Your comments are 💯% accurate based on my V2 35-100 f2.8. Having said that I'm selling mine since I desire the PL 50-200 f2.8/4.0 for it's extra range. I'm also selling my 100-300mm v2 and my Lumix 25mm f1.7 because I don't use them enough. After owning the PL 12-60 f2.8/4 and the PL 8-18mm I'm spoiled by their wonderful feel, construction and IQ on my G9.
The Leica 50-200 replaces the 45-200 not the 35-100 f/2.8 - the constant aperture is a must-have for shooting movie, it keeps the exposure value the same when zooming. At 100mm the Leica is f/3.5, not as fast as the GX - and f/2.8 at 100mm is pretty fast from a zoom. Extra long lenses are generally not very fast because the DoF would be too shallow. Meaning that the aperture range of the Lumix 45-200 f/4-5.6 is perfectly adequate.
Got the mkII version along with its matching 12 - 35 f2.8 mkII and its a joy to carry. I'm used to lugging around my FF Nikon with the 24 - 70 f2.8 and 70 - 200 f2.8, those lenses are heavy, especially the 70 - 200 which is quite a lump. Great image quality from both lenses and the dual IS2 is unbeatable.
Thanks a lot for review! Even I prefer Olympus, I think Panasonic engineers did excellent job by designing sweet combo 12-35/2.8, 35-100/2.8 in such compact and absolutely lightweight way. Even filter size just 58mm. Plus support for dual is makes this combo a very appealing choice for G9 owners.
Thanks for the review! I got the first version of this second hand for my birthday 2 months ago and I find it just incredible versatile! The optical performance and the fact that it doesn't extend while zooming is so lovely. It's my goto hiking lens with the 12-60 now which is a perfect couple since they share the same filter thread size. I've also gotten comments more than once that my gear looks cheap or entry level with that lens on, which I see as a huge benefit as it should mean it doesn't attract unwanted attention from pickpockets... :)
It's far from entry level, it is a pro lens. The X series were developed by Panasonic quite early on for video, and probably to show what they could do. That would have been for GH2 and GH3. They sit above the G-series with the Leica models.
@@jeffslade1892 I think you didn't quite read my message :) It definitely IS a pro grade lens, but it doesn't look that way in the same way as a Canon L series or other big full frame 70-200 lens does. I cannot count how many times people have attempted to grab and run away with my camera bag when I had a big Canon dslr. Never happened with my Lumix lenses!
@@AndrPhoto no, because it is so much smaller. I've never had anyone try to snatch my camera. But then I don't live in a city, and probably look a bit mean and ugly and likely to hurt them.
The tiny size + wide aperture of this lens makes it such a powerful tool for indoor event shooting. I suppose the weather sealing is also great insurance against spilled drinks and other mishaps!
I'm planning on this being my next lens even though I shoot Olympus because I hate the size of the 40-150mm pro. 70-200 equivalent would be excellent for my event photography. I like the range of the 40-150mm but I want better image quality than the kit. If Olympus does make an f/4 pro version of their 40-150mm, then it would be my everyday and hiking telephoto lens.
I have the Mark II. I've had it for about 8 months and it's only been off my G9 for a couple hours since I got it. Love it to death. I'd love them to make a similar range lens that's say an f2 or F2.4. It would obviously be bigger, but still smaller than any FF, 70-200 f2.8
Thanks Matti for this review. I own the Mk1 lens since about 4 years now with an Olympus EM5II and now with EM1MIII. It's a great lens for portraits allowing very shallow depth of field and quite compact design. If taking with me Tele lens it's still my first choice.
Just bough this lens couple a months ago, great lens! 450e in used condition. Now I only need the 12-35 f/2.8 and 200 f/2.8 and my sports kit is complete!
It is the only Pro lens i have from Panasonic ...and it is a really nice lens . Nice that the micro 4/3 system still alive with both Olympus and Panasonic .
