A Look At The Panasonic 35-100mm f4-5.6 Micro Four Thirds Compact Zoom Lens.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 янв 2015
- This is a take on the Panasonic 35-100mm f4-5.6 compact zoom lens lens for Micro Four Thirds, M43, M4/3, MFT cameras.
----------
Help keep my channel going - Buy though my Amazon shop at
www.amazon.co.uk/shop/davidth...
In association with ePHOTOzine - www.ephotozine.com
Sound post production by Charles Walkowski at www.walkowski.co.uk
See my M43 blog at m43blog.dthorpe.net/ 
Наука
Sigh….. good old times… We miss you David! R.I.P.
On the other side you escaped from living in the so called “new normal” … You lived your live just in best times humanity ever had.
I chuckled at the "deeper, better quality rattle". Thanks for the very informative video.
白海塔 Glad you enjoyed it - and the joke!
David, thank you for the video review.
Based on this I have bought one for my 70-200 replacement in m 4/3 on my new Olympus OMD EM10.
What a stunning lens, so tiny, so well built, such good images.
What an epiphany leaving full sized DSLR and going m4/3 has been.
+alan white I'm glad you've found MFT to your liking. I'm with you, it's the possibility of lenses like this which still produce excellent image quality that first got me into the system too.
Thanks David, Great review! Purchased the lens last week and it arrived this weekend. Woooo!
I shoot fuji. Just came back to hear the calm voice of reason and practicality.
David, very good way with words...excellent!
I received this lens for Christmas and it has been on my GX7 ever since! I agree with your review 100%.
Michael Gerrard That's a great present, Michael. Someone obviously loves you a lot!
Fantastic review David...as usual.
Wish you well dear friend.
Thanks, João!
Excellent assessment. You have helped make up my mind.
Glad I could help!
Really solid review, good sir.
Thank you - and for telling me. Much appreciated.
David, your reviews are the most succinct and thorough information on Micro 4/3 equip around. It's soothing to listen to your delivery of wisdom. I bought this lens used for $200 USD and absolutely love it. I've compared the clarity against the Oly 45mm 1.8 and it's right there. To know that the only limiting factor is the smaller aperture is quite refreshing as this tiny lens becomes my go-to walk around daytime telephoto. Paired with the Pana 14mm f2.5 you have a wonderful daytime kit. Thank you for your reviews. Please keep them coming.
Thanks Daniel - I've been out and about today and one of the two lenses in my shoulder bag is this one. It would be a uniquely tiny and useful lens even if it compromised on sharpness. The fact that it doesn't makes it special.
Hace un año compré una camara usada que incluía este lente, nunca lo he usado, voy a probarlo. Gracias.
Excellent review again! Thanks. This looks like a really useful lens. It would look nice on my GX7.
It's perfect for the GX7.
Great tutorial, Thanks.
Thanks!
nice review - and great points. Nice that Panasonic is supporting the GM1 and GM5 with more lenses -
jon hermannsson Yes, those bodies and the two tiny zooms make a sort of eco-system all of their own.
Lovely video
Thanks so much, Kyristol!
Thank you David recently bought this lens based on your review and its been great & amazing value (purchased 2nd hand). Also purchased the Pana 25mm f1.7 after your review which is great, but just like your reservation about the focal length it rarely gets used.
For some it's the only lens they want, for me, like you, it is rarely used. Nice to have for when you need the speed, though. The 35-100 is a little miracle, a sharp tele zoom that you can slip in a pocket.
@@DavidThorpeMFT yep love it. Ref focal length Im only just realising after many years I want something either pretty damn wide (esp for city work), or medium telephoto & above, it really helps to use something quite different to our own eyes to get that wow factor I feel. So, as much as the Pana 12-32 is another "little miracle", its actually my Oly 9-18 & Pana 35-100 that is getting all the use now, both of those lens purchased this year.
@@JeevesTCW I like the ultra-wide to slightly wide zooms as a standard lens left on the camera. Very versatile and I like the way in which very wide lenses, like very long ones, suggest pictures to you. The 25mm Panasonic nicely bridges the gap between 18 and 35mm and gives you some extra speed when you need it. I use a similar idea myself.
Thanks for this video. I just have seen the other one about the 12-32mm. I have the these lenses but sometimes when i travel i don't know which one put on my gx80. Any advice for the best of these two in street photos?
rather than travel with a few cameras to get the ranges i want i decided to go M43, based on your excellent videos i am gathering together a compact kit that includes , OM Pen EP5, lumix 12-32, OM 17/1.8 Lumix 35-100 4-5.6 & OM 45/1.8, this all fits nicely in STM small sling with a 7" tablet & some bits & bobs, having IT ALL in such a small kit is a joy in its self, though i'm going to add a 15/1.7 DG and 42,5 Nocti to the GX8 for those special Sundays , as a 30 year Canon user i find these new Toys quite respectable, the L's not looking so lofty these days. though i secretly hanker for a Digital Plaubel Makina W67.
