I've never seen a DA 12-24mm lens with my own eyes. The pictures make it look about the same size as a DA 18-55mm kit lens. The hood seems wider so I assume that the fron lens or filter diameter is bigger.

So, how big is the 12-24mm really? Is it comparable to the kit lens?

EDIT: OK, I found the specs. So it's really quite a bit longer, wider and heavier. But does it feel like that?

[stl09]

emr,

it's not really all the much heavier or longer. wider it is!! were talking a 52mm filter on the kit lens vs 77mm filter on the 12-24mm and of course the hood is even wider. Overall it's a great lens.

I've never seen a DA 12-24mm lens with my own eyes. The pictures make it look about the same size as a DA 18-55mm kit lens. The hood seems wider so I assume that the fron lens or filter diameter is bigger.

So, how big is the 12-24mm really? Is it comparable to the kit lens?

EDIT: OK, I found the specs. So it's really quite a bit longer, wider and heavier. But does it feel like that?

[Venturi]

It's a little longer and the filter ring and hood make it wider by a good stretch - but the barrel of the lens itself is fairly slim actually. I haven't held a DA18-55 in a good while but I want to say the barrel of the DA12-24 may actually be a couple millimeters skinnier.

[Canada_Rockies]

It's a little longer and the filter ring and hood make it wider by a good stretch - but the barrel of the lens itself is fairly slim actually. I haven't held a DA18-55 in a good while but I want to say the barrel of the DA12-24 may actually be a couple millimeters skinnier.

No, the kit lens is a bit more compact than the DA 12-24. I compared my daughter's new 18-55 II and the 12-24 is bigger, and definitely a lot heavier.

[Marc Sabatella]

it's not really all the much heavier or longer.

Might not be that much longer, but it's almost *twice* the weight of the "regular" 18-55's; *over* twice the weight of the "L" version. Not this would matter to everyone, and I'm sure it's a great lens.

[timo]

Might not be that much longer, but it's almost *twice* the weight of the "regular" 18-55's; *over* twice the weight of the "L" version. Not this would matter to everyone, and I'm sure it's a great lens.

Marc - subjectively the 12-24 feels (and looks) a lot bigger and heavier, although it is true the barrel is quite modest in comparison to the housing for the front element. I'm not using mine because it has developed a decentering problem (maybe I knocked it). But even before that I thought twice about putting it into the bag on a routine walkaround basis. That said, when it worked well, it worked very well. I will probably pay the cost of having mine repaired, if it is not ridiculous; but if I were buying anew, I would now go for one of the primes - the 14mm and 15mm options, for their weight. In the meantime, once I get home to Singapore next month the good ol' Z will get an airing.