Panasonic Lumix 12-35 died - What would you do?

[kandinsky]

After just 3 years +. Started having some intermittent shaking of the image during camera operation, also a high pitched whine. Sent to service centre, current diagnosis: OIS unit failure, quoted approx $400+ for repair.

What would you do?

1. Send for repair?
My problem with their repair is that they don't warranty it, if I recall correctly. If it, or something else, fails 2-3 months later, that's a wasted repair.
Correction: Replaced parts are warrantied for 90days.

2. Look for alternatives?
Budget an additional $4-500 for a new lens? At least that's how much I think a new one will cost. Just emailed some shops for quotes, waiting for reply.

Can't help feeling a bit let down by Panasonic m43 system, don't feel like I can depend on it. 3 years doesn't feel very long. But I wonder, with fully electronic lenses, maybe it's a matter of time and I'm just unlucky it didn't fail when it was still covered by warranty. Anyone had similar issues with OIS failure with their m43 lenses?

Feel like going for the Oly 12-40 as a replacement, wonder if it will be more lasting. :think:

 

[fatigue]

Does the problem occur only when OIS is activated?
If yes, just use the lens without that function
I mean, as long as it can be used rather than to spend $400

 

[fatigue]

In one camera system, the anti-shake mechanism can be disabled by simply disconnecting a flexible cable inside the lens.
Although in another camera system, the anti shake works together with AF. So disabling the the anti shake means manual focus only.
I'm not really sure if it's the same for Lumix system.

 

[kandinsky]

Does the problem occur only when OIS is activated?
If yes, just use the lens without that function
I mean, as long as it can be used rather than to spend $400

Unfortunately, it also occurs when the OIS is switched off and even set to MF.

In one camera system, the anti-shake mechanism can be disabled by simply disconnecting a flexible cable inside the lens.
Although in another camera system, the anti shake works together with AF. So disabling the the anti shake means manual focus only.
I'm not really sure if it's the same for Lumix system.

Interesting, I don't know which it is more similar to, but it seems like both are affected to a certain extent on my unit, the repair quote mentions replacement of the AF motor assembly.

Good news is that I realized they will warranty the replaced parts for 90 days. Looks like I might proceed with this and keep my fingers crossed...

 

[lippy]

In one camera system, the anti-shake mechanism can be disabled by simply disconnecting a flexible cable inside the lens.
Although in another camera system, the anti shake works together with AF. So disabling the the anti shake means manual focus only.
I'm not really sure if it's the same for Lumix system.

If the OIS motor worked together with AF, manual focus wouldn't be possible on most M43 lenses as they are focus by wire

I had one focus by wire lens before which had some impact damage, it created a whining sound like TS has suggested whenever I tried focusing. I opened it up and found out that the focusing gearbox assembly had a single gear with 2 striped teeth. Sadly there weren't spare parts available on ebay or elsewhere. So since the lens didn't have a mechanical link to the focusing elements, it ended up as trash.

Although I like how focus by wire works for video autofocus, it is non robust in the sense that both AF and MF are dependent on the AF motor or gearbox assembly. This makes external focusing lenses especially vulnerable to any hits and knocks.

 

[kandinsky]

If the OIS motor worked together with AF, manual focus wouldn't be possible on most M43 lenses as they are focus by wire

I had one focus by wire lens before which had some impact damage, it created a whining sound like TS has suggested whenever I tried focusing. I opened it up and found out that the focusing gearbox assembly had a single gear with 2 striped teeth. Sadly there weren't spare parts available on ebay or elsewhere. So since the lens didn't have a mechanical link to the focusing elements, it ended up as trash.

Although I like how focus by wire works for video autofocus, it is non robust in the sense that both AF and MF are dependent on the AF motor or gearbox assembly. This makes external focusing lenses especially vulnerable to any hits and knocks.