I got this lens a while ago, it's a nice lens but I find I never have use for it. It's only stand out use cases would to me be, 1. On the go medium zoom for video, especially for using it's lens stabilization. 2. On the go portraits if weaving between tables at a wedding so you can work with available space, and to choose how much background should be in shot within that space. But the reasons I personally don't use it is that, 1. for film, I usually like to tripod if I'm using such zoom anyway. 2. For portraits, I prefer to have 2 cameras ready, one with a wide low f number lens for tight spaces, and one a dedicated portrait prime. This way if I don't like the background I have the option to blow it away at f1.4, or even f0.95, depending on the lens of the day, which I find more valuable than getting the viewing angle perfect using a zoom lens with at most f2.8. But it is still a very nice sharp lens. And if you have the space to zoom, then the f2.8 can blow away backgrounds. So each for their own I say.
I purchased a second hand mk 1 version a few months ago. Found a good deal at a reputable retailer and included warranty as well. It has been my "portrait" lens since I got it.
I've bought several Panasonic lenses used but the only one that ever burned me was a 14-42 PZ lens from KEH. It was sold in EX+ condition IIRC but it never quite focused right and seemed to have more shutter shock issues than normal with my GX1. I actually tried it out again last week on my G9 because I wanted a small zoom lens that wouldn't make my G9 stand out too much and the optical performance was worse than I remembered. Thankfully I also brought my 20 f/1.7 II (also bought from KEH) which has been a great lens so far. I've actually contemplated taking the 14-42 PZ apart to see if it can be fixed. I have some experience with micro electronics repair and the lens has virtually no value to me as it sits.
I have two of the GX 14-42 PZ and they're both perfect. Whilst they're not up to the 12-35 f/2.8 they're better than the kit 14-42 and the equivalent Oly EZ Its sibling the GX 45-175 PZ is tiny too. Ditch it and get one that works properly.
This is a great, compact lens on both Olympus and Panasonic bodies. I like to pair this 35-100 2.8 with the Olympus 12-40 2.8 and Olympus 17 1.8 prime or Leica 15mm 1.7 in a small bag (Peak Design 5L). The 35-100, for me, is especially good for taking photos of my kids running around outside (or inside when they are still - IBIS on m43 is great!), as well as landscapes. All-in-all a good, compact, life "event" lens.
This is a little off topic, but I think you have to put the timestamps before the chapter names in order for the chapters feature to work. On another note, I've been waiting for this review for a really long time! Good to hear your professional opinion on the lens.
If it works, do you see a big or small difference in quality between the 2 converters ? It is better to use the TC14 with only one stop increase ? Or TC20 is enough good to bé used with 35-100 or 50-200?
I have had the Mk.1 versions 12-35 and 35-100 f/2.8 for many years. I got them for my GH4. They were lauded as "world class lenses" whatever that means. There is a lesser 35-100 that is slower, it is not comparable. The 35-100 does make a good general purpose and portrait lens. The constant aperture keeps the same exposure value when zooming, which can be important shooting movie. They are only just slightly soft wide open, like a Leica they can be used wide open if necessary. I reckon the pair are the two top MFT zoom lenses. The Oly versions equal the glass but they are not stabilised. The lens is robust. I had the tripod kicked over by a pair of drunks at a gig, the only thing broken was the hood, the lens and GH4 were undamaged. Your demo lens must have received a mighty crash to have unsettled it, probably smashed the hood. Spare hoods are available. The bottom of my 35-100 has been creased by the tripod plate, but it's only thin casing not the frame of the lens. I wish Panasonic still made the DMW-TA1 adapter to lift the camera body. The Mk.1 stabilisation on the G9 is only Dual-IS but that is more than adequate, they're well stabilised by the lens Power-OIS on the GH4 with no body stabilisation. I will not be upgrading to the Mk.2, that is unnecessary.