Hello David, as I didn't followed Panasonic lenses range for years, I saw this review with pleasure.
It is funny to hear exactly the same sound when shaking the lense as the Powerzoom 45-175 I used to have. Shaking the 12-35 and 35-100 2.8 let us feel the stabilisation, but it doesn't sound as a small inside part injury :)
As now I am doing videos I would have been curious to try both powerzooms sometime but I have not them anymore. It seems that Panasonic definitely stopped this zoom approach.
+CosyPhotos For anyone used to film lenses, shaking a lens and having it rattle al all would be unacceptable. But louder or quieter, it's normal now. I still don't like it though! Yes, Panasnoc seem to have given up on the power zoom. Maybe they didn't sell too well so they've stopped developing it.
How do you choose between olympus ibis or lens ois? If theres no switch on the lens.
Thanks David for a splendid review of this great little lens. But i wanted to inform you that a replacement hood is available, directly from Panasonic. I just ordered a one here in the US. I wanted a black hood to put on the silver copy of the lens I just purchased on Ebay.
+Mario Manzo Thanks Mario. Yes, I ordered one from the U.S. myself. Ridiculously expensive with postage and why they don't sell them in Europe I don't know. Maybe Europeans never lose lens hoods :-)
do you think this lens is better than Panasonic 14-140mm for video and how is image quality, stabilization, and auto-focus noise compared to Panasonic 14-140mm.
i will be shooting wedding video and some documentary with the gh2 mostly handheld.
this the first and only lens i will buy for now.
Might actually want to get this one - while I would really, really love to own an Olympus 40-150 2.8, this is something I would actually end up carrying on a day in town, and opening up different photographic opportunities that my 25 1.4 and hopefully soon-to-be 12-40 2.8 won't do. And without costing much bag space at that. That might just be my future three lens setup, as it would perfectly fit my Mirrorless Mover 25i bag.
Really appreciate the video as usual, you're easily one of the most helpful reviewers out there on RUclips.
Thanks, Jenny. This is one lens that is no burden at all to carry. What surprised me was that it doesn't sacrifice any sharpness to its size.
My current set up is Leica 8-18mm, Leica 25mm 1.4, and this 35-100mm. I don't do very serious telephoto, nor often, but it's amazing how I could carry it with me almost anytime without noticing. Sometimes it stays in my coat's pocket. Other times it opens up new amazing fun opportunities, exactly as you said. I strongly recommend it and thank David for making a video on it - this lens did not receive much attention by reviewers otherwise.
@@8thom00 Hi Giorgio - it's often the big, expensive, glamorous lenses that get all the attention from reviewers yet truly useful but seemingly dull ones that actually get used the most. I love this lens because there is really no reason not to have it with you and that means you can grab pictures with it simply because it is there. I still find it startling that such atiny lens should be so sharp. I'd have been willing to cut it some slack for its size advantage but no need. It obviously fits perfectly with your setup , there if you happen to need it but no burden if you don't.
Thank you David. I have just graduated to owning my first interchangeable lens camera, the Panasonic Lumix GH3. I bought the Lumix G 12-35 zoom lens separately and could still exchange it although it takes nice portrait stills. My main current interest is in shooting video closeups of falling water, Colorado mountain waterfalls in particular. I can't get physically close to these but I enjoy capturing artful extreme-closeups. Years ago I had some experience producing water videos with the Sony VX1000 professional camcorder using a wide angle lens. What telephoto lens would you recommend for the GH3 to get up close with sparkling clarity? Thank you for your help!
+Tessalin Green The 35-100 f/2.8 Panasonic would make an ideal partner for the lens you have provided it has enough magnification to get the close-up view you require. If not, the Olympus 40-150 f/2,8 with converter should do the trick. It focuses very close, too. The reason I put it second is that on the GH3 it won't be stabilized but for what you are doing, I'd think a tripod would be in order anyway. A truly fabulous lens. Expensive but since you'd likely keep it years, cheap in the long run.
Otherwise there's the Panasonic 100-300 and Olympus 40-150 but these aren't as good optically. A lot less money, though. If you didn't need the speed of the 12-35, I'd suggest the 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom. a lovely sharp lens and great all rounder, especially for video.
thank you for replying sir
Great content
Thanks, David!
