The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

No 150mm

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
So I sold the Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8. To big, to bulky with the hood on, particularly for travel, sharp but not my taste when it comes to rendering, no IS except on Olympus bodies, too front heavy except on the E-M1... not my lens. But I need the focal length, 150 or 200mm. A 150 or 200mm f/2.8 prime would have been perfect, even an f/4. But there are no m4/3 primes between 75 and 300mm, and when it comes to zooms, it's either big (Zuiko 40-150 and PL 100-400) or small, kit-lens style plastic lens.

Are any of the cheap ones worth a try? Anyone with experience?
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
So I sold the Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8. To big, to bulky with the hood on, particularly for travel, sharp but not my taste when it comes to rendering, no IS except on Olympus bodies, too front heavy except on the E-M1... not my lens. But I need the focal length, 150 or 200mm. A 150 or 200mm f/2.8 prime would have been perfect, even an f/4. But there are no m4/3 primes between 75 and 300mm, and when it comes to zooms, it's either big (Zuiko 40-150 and PL 100-400) or small, kit-lens style plastic lens.

Are any of the cheap ones worth a try? Anyone with experience?
Good luck anyway, you know that I love my 2.8/40-150 and I cannot see a better lens in that range anyway.

IMHO all the alternatives are just "cheap plastic"
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Good luck anyway, you know that I love my 2.8/40-150 and I cannot see a better lens in that range anyway.

IMHO all the alternatives are just "cheap plastic"
But it's strange isn't it? Fuji lacks a 300mm eqv. prime as well, as do Sony, although the 70-200 f/4 on a DX body covers it for them, the same way as the 40-150mm covers it on m4/3.

But if you look at Canon and Nikon, a 300mm f/4 has been a mainstay in their lineup for decades, and the current full frame Nikon is so tiny it's more or less the Nikon equivalent of the Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, except that it's twice as long (eqv.) as the Zuiko.

Panasonic showed a 150mm f/2.8 prototype a few years ago, but it looked quite large, maybe as large as the Zuiko zoom, and it was later pulled, maybe for that exact reason. I'm sure their coming 50-200mm will be great, but it looks rather large as well. Good zoom lenses mostly are, and heavy.

The problem is that I typically use these focal lengths when I travel, and walking around in remote villages of third world countries with something that looks like a WMD isn't always convenient. I guess I'll buy the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8, and simply pretend that 100mm is enough. It mostly is :)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
But it's strange isn't it? Fuji lacks a 300mm eqv. prime as well, as do Sony, although the 70-200 f/4 on a DX body covers it for them, the same way as the 40-150mm covers it on m4/3.

But if you look at Canon and Nikon, a 300mm f/4 has been a mainstay in their lineup for decades, and the current full frame Nikon is so tiny it's more or less the Nikon equivalent of the Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, except that it's twice as long (eqv.) as the Zuiko.

Panasonic showed a 150mm f/2.8 prototype a few years ago, but it looked quite large, maybe as large as the Zuiko zoom, and it was later pulled, maybe for that exact reason. I'm sure their coming 50-200mm will be great, but it looks rather large as well. Good zoom lenses mostly are, and heavy.

The problem is that I typically use these focal lengths when I travel, and walking around in remote villages of third world countries with something that looks like a WMD isn't always convenient. I guess I'll buy the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8, and simply pretend that 100mm is enough. It mostly is :)
I actually was thinking that the Panasonic 2.8/35-100 must be the right lens for you :D
 

drofnad

Member
Then try to get a used one! This lens is to for so long there must be mint used samples available.
I find it interesting in checking the FM Buy&Sell forum that prices on the 35-100/2.8 & 12-40/2.8 are well lower than when I bought them over a year back, looking over some seemingly reasonable number of offers then & now. It's not as though --as for bodies-- folks should be all looking ahead to the Coming-Soon better version of these lenses. (And I think I had seen lower 12-40 pricing prior to the well-received new 12-100/4.) Still, one looks for "reasonable" and buying sooner means using sooner!

(-;
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I find it interesting in checking the FM Buy&Sell forum that prices on the 35-100/2.8 & 12-40/2.8 are well lower than when I bought them over a year back, looking over some seemingly reasonable number of offers then & now. It's not as though --as for bodies-- folks should be all looking ahead to the Coming-Soon better version of these lenses. (And I think I had seen lower 12-40 pricing prior to the well-received new 12-100/4.) Still, one looks for "reasonable" and buying sooner means using sooner!

(-;
I have a feeling that the reason for the low 12-35/35-100 prices is that the Zuiko 12-40/40-150 look better on paper. The perform better in tests and have a longer range, making the Panasonics look a bit "dated", which they are clearly not. Another reason now may be the upcoming PL trio which will probably outshine the old duo, but at the cost of size, weight and price. On the GX8 body, the Panasonic lenses make perfect sense.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
So I sold the Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8. To big, to bulky with the hood on, particularly for travel, sharp but not my taste when it comes to rendering, no IS except on Olympus bodies, too front heavy except on the E-M1... not my lens. But I need the focal length, 150 or 200mm. A 150 or 200mm f/2.8 prime would have been perfect, even an f/4. But there are no m4/3 primes between 75 and 300mm, and when it comes to zooms, it's either big (Zuiko 40-150 and PL 100-400) or small, kit-lens style plastic lens.

Are any of the cheap ones worth a try? Anyone with experience?
The shockingly small, light, and cheap Olympus M.Zuiko 40-150/4-5.6 (second version) produces astonishingly good photos for a very inexpensive, slow, plastic bodied lens.

The reference standard by which all 150mm lenses for FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds cameras must be measured is the Olympus Zuiko Digital 150mm f/2 ED "super high grade" lens for FourThirds SLR. It's a big, heavy, beast of a lens; but the image quality it produces is simply the best in the business. It's also a perfect optical match to the Olympus EC-14 1.4x teleconverter, netting a 210mm f/2.8 lens. I've never owned one, borrowed and rented one a few times ... absolutely outstanding in every way. I've used it on the E-1, E-5, and E-M1. Expensive (typically $1300-$1800).

G
 

drofnad

Member
I have a feeling that the reason for the low 12-35/35-100 prices is that the Zuiko 12-40/40-150 look better on paper.
Hmm, you maybe mis-read, but first I noticed was lower >>12-40<<, going now in low $600 or lower vs. my >$700 purchase; now, I see 35-100 --the long lens-- also around $100+ cheaper, and the Oly counterpart had been out amply long enough when I got my Pana (for size and cost savings). (I've no idea re 12-35 price.)

(Just today, I see someone offering a 7-14/4 (Pana) at a good $500ish price! --an "old" lens that does quite well. And on this, I missed one at FM only to luck into a fine one for $100 less via KEH.com. Purple fringing hasn't been a big deal for me.)

(-;
 

bensonga

Well-known member
I have been very happy with both the Pana 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 lenses on my GX-8s. I really like the size, build quality and performance of both of these lenses on the GX-8. I had three Panasonic MFT bodies with me at the Rolex Monterey Motorsports Reunion in August, a pair of GX-8s with these lenses mounted and a GH-3 with the vertical/battery grip and a Panasonic 100-300mm lens. I used the 35-100/2.8 quite a lot when I was positioned at The Corkscrew (Turns 8 and 8a) and in the grandstands overlooking Turn 4. It was perfect for these mid-range shots. Here is an example from the top of The Corkscrew. This image is a crop of about 40% of the original.

I received the Oly 75/1.8 for Christmas, so I'm looking forward to trying that one out soon. :)

Gary

GX-8, 35-100/2.8 at 100mm, ISO400, f11 at 1/500th
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I have been very happy with both the Pana 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 lenses on my GX-8s. I really like the size, build quality and performance of both of these lenses on the GX-8. I had three Panasonic MFT bodies with me at the Rolex Monterey Motorsports Reunion in August, a pair of GX-8s with these lenses mounted and a GH-3 with the vertical/battery grip and a Panasonic 100-300mm lens. I used the 35-100/2.8 quite a lot when I was positioned at The Corkscrew (Turns 8 and 8a) and in the grandstands overlooking Turn 4. It was perfect for these mid-range shots. Here is an example from the top of The Corkscrew. This image is a crop of about 40% of the original.

I received the Oly 75/1.8 for Christmas, so I'm looking forward to trying that one out soon. :)

Gary
Interesting post, Gary. How do you find the 100-300? I've seen somewhat mixed reviews, but consider buying one to use until I can afford the PL 100-400mm and/or the announced PL 50-200mm.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Interesting post, Gary. How do you find the 100-300? I've seen somewhat mixed reviews, but consider buying one to use until I can afford the PL 100-400mm and/or the announced PL 50-200mm.
Hi Jorgen. I've been pleasantly surprised at how well the 100-300 has performed on the GH3 for me. Like you, I had heard mixed reviews of it, but I didn't want to spend the big bucks for the much larger PL 100-400 so I picked up a 100-300 when there was a rebate on it. I took quite a few shots with it at Laguna Seca and have taken others since then of static objects which are even better. This trip to Laguna Seca was my first time shooting motorsports, so it was a real learning experience for me. Overall, I've been happy with the IQ of this lens, even on the older GH3. I've also used it on the GX8 with even better results.

Here are a couple of examples from the races and one static shot (at 300mm).

Gary





 

bensonga

Well-known member
For ~$350, I definitely think it is worth a try. I just posted a couple more shots taken at Laguna Seca with the GH3 and 100-300 on the Fun with 4/3rds thread.

Gary
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Problem solved for now. Somebody whispered in my ear that the Samyang 135mm f/2 is a nice lens, so I bought one. Build quality is great, price is a joke and image quality... look for yourself. Although it's available in m4/3 mount, I bought one in F-mount to get full functionality with my F-mount bodies as well. For bokeh test, see the Nikon image thread.

Here's a snapshot I did this morning, handheld but at 1/12800s, f/2.0:

Full image:



Centre



Left side



Lower right corner



Looks like a keeper to me :)
 
Top