Agreed. Have to say I was caught off guard. The 12-35 was my first m43 and also focus by wire lens, always thought it was robust. To be fair, it has served me very well and reliably up till this point. What makes me feel let down is that this lens has never suffered a drop, just regular use, in and out of bags, on and off tripods, etc. The natural expectation was - if you took care of it, it should last... haha. I guess the reality is that they are disposable (which is true to a certain extent of anything electronic), and my expectations were possibly unrealistic. Definitely more hesitant to spend too much on full electronic lenses in future.

I'll post up a couple of videos I took for reference.

I also had issues with the exposure metering, but I'm not sure if this was caused by the lens or the body. I sent both in. Verdict for body not back yet.

 

[fatigue]

If the OIS motor worked together with AF, manual focus wouldn't be possible on most M43 lenses as they are focus by wire

Oh yes, you are right. the lens has a focusing ring sensor. Then the signal is sent to the camera and then camera drives the focus motor.

 

[Anson]

Feel like going for the Oly 12-40 as a replacement, wonder if it will be more lasting. :think:

If I am not wrong Oly 12-40's MF is not focus by wire. But if you are using it to take video, need to note that unlike the 12-35, its not parafocal.

 

[kandinsky]

If I am not wrong Oly 12-40's MF is not focus by wire. But if you are using it to take video, need to note that unlike the 12-35, its not parafocal.

Even though it has a focus clutch, think the underlying control is still fly-by-wire.

The focus "clutch" in the 12-40/2.8 engages or disengages an optical or electronic position sensor that transmits the location of the "focus" ring back to the camera body, that then sends a signal to the AF motor in the lens to change position. There is no mechanical focus mechanism in the lens directly connected to the "focus ring". It is a FLY-BY-WIRE focus system, and rotating the "focus ring" feels like turning a low mass ring with frictional drag.

https://www.mu-43.com/threads/12-35-or-12-40-for-gx8.82111/page-2

Oh ya, thanks for the reminder re: parfocal. Recall we had a thread discussing that. I think you started the thread right

Just remembered, going Oly will mean losing some support for Pana features like 4K (post focus, etc), DFD, and Dual IS. Just got current prices: 12-35 about $1K, 12-40 about $120 more.

 

[Anson]

Oh ya, thanks for the reminder re: parfocal. Recall we had a thread discussing that. I think you started the thread right

Just remembered, going Oly will mean losing some support for Pana features like 4K (post focus, etc), DFD, and Dual IS. Just got current prices: 12-35 about $1K, 12-40 about $120 more.

Yeah... that why most of my m43 lenses are still panny as they are general lighter and work better in videos den their their oly counterpart.

OT: If the upcoming GH5 have 5-axis IBIS like the GX85, it would be a real game changer for m43 users.

 

[Hong Jia]

Which body are you using now?

 

[kandinsky]

Which body are you using now?

Pana GH4 and GH3.

 

[Hong Jia]

Pana GH4 and GH3.

Then stick to 12-35 instead of consider olympus 12-40 cos not added advantage though it seem like 12-40 have better optics.

But 12-35 on gh3 and gh4 got the 240hz af refresh.

 

[lippy]

Agreed. Have to say I was caught off guard. The 12-35 was my first m43 and also focus by wire lens, always thought it was robust. To be fair, it has served me very well and reliably up till this point. What makes me feel let down is that this lens has never suffered a drop, just regular use, in and out of bags, on and off tripods, etc. The natural expectation was - if you took care of it, it should last... haha. I guess the reality is that they are disposable (which is true to a certain extent of anything electronic), and my expectations were possibly unrealistic. Definitely more hesitant to spend too much on full electronic lenses in future.

I'll post up a couple of videos I took for reference.

I also had issues with the exposure metering, but I'm not sure if this was caused by the lens or the body. I sent both in. Verdict for body not back yet.

Yes, I'd guess that the solid robust feel was an illusion. Because what you've stated definitely sounds like a fault which already existed in the lens which just needed the passage of time to happen. I would say that it is a real pity if the makers of the lens thought of it as disposable, especially at its price.