Hi David, thanks for all the many great reviews.
I was wondering if you think there is any difference in optical performance between this panasonic 35-100mm f4-5.6 and the panasonic 45-150 in the shared zoom range. Particularly in terms of sharpness. I want to pick up one of these two lenses, and they both have different pros from one another, so if there is difference optically it will probably sway me.
Thanks!
+Dan Neukirch Glad you like the reviews. I'd personally go for the 35-100 unless I really wanted the extra reach. Stopped down to f/5.6 it has unusually consistent sharpness across the frame even at 100mm. Having said that, keeping within the 100mm range, there's not much difference between the two. It's at the 150mm end that the 45-150 drops performance a bit. On the other hand, it's handy having a 35mm bottom end.
All in all, I'd be happier with the 35-100 which doesn't really have any practical optical compromise. And it is tiny enough to take everywhere. I wouldn't be without mine.
+David Thorpe Great, thanks for the quick reply! That's very helpful information.
I think I will pay the extra money for the smaller 35-100 over the 45-150. It will be the perfect lightweight travel tele zoom. Strangely, and a little frustratingly, the silver version of the 35-100 is about 25% cheaper than the black version!? Looks like I will be getting my first silver lens...
I've only very recently got into M43. I'm loving the small form factor, and it's a system that will complement my big DSLR well. My M43 kit so far is the (awesome feature packed) GX7, Panasonic 14mm 2.8, 20mm 1.7 & 42.5mm 1.7. This tele zoom should round out my little kit well.
Your reviews are easily the best on RUclips for M43. Thanks and keep it up!
+Dan Neukirch Thanks Dan - enjoy the silver lens! One upon a time silver was the only colour anyone wanted. I don't know when - or why - it changed.
Hi David,is it really as sharp as the 2.8..I know it would have to be compared in the same situation,''light etc'',but I would have thought the actual glass quality would favour the 2.8...if there really is nothing between them in quality photos,in the same circumstances,it would indeed be a good buy...Thanks for the video
+adrahc Most lenses are much of a muchness at f/5.6 and there is little _practical_ difference between either of the 35-100s or even the 14-140 for that matter. The f/2.8 zooms really only justify their money when used at f/2.8 or f/4. They are as a rule a bit sharper in the centre all through the range but a little less good at the edges. Certainly if you don't plan to use the lenses in low light, there is little lost by going for the slower and cheaper lenses.
Thank you for another informative video. However I was wondering, can this lens be combined with me Oly em10 body? What about the stabilisation? Do I have to turn of the in body of olympus? Or can I somehow turn off the lens stabilisation?
+Vassilis Diamantis Yes, it'll work well with the E-M10 body, just as well as with a Panasonic. You can choose whether to use the camera or body stabilization. In section C of the Custom menu you should see _Lens I.S. Priority_. Off, the camera uses the body stabilization. On it uses the lens.
There's no particular reason to use one over the other, so when I use this lens on an Olympus I leave it Off, the default. You might want to experiment with both methods but it is almost impossible to set up a definitive test.
+David Thorpe Well I wasnt expecting such a fast response! Thank you both for the fast response as well as for the response itself!
+Vassilis Diamantis :-)
thank you
At the moment my only zoom is a vivitar series one 70-210mm (140-420mm equivalent) f3.5 constant aperture that I use on my epl5. It is a wonderful, sharp lens with incredible macro capability, but being a vintage lens, it is far too heavy and unwieldy for daily use. Would this lens be a good buy purely for it being a compact zoom? Or should I just bear with my 70-210 and snag an Olympus 40-150 (still much lighter being a plastic lens) for chump change on eBay?
A tough one! I'd be inclined to go for the 35-100. Although it is tiny, its image quality doesn't suffer and it would make a lovely small and light combo with your Olympus. It does leave a slight gap in the zoom range you have available but that shouldn't be a problem.
Hi David, thank you so much for all your reviews .. I am completely new to photography and knew what I wanted to be able to do so could narrow my choice down to my price range and then used your reviews to end up going for the GM1 ... it seems great so I'm very pleased .. now I am after a zoom lense but can't quite stretch to the cost of this one ... what are your views on the 45-150 ? Currys seem to favour it and its more in my price range .... or should I really save for longer and go for this one?
Really appreciate your views
Many thanks
FamilyNeve Glad to have been of help! You won't go wrong with the Panasonic45-150mm. Sharpness falls off a bit at the long end where the 35-100 unusually does not but of course the the 45-150 has 50% greater reach anyway. Given that this is likely to be your only telephoto lens for a while at least, this might actually be a better choice. It's bigger than the 35-100 but that's because the 35-100 is tiny. The 45-150 is just small! The other choice would be the Olymous 40-150mm f/4-5.6 which is cheaper and an excellent little lens. But on a Panasonic body it won't have stabilization and at 100mm and up it's necessary in my opinion.
