A list of good/bad MFT lens for new owner?

Started Oct 1, 2012 | Discussions
shihhan
Regular MemberPosts: 307
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to josbiker, Feb 26, 2013

shihhan wrote:

josbiker wrote:

For me the PZ 45-175 has been amazing. Very small, normally very sharp, the lens does not extend when zooming, and the two lenses are a good combo for hand held video clips

Who thinks that this lens is better than the 14-140 for video and foto's?

Can you "forget" the 14-140? Or....

I like "right"answers?

There is no 'right' or 'wrong' answers... as lens choice is as much a mixture of personal need (what you shoot) and your budget as it is to pure objective specifications.

For stills, the 45-175 X will beat the performance of the 14-140 pretty much throughout the range...

Image Quality wise (by looking at MTF charts): 45-175 X will give you much better images both at the centre and at the corners (excellent/good)... whereas the 14-140 will only give you good/fair pictures (if you blow the pictures up to 100%).

Aperture wise (by looking at aperture charts): the 45-175 X is comparatively faster (f4-5.6 variable)... whereas the 14-140 despite what they write (f4-5.8) can be pretty much considered a f5.8 lens, with a bit of f4 bonus at the wide end.

But granted both lenses aren't very fast... if aperture is what you want, then you're currently stuck with primes (45 f1.4, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8) or the extremely pricey 35-100 X.

For video, the 45-175 X features power zoom, which gives you much better and smoother zooming action than manual zoom. (Even though most professional video never zoom anyway...)

Both lenses are HD / Video optimised.

The benefit of the 14-140 is mainly convenience, the fact you don't have to change lens from wide to telephoto... but with this you have to compromise (like every other lens), and unfortunately the compromise is you lose a bit of IQ, Aperture and size/weight.

The 45-175 X on the other hand, is built for image quality (smaller zoom range usually means better IQ) and size advatnage... but you have to compromise on zoom range. The price is also a lot cheaper (£250 v £500)

So it all depends on what you value most!

Very help full! Thanks!

Is it possible to "forget" also the 100-300 and use the ETC funtionality with this lens?

I become than 90-350 mm!! Which of the two is the sharpest above 200 mm?

I think if  I print max. A3 format that there is no difference, is that a fact?

I've never tried etc so I cannot really help you there. But I assume you'll lose pixels as it crops the frame to only use the centre?

I'm assuming native 200mm on the 100-300 will be better than the etc? But of it requires a lens change then there are pro and cons.

Generally with zooms the tele end performance suffers a bit... But etc only uses the centre pixels so I'm not sure.

Best way is to try it somewhere other than Jessop's...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
shihhan
Regular MemberPosts: 307
Like?
Re: A list of good/bad MFT lens for new owner?
In reply to Tvaclavek, Feb 26, 2013

I have the following:

7-14mm - keeper

12-35 - keeper

14mm pancake - keeper for how small it is

25mm f/1.4 - worth the extra $150 over the 20mm (way too slow to focus)

60mm macro -  best of the macros I've tried

40-150mm - cheap but threat when there is enough light

The 45mm is a great lens and cheap too. I'll get another one eventually I'm sure. I really want the 75mm which looks amazing and eventually I'll pick up a 17mm f/1.8 if I can find a sharp copy.  If you are into fisheye the as yang looks great.

Skip all the kit lenses especially if you are coming from full frame like I did.

If money is no object get the 7-14, the 12-35 and 35-100 and then the 17 or 25 depending on your preference and you are covered for just about any situation. Fill deep other lenses depending on need like fisheye or macro et al.

-- hide signature --

- Tom

Hey Tom, what made you get the 60 macro?

I'm debating. The 45 v. 60... Macros
s I already have 45 f1.8 covered...

Is the 60mm reach make up for lack of ois?
The problem with 45 is it feels a bit redundant with the 45 f1.8 already covered?

Thx

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
josbiker
Regular MemberPosts: 372Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to shihhan, Feb 26, 2013

shihhan wrote:

shihhan wrote:

josbiker wrote:

For me the PZ 45-175 has been amazing. Very small, normally very sharp, the lens does not extend when zooming, and the two lenses are a good combo for hand held video clips

Who thinks that this lens is better than the 14-140 for video and foto's?

Can you "forget" the 14-140? Or....

I like "right"answers?

There is no 'right' or 'wrong' answers... as lens choice is as much a mixture of personal need (what you shoot) and your budget as it is to pure objective specifications.