If every lens were like a Nikon F mount, mechanical coupled and controlled aperture, mechanically coupled focus and with an included schematic to show its full internal workings and parts that would be ideal. But I'd guess the benefits of PDAF, OIS, quick video AF and DFD are more relevant than serviceability.

 

[spidey89]

But if every lens were Nikon F mount and mechanical coupled, it will be very noisy. Having used the 80-200 AFD on my Nikon D3, I can feel the lens when it starts and stops auto focus. Mechanical stuff will fail too, matter of when. I'm sure with quality parts, non mechanical lenses will function just as well. The oldest digital lens I have is the ZD 14-54 and many many years later, it's still working fine on my E-1

 

[kandinsky]

Then stick to 12-35 instead of consider olympus 12-40 cos not added advantage though it seem like 12-40 have better optics.

But 12-35 on gh3 and gh4 got the 240hz af refresh.

Thanks for your input. Yup, came to that conclusion eventually. In repair now.

Yes, I'd guess that the solid robust feel was an illusion. Because what you've stated definitely sounds like a fault which already existed in the lens which just needed the passage of time to happen. I would say that it is a real pity if the makers of the lens thought of it as disposable, especially at its price.

If every lens were like a Nikon F mount, mechanical coupled and controlled aperture, mechanically coupled focus and with an included schematic to show its full internal workings and parts that would be ideal. But I'd guess the benefits of PDAF, OIS, quick video AF and DFD are more relevant than serviceability.

+1. The pros/cons of technical improvements.

But if every lens were Nikon F mount and mechanical coupled, it will be very noisy. Having used the 80-200 AFD on my Nikon D3, I can feel the lens when it starts and stops auto focus. Mechanical stuff will fail too, matter of when. I'm sure with quality parts, non mechanical lenses will function just as well. The oldest digital lens I have is the ZD 14-54 and many many years later, it's still working fine on my E-1

Yup, true. The noise/movement in older mech lenses, haven't heard that in a long time. Haha.

Just very sian when it suddenly fails on you. All in all, I'm still thankful it didn't fail during a shoot, would have been really caught off-guard.

 

[lippy]

But if every lens were Nikon F mount and mechanical coupled, it will be very noisy. Having used the 80-200 AFD on my Nikon D3, I can feel the lens when it starts and stops auto focus. Mechanical stuff will fail too, matter of when. I'm sure with quality parts, non mechanical lenses will function just as well. The oldest digital lens I have is the ZD 14-54 and many many years later, it's still working fine on my E-1

Agreed with entirely... Either philosophy of lens design is a trade off. Some focus by wire lenses are also easily serviceable. But the lack of redundant focusing systems should the focusing motor fail is still a risk until lens manufacturers find a way to have silent af with mechanical focus coupling

 

[spidey89]

Just very sian when it suddenly fails on you. All in all, I'm still thankful it didn't fail during a shoot, would have been really caught off-guard.

At least it didn't fail during a shoot, my 24-70 failed on me a few years ago during the AD wedding, was wondering why my dof so shallow, at the church then realize aperture not closing/opening properly. Luckily loosening one of the screws which I borrowed from the church worked, and since then no issues

Agreed with entirely... Either philosophy of lens design is a trade off. Some focus by wire lenses are also easily serviceable. But the lack of redundant focusing systems should the focusing motor fail is still a risk until lens manufacturers find a way to have silent af with mechanical focus coupling

Possibly, regardless, I'm happy with what's available right now

 

[kandinsky]

At least it didn't fail during a shoot, my 24-70 failed on me a few years ago during the AD wedding, was wondering why my dof so shallow, at the church then realize aperture not closing/opening properly. Luckily loosening one of the screws which I borrowed from the church worked, and since then no issues

You're the man lah, can troubleshoot/repair on the spot How did you know loosening a screw would help??

 

[spidey89]

Heng la, I forgot how I troubleshoot, but I assume somewhere probably over tighten or something, so just loosen just a little bit and it works already lor