Fantastic ... thanks for your help, much appreciated
David Thorpe Hi again ... I went and had a look at the 45-150 but it did compromise on size a bit which was the very reason I went for the GM1... so anyway ... I have just taken delivery of a new 35-100 😊Early thoughts ... you're right it's tiny! So easy to carry around ... It seems very good indeed ... thanks again for your advice
FamilyNeve You're welcome! It is tiny, isn't it? What I particularly like is that like is that there's no compromise on optical quality. It seems too good to be true.
Hi David, I found your channel after trying to find out what is happening with thie lense. I bought this lense for 2 years now and barely using it for a reason that even though I am using both manual and auto focus on my Lumix G100, it is shadowy and blurred on the focus object. Is there anything I should do? Thanks.
Unfortunately David is not with us anymore.
Do you shoot in S-AF or C-AF?
Have you tried to take a picture of a tape measure (extended away from the camera). For example focus on the 2m mark and see what area is actually in focus.
I have a similar problem with the Panasonic 30mm macro. Focus is not where it should be. Also never found a solution but to focus "wrong" on purpose.
Nce review. Is there any significant advantage to this lens over the 45-150mm from Panasonic?
The main one is that it is very, very small and light and that performance doesn't drop off as much as the 45-150mm at the long end. But the long end is not so long, of course.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Yes I must admit that it's often difficult to get good focus on a moving object above 100mm on the 150mm Lens with my G7. Even with a tripod and remote shutter.
As a complete beginner (legit newbie) what would you recommend. I have the GX85, lumix 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and also a lumix 25mm f/1.7 lens (gift with purchase) but I don't know which telephoto to purchase. All the guides recommend a telephoto and I have no clue. I will be able to obtain either one for very similar prices (I think at most it'll be like a US$40 difference). I can't decide between the Lumix G Vario 35-100mm f/4.0-5.6 MEGA OIS and the Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4.0-5.6 MEGA OIS.
I'd get the 35-100mm mini zoom without hesitation. Much sharper, wonderfully compact to match your 12-32mm and cheaper! You lose 50mm on the long end and the power zooming but both of those are trivial losses compared to the 35-100. The outfit you will have with those three lenses is a classic Micro Four Thirds in my eyes. Compact, versatile and outstanding IQ.
Thanks for that
+adrahc You are very welcome!
may i ask you a question i only make videos no foto
what is the best video quality lens for filming 1080p
i wont be using 4 k for now only full hd is it the 35 100
or 14-140 thank you very very much
The 14-140 is the most versatile of the lenses and performs well in video, though they all do really. Stopped down one stop its IQ is little different from the f/2.8 Panasonics. It's the lens I use most for video, though I'm no expert in that field.
You made me buy this lens, really impressive indeed. Regards.
It is impressive, isn't it? I would have been prepared to accept some loss of IQ in return for the compactness but there isn't any.
@@DavidThorpeMFT crazy sharp this tiny little glass. It really approaches the best, as you said. Thanks for the review David, really love your channel.
Kind of late to the party, but may i ask your opinion? I have a lumix 12-32mm kit lens now, and planning to get a good zoom lens mainly for stills, would you recommend the 14-140 or this 35-100mm? I saw that you prefer 35-100mm in terms of sharpness and crispness, but do you think that extra 40mm will be useful? I never owned / borrowed a zoom lens around this range so I'm not sure about the bokeh for portraits. Thanks!
Hi Theo - if I had the 12-32 and liked it, the 35-100 would be the best complement. In terms of all-round performance and you then have an amazingly compact and sharp pair of lenses. The 14-140 is very convenient and for portraits would not be very different from the 35-100, though a bit less biting sharp. The extra length to 140mm is very handy but there's a price to pay in size and money. I'd get the 35-100 and put the money saved to a 45mm Olympus.
@@DavidThorpeMFT wow thanks for the detailed reply! Yeah the price for 35-100mm is soo different than the 14-140mm! I guess I'll get the 35-100mm then. Why do you still need the 45mm though?