For stills, the 45-175 X will beat the performance of the 14-140 pretty much throughout the range...

Image Quality wise (by looking at MTF charts): 45-175 X will give you much better images both at the centre and at the corners (excellent/good)... whereas the 14-140 will only give you good/fair pictures (if you blow the pictures up to 100%).

Aperture wise (by looking at aperture charts): the 45-175 X is comparatively faster (f4-5.6 variable)... whereas the 14-140 despite what they write (f4-5.8) can be pretty much considered a f5.8 lens, with a bit of f4 bonus at the wide end.

But granted both lenses aren't very fast... if aperture is what you want, then you're currently stuck with primes (45 f1.4, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8) or the extremely pricey 35-100 X.

For video, the 45-175 X features power zoom, which gives you much better and smoother zooming action than manual zoom. (Even though most professional video never zoom anyway...)

Both lenses are HD / Video optimised.

The benefit of the 14-140 is mainly convenience, the fact you don't have to change lens from wide to telephoto... but with this you have to compromise (like every other lens), and unfortunately the compromise is you lose a bit of IQ, Aperture and size/weight.

The 45-175 X on the other hand, is built for image quality (smaller zoom range usually means better IQ) and size advatnage... but you have to compromise on zoom range. The price is also a lot cheaper (£250 v £500)

So it all depends on what you value most!

Very help full! Thanks!

Is it possible to "forget" also the 100-300 and use the ETC funtionality with this lens?

I become than 90-350 mm!! Which of the two is the sharpest above 200 mm?

I think if I print max. A3 format that there is no difference, is that a fact?

I've never tried etc so I cannot really help you there. But I assume you'll lose pixels as it crops the frame to only use the centre?

I'm assuming native 200mm on the 100-300 will be better than the etc? But of it requires a lens change then there are pro and cons.

Generally with zooms the tele end performance suffers a bit... But etc only uses the centre pixels so I'm not sure.

Best way is to try it somewhere other than Jessop's...

Who can shine a light?

 josbiker's gear list:josbiker's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
richarddd
Senior MemberPosts: 2,955Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to sbszine, Feb 26, 2013

sbszine wrote:

Good primes

Samyang 7.5 / 3.5 fisheye

Panasonic 20 / 1.7

Panasonic 25 / 1.4

Oly 45 / 1.8

Oly 60 / 2.8 macro

Oly 75 / 1.8

Good zooms

Panasonic 7-14 / 4

Panasonic 12-35 / 2.8

Panasonic 14-45 / 3.5-5.6

Oly 40-150

Everything else has its supporters and detractors, but the lenses above are considered good quality and / or value by pretty much everyone.

Are there detractors for the Oly 12/2?

There are a lot of complaints about the AF noise and speed of the Panasonic 20/1.7.

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
secretworld
Senior MemberPosts: 1,059Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to richarddd, Feb 26, 2013

Noise is a big word, yes you hear it focussing. Maybe that is why is seems a little slower too. But here in all situations I used it it was fine. Recently I compared the PL25 to the 20 and there isn´t much difference except the 5mm fov difference, which is a huge compliment for the 20mm. It was only a short shoot of a street view so don´t shoot me.

 secretworld's gear list:secretworld's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JCB123
Senior MemberPosts: 1,202Gear list
Like?
Re: No dogs !
In reply to Jefftan, Feb 26, 2013

Jefftan wrote:

Is there a list of what is generally consider to be good or bad lens for new owner

lots of different lens with price from low to high

must be confusing

at least to me

I've not seen such a list but so far I have not come across any bad lenses. As far as i know there aren't any real dogs from either Panasonic or Olympus. Of course I have not used all of them. These are what I have used.

Panasonic

20mm f1.7. Considered by some to be slow to focus and noisy but although its not the quickest or quietest I have never found it to be too much of a problem.

25mm f1.4 Great lens.

14-45mm kit lens  Very competent lens. Its a bit slow aperture wise (typical for a kit lens) but no real complaints.

45-200mm I think that this is a real bargain. Some seem to have gotten bad copies but I really like this lens. The image stabilisation is excellent, and its optically very good.

100-300mm Considering the 600mm FOV the reach this lens offers for the size and weight is really handy for wildlife. The iamge stabilisation is good but i think its better on the 45 to 200.