C‘mon, really? I‘ve been looking for a used version of this lens the last 3 days and now you made a video on it? I have the Olympus 40-150 f2.8. It‘s a fantastic lens, but I‘m looking for something smaller. Now I‘m even more tempted to put the 35-100 on my G9.
just viewed this review. I have been a still photographer for years. Bought my first mirrorless(used g7) last year. Getting into cinematography , working on my first nature documentary. Have the panasonic 25mm and panasonic-Leica 100-400. Very interested in this lense. Looking probably at a used version of this lense. At some point will probably get a second panasonic body with stabilization. Can you recommend a G camera that wont break the bank. Thanks in advance
For still photography the G9 that he mentioned is a very very good camera, and combined with the Leica 100-400 it is a phenomenal camera for birds and wildlife. The G9 is some kind of mixed camera, very good for stills and with few updates they are exceptional in video, with very good IBIS.
I have that Leica DG version. The optical design according to spec sheets seem pretty much identical. But the 'Leica coatings' may be different. Online images of the non-Leica versions seem to tell that they are quite similar in their rendering. I suspect the Leica version may have a different look in the shadows. If you don't mind swirly bokeh (fairly strong cat's eye effect) any version will give you some retro-style '3D pop' in the images (to my eyes at least.) EDIT: This means if you don't like the first two versions, chances are you won't be liking the 35-100DG either, or vice versa. I love mine.
Hi Matti nice review and gd to see someone recommending 2nd hand so many gd buys available. Hope you don't mind I would just like to add that I find these larger lenses can balance well on the Pana GX80 or GX9 when you add the HG-GX9 handgrip for £35 which transforms the handling with the Leica 8-18 & 12-60 f2.8-4 lenses I use. Regards Rich
Hi Matti, I just sold the 35-100 II. I will say why here. The fact is this lens should have been 2.8-4. At 100 f2.8, the sharpness is very, very underwhelming. My 14-140 at 100mm while darker obviously at f5.4, was visibly sharper. The 35-100 to be equally sharp as the 14-140 needs to be at f4, while at 5.6 is sharper. I found it useless since I can't use it wide open at 100mm f2.8 to get acceptable results in terms of sharpness. I returned too my 14-140. On the plus side, it is very compact, weather sealed, much better on dual IS than the 14-140. It focuses faster too.
Do you think buying the newer model vs a used one from 2013 is worthwhile? It’s about a $150 savings buying the older used model in what they say is excellent condition
The newer model has an updated stabilizer and an updated aperture control. It's up to you to decide if those are worth the extra money. The optical performance is the same on both.
Hi from Turkey hope you are well... I have a question for this lens. Did you ever try this with any olympus body? 40 -150 is too big and zuiko's 12-100 a bit slow. Range of this lens i am looking for however i dont have any idea how it works with olympus body...
Both are very good, but it depends on what you plan to shoot. If you need a compact general telephoto lens, take the 35-100mm. If you plan to shoot animal photos, take the 50-200mm.
Thanks Matti for all your good videos. I am wondering if DMW-TC 14 or 20 are usable with this Lens ? Could you consider that teleconverter is limited to 50-200 or higher as mentionné by Panasonic on the web ? Thanks for your clever answers.
I don't have either and have not tried, if they fit or work with other lenses. However, the 50-200mm F2.8-4 is an excellent lens and quite compact too. So, if that constant F2.8 is not critical for you, I can recommend the 50-200mm instead of the 35-100mm F2.8.
You have probably right 50-200m is a vécu good lens. I was thinking to have 35-100 at 2.8 and then with converter 100-140 at 4.0 (TC14) or 100-200 at 5.6 TC20). Sur solution may bring a little more flexibility. Concerning quality, your choice is better but you start at 50 rather than 35. So you miss 42.5 which it supposes to be the best focal length for portrait. BR
@@francoisguerin_1386 There is no best lens portraits, really. Traditionally 85-105mm FF is considered optimal, so a 50mm MFT would be fine, but there are many fine portraits shot on a shorter or longer lens than that.
It's probably a better idea to use the optical stabilizer, because this is a telephoto lens. However, you can of course test it yourself and see which stabilizer works better.