It's not that you need it, Theo, more that it has a wider aperture so gives shallower depth of field for portraits. A nicety, really. I just like spending other people's money 😊
@@davidthorpe7732 sweet, thanks man, really nice talking to another m43 enthusiasts! For portraits I'll stick to my 25mm f1.7 for now, so you can't spend my money haha, thanks!
hi MR Thorpe, could you tell me if i can use the autofocus with this lens on a Olympus om-d m5 mark II ?thaks a lot
Hi Eugenio - yes, this lens is a native Micro Four Thirds lens and will work on the Olympus exactly as on a Panasonic body. You will have a choice of body or lens stabilization but I'd stay with the Oylmpus's.
thanks a lot
This was a great review, very thoughtful. How does this compare to the Olympus 40-150? I know there is less reach, but also I find the Olympus to be incredibly sharp. I would be using both on the EM5.
sam m I'd say the Panasonic holds up a bit better at the edges - though I don't find that of any great importance. And it holds up better at the longer end too but then the longer end is much longer on the Olympus. If I already had the 40-150 I wouldn't see any reason to ditch it in favour of the Panasonic other than the smaller form. And that extra 50mm completely justifies the extra size. Having said that, the Olympus is hardly big!
+David Thorpe Ahh you answered my question I just posted here. There really isn't that much to gain from 100mm to 150mm IMO. Even from 75mm it's not a major difference to me that can't be cropped. Supposed it depends on the subject though. The 40-150 f4-5.6 for what it costs is very nice. I've printed large from both ends of the zoom range.
+Steve F I answered your question directly, below, Steve!
What a sweet piece of glass...
And I take it Panasonic haven't actually released a smaller brother to the GX7 unbeknownst to me, and that in mentioning the cameras this lens would go ideally with, you meant the GM1 and G-M-5, not the GX5, right David...?
A pleasant review as always, in any case!
Haha! Well spotted. But there's something you don't know. Panasonic have supplied me and me only with a GX5. It is the size of the GX7 but with the swivel screen and all facilities of the GH4, plus 4K. It has PDAF focusing like the D4 Nikon and the 5 way stabilization of the Olympus E-M1. It comes with a new kit lens the size of the 12-32mm but is a 12-300mm f2. Unfortunately, Panasonic have told me that I am not allowed to review it so I can say no more than that it focuses in 100th of the time of the GH4, has continuous AF that is _never_ wrong-footed and weighs less than the GM5.
David Thorpe LOL... A video review or it never happened! :-)
David Thorpe I hope you're joking about GX5. lol.
luck002 No, he's actually not... I managed to get my hands on one of these babies, too, and it's SO good, I've tossed out my GX1s, my G6 and my GX7! :-)
guyo68 Did we mention that it has a 60Mp sensor with the same noise level at 12800 ISO as the D4 at 200ISO? And a retail price one tenth that of the GX7. And if you buy one, you get one free. It just gets better :-)
I wonder of one of the rumour sites will pick this up?
Well that was good timing coz I'm considering the gm5 with both kit lenses.
Still a bit torn
reg171reg This and the 12-32 are a great match for minimum size. The 15mm is bigger, of course but the jump from 15 to 35mm is a reasonable one. And the 15 does have the extra speed. Difficult choice but whichever you choose you can't be wrong with lenses of this quality.
Great review David! I was actually wondering what you'd make of this lens in comparison to the 35-100 f2.8. And now I know.
Frederick Van Johnson Nice to hear from you again. I was a bit surprised because you expect to make sharpness allowances at least for cheaper lenses but this bucks that. It reminds me a bit of Yamaha guitars, where the base model sounds and plays much like the top models, just lacks the fancy inlays, gold plating, exotic woods and hot pickups.
David Thorpe Nice to discover that there's a guitarist in you! :)
mcol3 Guitars and music relate to photography somehow. I've worked with many musicians and a surprising number of them are photographers too. I think maybe the two things are similar in being a blend of artistic and physical skills plus the technical side of the instrument itself.
+David Thorpe I have a few Yamaha guitars myself...nice quality 3rd models up from base I think.FG730s and pacifica 112v
Anyway...how do you think this compares to the Oly 40-150 F4-5.6 (at least to 100mm). I just love the size of this one....and I'd only get it for $200ish from Ebay....not worth $400 to me...but at that price wonder how the IQ compares? Not that the 40-150 is big or heavy. I've sorta held off getting one...and now considering the 40-150 F2.8, but that might be overkill ..
+Steve F The little Panasonic has a bit better edge sharpness but for practical purposes, there's nothing to choose between them optically. The 35-100 stabilized, of course so better for a Panasonic body. If you really want the extra 50mm reach - and it can be very useful to have - then the Olympus it must be. For me, the Panasonic is such an attractive and handy little lens that I'd forego the extra 50mm in favour of pocketabilty to the point where you can find no reason _not_ to have it with you.