Olympus

The 14-42 kits lens and the 40-150 R might not be super high quality but they are decent enough. They are not built for battle either but this duo with an E-PL5 is my lightweight- go anywhere kit. It won't give you a hernia to add a small fast prime to the mix either.

9-18mm Small light covers ultra wide and overlaps nicely with the kit lenses. A very good UWA zoom that takes filters.

45mm f1.8 Another small and light weight lens and a real gem. A great portrait lens, but useful for many other applications too.

There are more and better lenses that I have not mentioned because I have not used them. Check out review sites like slrgear lenstip and photozone, but also look for blogs on real-world usage because the technical reviews don't tell the whole story. A review might tell which lens is the sharpest, but the difference might be imperceptible in real world images and sometimes the runner up might offer a better overall package.

Regards

John

 JCB123's gear list:JCB123's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chatokun
Regular MemberPosts: 447Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to richarddd, Feb 26, 2013

richarddd wrote:

sbszine wrote:

Good primes

Samyang 7.5 / 3.5 fisheye

Panasonic 20 / 1.7

Panasonic 25 / 1.4

Oly 45 / 1.8

Oly 60 / 2.8 macro

Oly 75 / 1.8

Good zooms

Panasonic 7-14 / 4

Panasonic 12-35 / 2.8

Panasonic 14-45 / 3.5-5.6

Oly 40-150

Everything else has its supporters and detractors, but the lenses above are considered good quality and / or value by pretty much everyone.

Are there detractors for the Oly 12/2?

There are a lot of complaints about the AF noise and speed of the Panasonic 20/1.7.

I didn't get very good subjects to try it out on (I'm in Florida, and I like landscapes, but such a flat land... I guess I could have gone to a beach but..), but I rented both the Oly 12mm and the SLR Magic 12mm for a week to try them both out. Oddly, I had more fun messing with the fully MF cine lens, with stepless aperture and such, but when I actually looked at the pictures, I liked the Oly a lot more.

It's very small, which is nice, and it has very good image quality. The SLR Magic had more flare and much heavier vignetting. The short experience I had with it favored the Oly, except maybe for video, which I don't do much.

Which segues on to the 20mm f1.7. This was my first prime, and it's great. Small, nice aperture, very good image quality, pleasing colors, etc etc. Now for the bad:

Sound: Yes, it's present. This mostly affects video, as it's not very loud, just recordable. I don't do much video, so there you have it.

On the E-PL1 (my long exposure/backup camera) this lens is pretty slow at auto focusing, especially in low light. However, this speed was greatly increased on the GX1 (first camera) and my new OM-D the lens is actually pretty quick on auto focus. There are faster, but it's no where near as slow as some many of the P&S I've used. I tried it around my indoor work office, and it almost always was focused in less than a second.

Compared to some of my other lenses:
75/1.8 beats in hands down. Instant focus.
45/2.8 Macro This lens has a similar focus time to the 20mm on limit for me, and is longer when on full. This is mostly due to being a Macro though.

shihhan wrote:

Hey Tom, what made you get the 60 macro?

I'm debating. The 45 v. 60... Macros
s I already have 45 f1.8 covered...

Is the 60mm reach make up for lack of ois?
The problem with 45 is it feels a bit redundant with the 45 f1.8 already covered?

Thx

I haven't used the 60mm, but I know how you feel. I have the 45mm f2.8 and I feel gettiing the 45/1.8 would be redundant, even though I feel a desire to have it (faster aperture, faster AF, better bokeh.) I have the 75 though, so what I plan to do myself is wait and see how the new 42(43?)/1.2 is going to be. If it's not ridiculously expensive and has really good quality, I'll probably get that instead and keep the 45 just for macro.

As for OIS, since I have the OM-D now I don't have to worry about it, but if you're on a Panasonic body, I wouldn't recommend going larger.. OIS is more significant the longer the focal length. The 60 doesn't make up for OIS, it makes the lack of OIS more evident.

And just to follow the trend I guess I'll list my lenses and thoughts:

Primes (I like primes over zooms):
7.5mm f3/5 Rokinon Love it, it's fun, sharp, and I like the distortion. Manual focus is easy and fun. Can be dim sometimes, but not for the type of shots I use it for (outdoor, sky, etc) unless it's moon/stars, and that's tripod time.
15mm f8 Body Cap: Toy lens. Fun. Better quality than expected, obviously not as good as anything else on list.
20mm f/1.7 Already covered
45mm f/2.8 Already covered. Nice, but a bit slower than the 45mm 1.8 in all respects. At 2.8 I've read the Oly is a smidge sharper also.
75mm f/1.8 Very very excellent lens. Very pricy too. Takes very sharp pictures wide open, and on and up to and pasty f/11 (past f/11 suffers from diffraction, which is sensor, not the lens, but up to f/16 still looked pretty good). I like this both as portrait and short telephoto.