@@mattisulanto I should of put f4 - 5.6 but I thought you might be able to remember it. But yeah you did a video on it. Which of the two did you like better ruclips.net/video/wYYfAgp00UM/видео.html
@@mattisulanto thank you so much, I'm beginner in photography, I'm using Lumix gf3 an old camera..how you think about leica lens 100-400mm..it work with it???.i hope give me some advice too... thanks you sir
The lens works fine, but since the GF3 does not have a viewfinder, only rear screen, it’s not ideal for telephoto shooting. It’s much easier to shoot on a long telephoto using a camera that has a viewfinder, in my opinion.
Your comments are 💯% accurate based on my V2 35-100 f2.8. Having said that I'm selling mine since I desire the PL 50-200 f2.8/4.0 for it's extra range. I'm also selling my 100-300mm v2 and my Lumix 25mm f1.7 because I don't use them enough. After owning the PL 12-60 f2.8/4 and the PL 8-18mm I'm spoiled by their wonderful feel, construction and IQ on my G9.
The Leica 50-200 replaces the 45-200 not the 35-100 f/2.8 - the constant aperture is a must-have for shooting movie, it keeps the exposure value the same when zooming. At 100mm the Leica is f/3.5, not as fast as the GX - and f/2.8 at 100mm is pretty fast from a zoom.
Extra long lenses are generally not very fast because the DoF would be too shallow. Meaning that the aperture range of the Lumix 45-200 f/4-5.6 is perfectly adequate.
Got the mkII version along with its matching 12 - 35 f2.8 mkII and its a joy to carry. I'm used to lugging around my FF Nikon with the 24 - 70 f2.8 and 70 - 200 f2.8, those lenses are heavy, especially the 70 - 200 which is quite a lump. Great image quality from both lenses and the dual IS2 is unbeatable.
Thanks a lot for review! Even I prefer Olympus, I think Panasonic engineers did excellent job by designing sweet combo 12-35/2.8, 35-100/2.8 in such compact and absolutely lightweight way. Even filter size just 58mm. Plus support for dual is makes this combo a very appealing choice for G9 owners.
Just bought this lens. So far, I like it.
Great to hear!
I have the mk1 version and it's one of my favorite mid-range tele zoom lenses. Fast and sharp, ideal for portraits.
Thanks for the review! I got the first version of this second hand for my birthday 2 months ago and I find it just incredible versatile! The optical performance and the fact that it doesn't extend while zooming is so lovely. It's my goto hiking lens with the 12-60 now which is a perfect couple since they share the same filter thread size. I've also gotten comments more than once that my gear looks cheap or entry level with that lens on, which I see as a huge benefit as it should mean it doesn't attract unwanted attention from pickpockets... :)
Thanks for sharing.
It's far from entry level, it is a pro lens.
The X series were developed by Panasonic quite early on for video, and probably to show what they could do. That would have been for GH2 and GH3. They sit above the G-series with the Leica models.
@@jeffslade1892 I think you didn't quite read my message :) It definitely IS a pro grade lens, but it doesn't look that way in the same way as a Canon L series or other big full frame 70-200 lens does. I cannot count how many times people have attempted to grab and run away with my camera bag when I had a big Canon dslr. Never happened with my Lumix lenses!
@@AndrPhoto no, because it is so much smaller.
I've never had anyone try to snatch my camera. But then I don't live in a city, and probably look a bit mean and ugly and likely to hurt them.
The tiny size + wide aperture of this lens makes it such a powerful tool for indoor event shooting. I suppose the weather sealing is also great insurance against spilled drinks and other mishaps!
Spilled drinks😀
I'm planning on this being my next lens even though I shoot Olympus because I hate the size of the 40-150mm pro. 70-200 equivalent would be excellent for my event photography. I like the range of the 40-150mm but I want better image quality than the kit. If Olympus does make an f/4 pro version of their 40-150mm, then it would be my everyday and hiking telephoto lens.
I have a 35-100/4-5.6. If I'm using it on my GM1, then you're talking about a compact combination. It even fits into my jacket pocket.
That is a tiny combo.
I have the Mark II. I've had it for about 8 months and it's only been off my G9 for a couple hours since I got it. Love it to death. I'd love them to make a similar range lens that's say an f2 or F2.4. It would obviously be bigger, but still smaller than any FF, 70-200 f2.8
I bought the Mk-II version in January and it's quickly become a mainstay.