The f/2.8 is a whole different ball game. It's better in every way than these two, as it should be given the cost. But you pay a heavy price in weight and size (by MFT standards, that is) and it really is only worth while if you intend to use - need - that f/2.8 aperture. I have one for when I am working with it and I know I'll need it. As such, it gets about 10% of the use my mini Panasonic does.
hello david! im an owner of oly 10 mark 2 and was about to buy the 40 150 4-5.6 until i saw this video and I'd like to ask you if you know which lens will have faster AF and work better at 100mm ! oly have 250€ and pana 300€ in greece ! thank you for your great videos ! its a big help!! cheers
Hello Thedoris - I'd go with the 40-150mm Olympus if I were you. It's a good performer (as are most Micro Four Thirds lenses!) and gives you an extra 50mm at the long end, which is very useful. The lens is bigger than the Panasonic but still small. I'd say the 35-100mm is a bit sharper in the centre but not that you'd notice in day to day use.
David Thorpe thanks a lot for your fast reply ! cant wait to see more of your mft exelent videos!
Thanks for the review. Mine came wrapped only in bubble wrap, no box or manual. Is it he smae for you?
No, mine came packaged the same way as all Panasonic lenses, in a box with hood and a little pouch. Something strange there, Arsen, unless it was a special buy.
Actually I got it at 50% discount. thanks.
For that price I'd be happy to ditch the pouch and manual. Don't lose the lens hood like I did. It cost me £40 and had to be imported from Japan!
I was happy indeed! thanks.
David, I have heard the argument that just as a half size sensor doubles the effective length of the lens it also doubles - or halves - the value of the aperture. Does this not mean that f5.6 on a 35-100, at the long end, is approaching too great a limitation? What is its equivalence on a full frame camera, f8, f11? Isn;t that going to force me to up the iso and risk greater noise? Thanks for the great reviews, btw. You're the one I always turn to first.
Malachi O' Doherty hanks Malachi. There are many ways of interpreting equivalences but they are ultimately fruitless because an MFT camera is not a FF camera. If correct exposure on a FF camera if 1/500th @ f.2,8 at 200ISO, then it will be 1.500th @ f/2.8 on an MFT camera. Equivalences are just a complicated way of stating the obvious - a smaller sensor will be noisier than a larger one.
David Thorpe Thank you, not least for so gently pointing out that I asked a stupid question.
Another interesting and revealing review. Panasonic seem to have produced something rather exceptional. I personally love the Olympus primes 25mm and 45mm and have been trying to decide for a while if I should opt for the 75mm or go for the 35-100mm f2.8 for more versatility...however since there have now been a few great reviews of the f4-5.6 version including yours I am rather pleased I waited as it seems, I could for around the same money as the f2.8 on its own look at opting for both the 75mm f1.8 and 35-100mm f4-5.6! remarkable...
NQ Media I hadn't thought of looking at it the way you have - it's interesting how the introduction of a lens like this opens up other options. I am sure Panasonic will be delighted that they have given you the opportunity to buy this and an Olympus lens instead of their 2.8 zoom :-)
Thanks David I guess for anyone who hasn't previously purchased the f2.8 as you have the options are there, especially if as you seem to indicate the f4-5.6 is right up there in terms of optical quality. Of course if Panasonic ;) felt that they wanted to reduce the price of the f2.8 to around the £580 mark then it may make me think again but at £870 plus it seems somewhat excessive even allowing for the constant f2.8 aperture...
NQ Media I don't think £870 is excessive for the lens, it's in line with most other makers prices for similar optics. That said, it certainly isn't a bargain. The prices for UK sourced lenses don't seem to vary much. I wonder if that is because demand is strong or whether otherwise the profit margin is too small? I have no idea what a shop would buy this lens for and what the margins would be on the retail price. Looking on Amazon I see that the small lens costs less than one third of the 2.8 one. Comparitivley, that is a bit of a bargain, actually.
David Thorpe yes in many ways I agree especially compared to other makers similar offerings. I have also noticed that prices do not seem to fluctuate much even during sales periods like Black Friday or over Christmas. However the interesting aspect here is that according to your review and a couple of others the new 35-100 f4-5.6 is seemingly optically way ahead of perhaps what you may expect at its price point (compared to the 45-150mm for example). Normally you would probably look at both versions expecting to see a significant difference in the sharpness and tonal quality and say ok I can see why I need to pay an extra £500 for that lens because it is obvious. However in this scenario you and others appear to indicate that unless you wish to use the lens indoors for performances or similar then the f4-5.6 looks incredible value given the quality of the output. The bokeh and the inset you did at 250% towards the end of your review looks very impressive at least to my eyes. Can I ask if that particular shot was taken at 100mm? or 75mm perhaps? the bokeh behind looks very impressive (creamy) especially if that's 5.6?