Zooms(not much of a fan of these):
45-200mm: Decent, but I don't find myself using it much. The focus, while accurate to.. something... usually doesn't get what I want at the far end, and the manual focus isn't fast enough for me. I ended up adapting an old 200mm f/3.5 prime for my long shots, so I hardly use this.
12-50mm: I just got this for various reasons, and haven't been able to really test it. Mainly as a cheap wide, and to take advantage of my weather sealed body. I dislike slow lenses, but since I will mostly shoot in daylight, we'll see.

 Chatokun's gear list:Chatokun's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
richarddd
Senior MemberPosts: 2,955Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to secretworld, Feb 26, 2013

secretworld wrote:

Noise is a big word, yes you hear it focussing. Maybe that is why is seems a little slower too. But here in all situations I used it it was fine. Recently I compared the PL25 to the 20 and there isn´t much difference except the 5mm fov difference, which is a huge compliment for the 20mm. It was only a short shoot of a street view so don´t shoot me.

I don't have the lens, so I'm just reporting on what others say.  Anders W has some timed tests to the effect that the difference in focusing speed is very low.

In any event, there are many people who complain about the focusing noise and speed of this lens. Whether or not they are justified is another question.  Almost everyone seems to like the optical quality of the lens.

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
josbiker
Regular MemberPosts: 372Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to josbiker, Feb 26, 2013

I'm assuming native 200mm on the 100-300 will be better than the etc? But of it requires a lens change then there are pro and cons.

So I have refrase my question!

Is it possible too "forget" the 100-300 lens and then use the ETC funtionality of the 45-75 lens?

I get 90-350 mm with these 45-175 lens!!!Which of these two lenses is the sharpest above 225 mm range? The 100-300 or the 45-175 with ETC.

I understand  that when I use the ETC function I can only print 4 Mp stills.

Who can give me an answers? For me is this an very important isue!

 josbiker's gear list:josbiker's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Al Bond
Regular MemberPosts: 457
Like?
Re: 45-150 or 45-200
In reply to shihhan, Feb 26, 2013

shihhan wrote:

Plan B. Sell both for the 45-175 X. Assuming you can put up with being 25mm short in the tele end, and don't object the lens (go try it out somewhere that's not Jessops!).

Objectively its the best lens out of the lot, and price wise, is only £20 more than a 45-150. (but see warning above on the bad press it's been getting...) Though new 46mm filters will be another hidden cost...

Optically the 45-175 X does look tempting but the reported problems with shutter shock at certain shutter speeds would put me off.  I've not played with the electronic shutter on my G5 enough yet to know if the potential rolling shutter distortion would cause me any real problems.  So at present, that removes the 45-175 X from the equation for me.

I know that the 45-200 isn't stellar at the 200mm end but, if it is sharper at 150mm than the 45-150, that would probably push me towards keeping it, despite its bulk.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
.Sam.
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,122Gear list
Like?
let's stay positive ;-)
In reply to Jefftan, Feb 27, 2013

The system has many lenses, some are better than the rest

Solution... buy the best:

  • Keep your kit zoom
  • Oly 12 F/2
  • Pany 25 F/1.4
  • Oly 45 F/1.8
  • Oly 75 F/1.8
  • (if you like macros Oly 60 F/2.8 Macro)

If you want zooms;

  • Pany (older model) 14-45mm
  • Pany 12-35 F/2.8
  • Pany 35-100 F/2.8
-- hide signature --

.Sam.
GF1+20+45 Sigma DP2 & Pentax K20D - ist* DS - ZX-5 - LX
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/shadzee/

 .Sam.'s gear list:.Sam.'s gear list
Sigma DP2 Pentax *ist DS Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bellevue
Forum MemberPosts: 90
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to josbiker, Feb 27, 2013

Above 225mm, the 100-300mm will be sharper.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
teddoman
Senior MemberPosts: 1,335Gear list
Like?
Re: 45-150 or 45-200
In reply to Al Bond, Feb 27, 2013

Al Bond wrote:

shihhan wrote:

Plan B. Sell both for the 45-175 X. Assuming you can put up with being 25mm short in the tele end, and don't object the lens (go try it out somewhere that's not Jessops!).