This is a really great outdoor lens. I shot a Rodeo with it and got amazing pictures
Thanks Matti for this review.
I own the Mk1 lens since about 4 years now with an Olympus EM5II and now with EM1MIII.
It's a great lens for portraits allowing very shallow depth of field and quite compact design. If taking with me Tele lens it's still my first choice.
Just bough this lens couple a months ago, great lens! 450e in used condition. Now I only need the 12-35 f/2.8 and 200 f/2.8 and my sports kit is complete!
Thanks for sharing. It is a great lens.
just bought this cant wait to use it!
It‘s a fantastic lens. I like it very much
It really is!
It is the only Pro lens i have from Panasonic ...and it is a really nice lens . Nice that the micro 4/3 system still alive with both Olympus and Panasonic .
I got this lens a while ago, it's a nice lens but I find I never have use for it. It's only stand out use cases would to me be, 1. On the go medium zoom for video, especially for using it's lens stabilization. 2. On the go portraits if weaving between tables at a wedding so you can work with available space, and to choose how much background should be in shot within that space.
But the reasons I personally don't use it is that, 1. for film, I usually like to tripod if I'm using such zoom anyway. 2. For portraits, I prefer to have 2 cameras ready, one with a wide low f number lens for tight spaces, and one a dedicated portrait prime. This way if I don't like the background I have the option to blow it away at f1.4, or even f0.95, depending on the lens of the day, which I find more valuable than getting the viewing angle perfect using a zoom lens with at most f2.8.
But it is still a very nice sharp lens. And if you have the space to zoom, then the f2.8 can blow away backgrounds. So each for their own I say.
Thanks for sharing.
I purchased a second hand mk 1 version a few months ago. Found a good deal at a reputable retailer and included warranty as well. It has been my "portrait" lens since I got it.
Thanks for sharing!
I've bought several Panasonic lenses used but the only one that ever burned me was a 14-42 PZ lens from KEH. It was sold in EX+ condition IIRC but it never quite focused right and seemed to have more shutter shock issues than normal with my GX1. I actually tried it out again last week on my G9 because I wanted a small zoom lens that wouldn't make my G9 stand out too much and the optical performance was worse than I remembered. Thankfully I also brought my 20 f/1.7 II (also bought from KEH) which has been a great lens so far. I've actually contemplated taking the 14-42 PZ apart to see if it can be fixed. I have some experience with micro electronics repair and the lens has virtually no value to me as it sits.
I have two of the GX 14-42 PZ and they're both perfect.
Whilst they're not up to the 12-35 f/2.8 they're better than the kit 14-42 and the equivalent Oly EZ
Its sibling the GX 45-175 PZ is tiny too.
Ditch it and get one that works properly.
Hi I have this lens and love it. Find it a bit unforgiving and precise at times. thanks
This is a great, compact lens on both Olympus and Panasonic bodies. I like to pair this 35-100 2.8 with the Olympus 12-40 2.8 and Olympus 17 1.8 prime or Leica 15mm 1.7 in a small bag (Peak Design 5L). The 35-100, for me, is especially good for taking photos of my kids running around outside (or inside when they are still - IBIS on m43 is great!), as well as landscapes. All-in-all a good, compact, life "event" lens.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for the review. What price would be good for a used one?
This is a little off topic, but I think you have to put the timestamps before the chapter names in order for the chapters feature to work.
On another note, I've been waiting for this review for a really long time! Good to hear your professional opinion on the lens.
Thanks! The time stamps seems to work, though.
Love my mk2. My favourite lens.
If it works, do you see a big or small difference in quality between the 2 converters ?
It is better to use the TC14 with only one stop increase ?
Or TC20 is enough good to bé used with 35-100 or 50-200?
Timely vid thanks
I have had the Mk.1 versions 12-35 and 35-100 f/2.8 for many years. I got them for my GH4. They were lauded as "world class lenses" whatever that means. There is a lesser 35-100 that is slower, it is not comparable.
The 35-100 does make a good general purpose and portrait lens. The constant aperture keeps the same exposure value when zooming, which can be important shooting movie. They are only just slightly soft wide open, like a Leica they can be used wide open if necessary.
I reckon the pair are the two top MFT zoom lenses. The Oly versions equal the glass but they are not stabilised.
The lens is robust. I had the tripod kicked over by a pair of drunks at a gig, the only thing broken was the hood, the lens and GH4 were undamaged. Your demo lens must have received a mighty crash to have unsettled it, probably smashed the hood. Spare hoods are available.
The bottom of my 35-100 has been creased by the tripod plate, but it's only thin casing not the frame of the lens. I wish Panasonic still made the DMW-TA1 adapter to lift the camera body.
The Mk.1 stabilisation on the G9 is only Dual-IS but that is more than adequate, they're well stabilised by the lens Power-OIS on the GH4 with no body stabilisation. I will not be upgrading to the Mk.2, that is unnecessary.
Thanks for sharing.
C‘mon, really? I‘ve been looking for a used version of this lens the last 3 days and now you made a video on it? I have the Olympus 40-150 f2.8. It‘s a fantastic lens, but I‘m looking for something smaller. Now I‘m even more tempted to put the 35-100 on my G9.
The hood is missing because you simply don't need it! Even the lens agrees with me.
I think someone needed the hood for another similar lens, because he/she lost the original one, but wanted to have the necessary hood.
Love it!
just viewed this review. I have been a still photographer for years. Bought my first mirrorless(used g7) last year. Getting into cinematography , working on my first nature
documentary. Have the panasonic 25mm and panasonic-Leica 100-400. Very interested in this lense. Looking probably at a used version of this lense. At some point will probably get a second panasonic body with stabilization. Can you recommend a G camera that wont break the bank. Thanks in advance
I don't know what breaks your bank, but the G9 is an excellent camera.
For still photography the G9 that he mentioned is a very very good camera, and combined with the Leica 100-400 it is a phenomenal camera for birds and wildlife.
The G9 is some kind of mixed camera, very good for stills and with few updates they are exceptional in video, with very good IBIS.
Is there a Leica variant to this lens. Leica 35-100 2.8?
I have that Leica DG version. The optical design according to spec sheets seem pretty much identical. But the 'Leica coatings' may be different.
Online images of the non-Leica versions seem to tell that they are quite similar in their rendering. I suspect the Leica version may have a different look in the shadows.
If you don't mind swirly bokeh (fairly strong cat's eye effect) any version will give you some retro-style '3D pop' in the images (to my eyes at least.)
EDIT: This means if you don't like the first two versions, chances are you won't be liking the 35-100DG either, or vice versa. I love mine.
Hi Matti nice review and gd to see someone recommending 2nd hand so many gd buys available. Hope you don't mind I would just like to add that I find these larger lenses can balance well on the Pana GX80 or GX9 when you add the HG-GX9 handgrip for £35 which transforms the handling with the Leica 8-18 & 12-60 f2.8-4 lenses I use. Regards Rich
Thanks. Those grips can be handy, but I usually forget to mention them, because I don't like them that much.
@@mattisulanto each to his own 👍👍🙏🏼
Hi Matti, I just sold the 35-100 II. I will say why here.
The fact is this lens should have been 2.8-4. At 100 f2.8, the sharpness is very, very underwhelming. My 14-140 at 100mm while darker obviously at f5.4, was visibly sharper. The 35-100 to be equally sharp as the 14-140 needs to be at f4, while at 5.6 is sharper. I found it useless since I can't use it wide open at 100mm f2.8 to get acceptable results in terms of sharpness. I returned too my 14-140.
On the plus side, it is very compact, weather sealed, much better on dual IS than the 14-140. It focuses faster too.
Maybe there was something wrong with your lens, it should be sharp.
Do you think buying the newer model vs a used one from 2013 is worthwhile? It’s about a $150 savings buying the older used model in what they say is excellent condition
The newer model has an updated stabilizer and an updated aperture control. It's up to you to decide if those are worth the extra money. The optical performance is the same on both.
if I use it on a full format like panasonic s1 R, is it possible ??
Not possible.
Hey Matti, how does this lens compare to the small and inexpensive f/4-5.6 version for image quality alone?
Theres is no significant difference.
@@mattisulanto Thank you, Matti!
Hi from Turkey hope you are well... I have a question for this lens. Did you ever try this with any olympus body? 40 -150 is too big and zuiko's 12-100 a bit slow. Range of this lens i am looking for however i dont have any idea how it works with olympus body...
I have tried it long time ago and I think worked really well.
The mk2 is really good
Hello, saw your review on the 50-200mm as well. Which of these 2 would you recommend to a user who has never own a telephoto lens before?
Both are very good, but it depends on what you plan to shoot. If you need a compact general telephoto lens, take the 35-100mm. If you plan to shoot animal photos, take the 50-200mm.
@@mattisulanto thank you! Looks like I'm going for the 35-100mm since I go for landscape and architecture shots 👍
Thanks Matti for all your good videos.
I am wondering if DMW-TC 14 or 20 are usable with this Lens ?
Could you consider that teleconverter is limited to 50-200 or higher as mentionné by Panasonic on the web ?
Thanks for your clever answers.
I don't have either and have not tried, if they fit or work with other lenses. However, the 50-200mm F2.8-4 is an excellent lens and quite compact too. So, if that constant F2.8 is not critical for you, I can recommend the 50-200mm instead of the 35-100mm F2.8.
You have probably right 50-200m is a vécu good lens.
I was thinking to have 35-100 at 2.8 and then with converter 100-140 at 4.0 (TC14) or 100-200 at 5.6 TC20).
Sur solution may bring a little more flexibility.
Concerning quality, your choice is better but you start at 50 rather than 35.
So you miss 42.5 which it supposes to be the best focal length for portrait.
BR
@@francoisguerin_1386 There is no best lens portraits, really. Traditionally 85-105mm FF is considered optimal, so a 50mm MFT would be fine, but there are many fine portraits shot on a shorter or longer lens than that.
May I ask, what hand strap do you use in this video?
That strap is a one off (actually there are two of them) made by daughter a few years ago.
@@mattisulanto Thanks for replying. So I just need a daughter :-)
is this lens weather sealed? so much smaller then a fullframe 70-200
See at 2:53 about the weather sealing. It's smaller than a FF 70-200, because it's a 35-100 made for a smaller sensor.
I prefer the 14-140 as a great walking around lens
Can i use some teleconverter with this lens (maybe a panasonic or olympus one)?
I don't this is compatible with converters.
When I use this lens on a Olympus M5 mark 3, can I better switch off the O.I.S ?
It's probably a better idea to use the optical stabilizer, because this is a telephoto lens. However, you can of course test it yourself and see which stabilizer works better.
@@mattisulanto Thanx a lot. I shall test it!
It does look compact considering it is f2.8. But it is about the same as the 12-60 or even 14-140 in size, isn't it?
Yes, it's about the same as the 12-60mm F2.8-4.
How would compare this to the 35mm to 100mm f4
Which lens is that? There is no such MFT lens.
@@mattisulanto I should of put f4 - 5.6 but I thought you might be able to remember it.
But yeah you did a video on it. Which of the two did you like better
ruclips.net/video/wYYfAgp00UM/видео.html
thanks mr,can i ask you about my lumix gf3???
Ask away and I’ll answer, if I can.
@@mattisulanto thank you so much, I'm beginner in photography, I'm using Lumix gf3 an old camera..how you think about leica lens 100-400mm..it work with it???.i hope give me some advice too... thanks you sir
The lens works fine, but since the GF3 does not have a viewfinder, only rear screen, it’s not ideal for telephoto shooting. It’s much easier to shoot on a long telephoto using a camera that has a viewfinder, in my opinion.
@@mattisulanto thanks..what lumix can you advise me.. should've be not expensive😁
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I wish it was par-focal.