around lens, too. (Only one lens to cover both.) Weather has been very cold lately. So simply taking a walk to see if the 12-32mm would suffice as the walkaround lens, may not happen for a while. But during this time I've been noticing some good deals on lenses that might qualify. So I'd like to get some thoughts and opinions from you folks before spending any more money. By the way I'm loving my new GX85.
Thanks, folks.
Bob
To which camera body has this lens usually been used (attached)?
Larry,
I had the original (recently sold it; as I've gone to mirrorless now) non-image stabilized version. I used it a lot. It was my main non-tele go-to lens. An excellent performer capable of nice WA angle work(at least for me).
Bob
I would have to recommend the Panasonic GX85. I just bought it, and love it. Am now in the process of selling all of my Canon DSLR gear.
If a choice between the 2 stabilization technologies, which is considered to be the more effective, in-body, or in-lens? Is there a definitive answer for this question? I'm aware that some instances allow for both to work together; increasing the stabilization(AKA "dual IS", & "sync IS". With my aging and shakiness that seems to be accompanying it, I need IS to be a real priority in any new camera purchase.
Thank you.
Nikonbug,
Are you saying that in-cam stabilization, when also using a lens with lens stabilization, together increases the stabilizing ability?
The pictures speak well for the lens at both extremes. Thanks for posting the samples.
Which lens does better at it's full tele range, especially for sharpness--the 16-300 at 300mm or the 18-400mm at 400mm?
Might you have any interest in a trade or trade/cash deal for your lens?
I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8(the older and "better" version), or a Canon 10-18mm STM, or a Canon 40mm 2.8 STM to consider.
Bob
Is the 70-200 f4 "L" lens IS?