NQ Media Isn't EXIF wonderful? That's 100mm at f5.6, so at what is usually a zoom lens's weakest zoom end and open aperture. In fact there is little sharpness difference that I can discern at through the zoom range. At times an extra 2 stops speed at 100mm could make a big difference but for me at least it would be a rare occasion when I _had_ to have f2.8.
How is the optical performance of this sense compared to the Panasonic 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 Zoom Lens?
***** It's hard to describe but I'd say the 35-100 has more bite, somehow. Its sharpness strikes you. The 14-140 has superb performance but doesn't match the overall crispness of the smaller lens. But, of course, it is comparing chalk and cheese. You need two lenses at least to cover the range of the 14-140 . In day to day use for on screen viewing and prints at 10x8 inches, there's not a lot of difference.
+Asa Jar Hi Asa I can't reply to you directly, no reply button on the post but have fun with the lens! A telephoto zoom smaller than most kit zooms - crazy!
Seems clear that both this and the 12-32 are great walkabout lenses for the GM/GX lines.
When the light gets low, pop on the 20mm, 14mm, or 15mm based on personal preference.
Great reviews as always.
kb5ql Thanks! Yes, and even with the extra lens for low light you wouldn't really need a special bag. Amazing.
great reviews (thumbs up)
Thank you, sir!
How does this compare to 45-140 f4-5.6? I can get it for half the price of 35-100?
It's main selling point is the tiny size which makes it uniquely 'take everywhere' for such a zoom range. Its sharpness is better than the 45-140's too. Both are good value but the size/ performance of the 35-100 is very attractive.
Do you have a camera manual for the gx8?
Hi David - if you mean one of my books, yes. It's on Amazon tinyurl.com/jv44uut
ive read somewhere you replied to someone else that the 35 100 video quality is sharper?
The 35-100 with a smaller zoom range is sharper than the 14-140 but the difference to the eye is marginal, especially after video compression. I have both lenses but use the 14-140 for video because the ease of use and ability to change framing while shooting is more valuable.
Hi David, I was wondering if you could give me your opinion on the image quality (particularly sharpness) of this Panasonic 35 100 f4 lens verse the Olympus 40-150 variable aperture lens.
I had a question awhile ago about this very lens and you were extremely helpful, however I didn't end up buying it at that time. Well, I am now close to pulling the trigger again ;)
I now have an EM10ii and just ordered the Oly 12-40 2.8 :) to add to my 3 primes (14, 20, 42.5).
I want a small light tele lens for general use and landscape photography. I will invariably use it for some spontaneous wildlife shots, but I do have a dedicated full frame zoom for that, so it's not the main purpose at all.
I like the small size and low weight of this lens vs the Oly, but the extra reach of the Oly makes those points about even for me. The rear metal mount of the Pany is a plus, and the zoom rotation of the Oly matching my newly ordered Oly 12-40 a plus for it. Both lenses I can get for $200AUD or less, so their well and evenly priced. The final, and very important factor therefore is the image quality of the two lenses (particularly as I want it largely for landscape shots). Based on your review, where you compare the image quality of this lens quite favourably to its big 2.8 brother, and other reviews of both lenses (but no direct comparison), I assume there is at least a decent enough edge towards the Pany in image quality / sharpness. I recall often hearing the Oly 40-150 is a bit weaker at infinity, which is also very important for landscapes. What is your opinion?
Thanks in advance for any advice, and of course, for all your great MFT RUclips reviews! Apologies if this has been asked before.
Hi Dan - the sharpness of the Olympus at long focal lengths is very similar to the Panasonic. Where the Olympus suffers is at the shorter end where edge sharpness drops off quite a lot. The Panasonic is more consistent across the zoom range (and actually best used at full aperture all the way through). For that reason, I'd choose the Panasonic. It depends on what you do but I use something like 40-60mm a lot for landscapes and edge sharpness is very important.
If you really wanted the extra 50mm reach - and it is quite a lot - you'd just want to avoid the Olympus's 40-55mm range for anything critical. Given the compactness of the Panasonic, I'd prefer that. Hope that helps and thanks for the kind words.
David Thorpe Great, thank you David! That helps me give the nod to the panasonic. Thanks also for replying so quick. I'm very excited to get my two new zooms and test them out fully.
Thanks for yet another great review. Strange how inexpensive this lens is; perfect price as dont use this range much ☺
+Uscenes relaxing videos Yes, it's so small that carrying it just on the off-chance is no hardship.