Objectively its the best lens out of the lot, and price wise, is only £20 more than a 45-150. (but see warning above on the bad press it's been getting...) Though new 46mm filters will be another hidden cost...

I know that the 45-200 isn't stellar at the 200mm end but, if it is sharper at 150mm than the 45-150, that would probably push me towards keeping it, despite its bulk.

I'm interested in the 45-200 as well. Can anyone compare these:

45-150 @ 150 mm

45-175 X @ 150 mm, 175 mm

45-200 @ 150 mm, 175 mm

Also, are all these internal focusing lenses? The 45-175 X does not extend to zoom. What about the 45-200? I intend to use them handheld and I want to make sure AF or zooming do not interfere with holding the camera and lens stable.

Is the 45-175 X the only one with reported shutter shock issues?

 teddoman's gear list:teddoman's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Fujifilm X-E1 Sony a6000 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,554Gear list
Like?
Re: A list of good/bad MFT lens for new owner?
In reply to John Bean (UK), Feb 27, 2013

John Bean (UK) wrote:

Jefftan wrote:

Is Olympus 17mm F2.8 a good lens?

Is it better or worse than Panasonice 14mm F2.5?

Why bother asking? Just look it up on slrgear...

You'll probably disagree with whatever answers you get from real users anyway.

-- hide signature --

John Bean [BST (GMT+1)]

Why won't you give him the consideration of a decent answer, which he deserves, instead of negative sarcasm? Or even better, say nothing at all?

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,554Gear list
Like?
Re: let's stay positive ;-)
In reply to .Sam., Feb 27, 2013

.Sam. wrote:

The system has many lenses, some are better than the rest

Solution... buy the best:

  • Keep your kit zoom
  • Oly 12 F/2
  • Pany 25 F/1.4
  • Oly 45 F/1.8
  • Oly 75 F/1.8
  • (if you like macros Oly 60 F/2.8 Macro)

If you want zooms;

  • Pany (older model) 14-45mm
  • Pany 12-35 F/2.8
  • Pany 35-100 F/2.8
-- hide signature --

.Sam.
GF1+20+45 Sigma DP2 & Pentax K20D - ist* DS - ZX-5 - LX
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/shadzee/

Currently the bargain is (or was) the 2 Sigma lens deal for $200. And some stores were selling the Sigma 19/2.8 for just over $100, although the price is now $149. This is a fantastic value for a very good lens.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
secretworld
Senior MemberPosts: 1,059Gear list
Like?
Re: 45-150 or 45-200
In reply to teddoman, Feb 27, 2013

tedandtricia wrote:

Al Bond wrote:

shihhan wrote:

Plan B. Sell both for the 45-175 X. Assuming you can put up with being 25mm short in the tele end, and don't object the lens (go try it out somewhere that's not Jessops!).

Objectively its the best lens out of the lot, and price wise, is only £20 more than a 45-150. (but see warning above on the bad press it's been getting...) Though new 46mm filters will be another hidden cost...

I know that the 45-200 isn't stellar at the 200mm end but, if it is sharper at 150mm than the 45-150, that would probably push me towards keeping it, despite its bulk.

I'm interested in the 45-200 as well. Can anyone compare these:

45-150 @ 150 mm

45-175 X @ 150 mm, 175 mm

45-200 @ 150 mm, 175 mm

Also, are all these internal focusing lenses? The 45-175 X does not extend to zoom. What about the 45-200? I intend to use them handheld and I want to make sure AF or zooming do not interfere with holding the camera and lens stable.

Is the 45-175 X the only one with reported shutter shock issues?

I have the 45/200. It is internal focus and extending zoom. That doesn´t affect stability of the lens. When you zoom looking through the viewfinder, you are completely unaware of the extending. And it extends quit a bit. The 45/175 is non extending. The 45/150 extends AFAIK.

 secretworld's gear list:secretworld's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
shihhan
Regular MemberPosts: 307
Like?
Re: 45-150 or 45-200
In reply to Al Bond, Feb 27, 2013

Al Bond wrote:

shihhan wrote:

Plan B. Sell both for the 45-175 X. Assuming you can put up with being 25mm short in the tele end, and don't object the lens (go try it out somewhere that's not Jessops!).