Finally got around to ordering it. Bargain at £109 brand new including shipping on eBay. Will combine nicely with my 12-32 for lightweight travel. Will be tiny next to my big old 70-210 PK mount.
I was using mine the other day and marvelling at the sharpness of it. 109 quid is a steal!
+David Thorpe. Istantly fell in love with this lens for outdoor use. Amazing quality, perfect walk around focal range (for outdoors in daylight) and very light and compact. With the 12-32 and some fast primes my set is complete. I was worried the range would be restricted when the others go longer, but so far it has been all I wanted. :)
I think 100mm is about the longest I'd consider suitable for normal everyday use. Longer than that and it seesm more specialist to me. The focal lengths from 12-100mm would cover 95% of all pictures taken I'd bet. I think this lens is one of my 'must haves' because with the 12-32 even the biggest Micro Four Thirds body will tuck a way in a small bag.
dave narra I can't reply directly on You Tube for some reason, Dave. As an only lens, there is no question that the 14-140 is the one to go for. You may even find it's all you ever need! The stabilisation is similar to the 35-100, the lens is optimized for low noise video and, while the sharpness is not in principle as high as the 35-100, this will be pretty academic in video. I'd say it is the ideal answer to your requirements. You may later on buy other lenses but I doubt you will ever sell this one.
So are you saying that 14-140 is better or the 35-100 for video
dave narra They are equally good for video use but the 14-140 is the more versatile lens, covering from wide angle right through to tele in one go. With the 35-100 you have no wide or normal focal lengths so ultimately you would find yourself needing a standard zoom _as well_.
I'm sorry for to much question, but other than those, which micro 4/3 lens which lens would you recommend for video for under $200 with image stabilization.
dave narra That's ok, Dave. There's not much choice at that price point. I'd be looking for the Panasonic 14-42mm standard kit zoom. It's £179 or $263 in the UK but only $164/ £136 dollars on Amazon in the USA. And a decent lens, too.
Hi How this lens compare to 45-150?
The 35-100 is consistently sharp right across the zoom range whereas the 45-10=50 drops off at the long end. Unless you really want the extra 50mm, the much more compact 35-100 is a better buy.
@@DavidThorpeMFT I think buy this 35-100 and 100-300 :) but more must have that 35-100 thats give me 70-200 Good range
Thanks
now iam using the kitlens 14-42
40-150 or 35-100 which one do you use most nowadays
Probably about equal. I have the little one with me all the time and take the big one when I'm out to do some serious work. So the mini-lens would be used fairly constantly, always in my shoulder bag, while the f/2.8 would take lots of pictures in a day or two.
David Thorpe I mean 35-100 2.8 vs 40-150 2.8
Sorry! The Olympus one. Again, because it replaces 2 lenses since I use the 150mm end a great deal. If only it were the size of the Panasonic but those laws of optics just get in the way!
qany
David Thorpe have you used Panasonic 45-150mm f4-5.6?
iam using the g7 always on tripod
When I was doing my photographic apprenticeship on a local newspaper the chief photographer told me that a tripod should always be used unless the circumstances made it impractical. Modern stabilization has made it less necessary but modern facilities like HDR have started to make a 'pod necessary again.
This and the 12-32, are a perfect kit with the gm
SamuelBarnes A camera system that fits in the palm of your hand!
thank you for this you seem to know a lot thanks man keep up the good work bought my self the g7 my first camera with interchangeable lenses sorry for my bad english the price of this lens is very nice iam not very familiar too video shooting Always used simple videocams point and shoot iam happy with people like you will subscribe and somethimes ask a few questions hope you dont mind sir
Thanks Hein and you are welcome! I've been out using this lens today. Not only small and reasonably priced but great sharpness too. It's so tiny, just take it everywhere.
So tiny but so slow in aperture. Bummer. Good having the stabilisation to help. Deffo just a bright day sports lens.
Dombowerphoto Tiny size with wide aperture is trying to make two and two not equal four unfortunately. As is wide aperture and small price!
Bokeh is not bad on this lens.
mp4podcastDOTcom Yes, quite nice and soft in the portraits. My daughter thought the lens was too sharp, though!
Bought this lens as no way I am paying that kind on money for the 2.8 version Lumix , great output for a lens at that price I have to say but the build quality is terrible in fact on another level of terrible . Can't complain I suppose at £139
That's incredibly cheap. Does it have a metal or plastic lens mount? I've not had any trouble with mine and the build quality seems OK. Practically speaking I have more faith in the ruggedness of a plastic lens than metal ones, from personal experience. Plastic just doesn't feel as good.