Objectively its the best lens out of the lot, and price wise, is only £20 more than a 45-150. (but see warning above on the bad press it's been getting...) Though new 46mm filters will be another hidden cost...

Optically the 45-175 X does look tempting but the reported problems with shutter shock at certain shutter speeds would put me off. I've not played with the electronic shutter on my G5 enough yet to know if the potential rolling shutter distortion would cause me any real problems. So at present, that removes the 45-175 X from the equation for me.

I know that the 45-200 isn't stellar at the 200mm end but, if it is sharper at 150mm than the 45-150, that would probably push me towards keeping it, despite its bulk.

If you're worried about the shutter shock issue then avoid the lens.
The 45-150 resolution at 150mm is good at both centre and edges up to f11.
I'm not sure about the 45-200 mostly only get MTF info for the 200mm (which shows its good in the centre, but only fair in the edges).
I think the best bet is to take some test shots of both at 150mm and see for yourself what do you think of the image quality? (or splash out on the 100-300 lol!)
Unfortunately I have never owned the 45-200, so I cannot really help you here!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
shihhan
Regular MemberPosts: 307
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to richarddd, Feb 27, 2013

richarddd wrote:

Are there detractors for the Oly 12/2?

There are a lot of complaints about the AF noise and speed of the Panasonic 20/1.7.

Hi Richarddd,

The Oly 12 f2 is a great lens.

Personally, I've found it a bit pricey (at 500), where the 12-35 X can be purchased for 700...

Yes, I understand IQ is much better on the 12 f2 (prime > zoom nearly every time), and the aperture is a stop faster (which may or may not make a difference in real life.)

So it depends on what your priorities are!

For me, I'd stick with 12-35 X + something faster / wider than 12 f2 (when it hits the market)... but that suits me, and you may have completely different requirements.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zensu11
Contributing MemberPosts: 941Gear list
Like?
Re: The general wisdom is...
In reply to shihhan, Feb 27, 2013

Just to let you know , yes the Olympus 40-150 R extends when zooming (almost double it's length) but there is no wobble in my copy at all even extended fully. AFAIK the lens focuses internally at least I don't notice any change in length when focusing. My copy is sharp enough for me at all focal lengths and I rarely print larger than 11x14. I love the light weight of this lens and in good light if focuses fast.

 Zensu11's gear list:Zensu11's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
josbiker
Regular MemberPosts: 372Gear list
Like?
Re: 45-150 or 45-200
In reply to shihhan, Feb 27, 2013

shihhan wrote:

Al Bond wrote:

shihhan wrote:

Plan B. Sell both for the 45-175 X. Assuming you can put up with being 25mm short in the tele end, and don't object the lens (go try it out somewhere that's not Jessops!).

Objectively its the best lens out of the lot, and price wise, is only £20 more than a 45-150. (but see warning above on the bad press it's been getting...) Though new 46mm filters will be another hidden cost...

Optically the 45-175 X does look tempting but the reported problems with shutter shock at certain shutter speeds would put me off. I've not played with the electronic shutter on my G5 enough yet to know if the potential rolling shutter distortion would cause me any real problems. So at present, that removes the 45-175 X from the equation for me.

I know that the 45-200 isn't stellar at the 200mm end but, if it is sharper at 150mm than the 45-150, that would probably push me towards keeping it, despite its bulk.

If you're worried about the shutter shock issue then avoid the lens.
The 45-150 resolution at 150mm is good at both centre and edges up to f11.
I'm not sure about the 45-200 mostly only get MTF info for the 200mm (which shows its good in the centre, but only fair in the edges).
I think the best bet is to take some test shots of both at 150mm and see for yourself what do you think of the image quality? (or splash out on the 100-300 lol!)
Unfortunately I have never owned the 45-200, so I cannot really help you here!

Please can you or some one else inform me about the shutter problems with the 45-175x.

I like the specs. etc and I am on the point to buy this lens in combination with the 12-35/2.8 lens and  sell the 20/1.7, the 14-140 and the 100-300 lens.

I have made some test with ETC and I am satisfied with my results.( 175 and above with the 45-175 lens)

The zooming smoothnes is for me important with the elec. zoom lever from the 45-175.

So my nearby future should be: my GH3 with the 12-35/2.8 and the 45-175 that means for me lighter and less swaps and much more quality.

Please help me?

Jos

 josbiker's gear list:josbiker's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads