CameraStoreTV Comparison - Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 vs. Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8

A fun video ... that's ultimately not really helpful for someone like me who's trying to decide between the two. Their conclusion is that both are great, with comparable image quality and focus speed. The decision comes down to longer reach v. optical image stabilization + smaller/lighter (as I had thought)

They make a couple errors - the OIS on the Panasonic isn't only useful for video, for example - but it's till worth a watch, nonetheless.

Hi

From what I understand the 40-150 F2.8 has significantly better IQ wide open. I own the 35-100 F2.8 and do not have an axe to grind as it were.

I like to go back and watch a video like that a bit more closely a 2nd time, pausing at certain points. One place that got my attention was when they were comparing resolution and shooting that sign post.

For a brief moment they had a side by side (split frame) comparison shot of the both lenses at f 2.8. For me, the Panasonic seems just a tiny bit sharper, but probably nothing that an adjustment in post couldn't fix.

However, in that same frame, if you look at the bokeh of the out of focus background area, I definitely prefer how the Olympus looks, with a softer, gentler bokeh.

I do a LOT of close focus telephoto shots at f2.8 specifically to get that nice bokeh, so that's an important trait for me, and while this particular shot wasn't designed with that in mind, for me it gives the edge to the Olympus.

But, in the final mix of things, I think there are quite a few differences in these lenses that will sway somebody one way or the the other, like size, weight, extra wide angle, extra long zoom, built-in stabilization, etc.

It's certainly nice to know that which ever way you decide, you're going to end up with a mighty fine lens.

We are so spoilt for choice in M4/3s land.

One of the effects of this lens, hopefully, is to cause a price drop of the 35-100/2.8.

…I might be tempted against muy better judgement in terms of weight and size.

The 45-150 f4~5.6 is s lovely little lens!

Cheers, geoff

Derek Dean said:

I like to go back and watch a video like that a bit more closely a 2nd time, pausing at certain points. One place that got my attention was when they were comparing resolution and shooting that sign post.

For a brief moment they had a side by side (split frame) comparison shot of the both lenses at f 2.8. For me, the Panasonic seems just a tiny bit sharper, but probably nothing that an adjustment in post couldn't fix.

However, in that same frame, if you look at the bokeh of the out of focus background area, I definitely prefer how the Olympus looks, with a softer, gentler bokeh.

Click to expand...

This is interesting. Looking at that image, I was first tempted to say that the background are of different things, as some of the detail in the Panasonic is entirely missing in the Olympus. Then I went to the individual frames and saw that the shooting position is almost exactly the same so the OOF areas are showing the same things. Then comparing 4:30 (Panasonic F2.8) with 4:34 (Olympus F2.8) it's clear that the former is shot at a wider angle than the latter. This would have caused the quantity of the blur to be different (Panasonic having larger DoF), in addition to any quality differences.

So I looked a bit closer setting the video to HD watching full screen mode etc.

In the centre of the frame, there is a blur quantity difference with the Olympus having more blur. But this is very subtle, and probably explained entirely by the difference in FoV. But the difference along the left hand edge is comparatively much more significant.

Looking closer, specular highlights in the edge areas are much better (more circular) in the Oly than in the Pany. In other words, in the edge areas, the sensor is seeing less of the entrance pupil of the Pany than the Oly. This means the Pany is effectively more stopped down in those areas than the Oly hence has a larger DoF.

Where from did you get this idea? IQ is really close. But i do like bokeh on oly a bit more, on panasonic there is some kind of double image in oof area.

Their resolution comparison was also not that serious, panasonic clearly has a lot more sharpness applied in camera. But they mentioned it, difference comes down to jpg engines.

I will certainly go for oly, simply because it's a lot more versatile, longer reach, can focus really close and can accept x1.4 TC. It's going to fit into my bag, so size is not so important, small enough.

Rohith Thumati said:

A fun video ... that's ultimately not really helpful for someone like me who's trying to decide between the two. Their conclusion is that both are great, with comparable image quality and focus speed. The decision comes down to longer reach v. optical image stabilization + smaller/lighter (as I had thought)

They make a couple errors - the OIS on the Panasonic isn't only useful for video, for example - but it's till worth a watch, nonetheless.

Click to expand...

I think they are both very good lenses and for me it comes down to a combination of size and most used focal lengths . I use the 35-100 range often wheras I use a 300mm effective AOV very rarely. So the 35-100 wins for me it smaller, lighter , covers a more useful range and importantly as a panasonic video user it has OIS , which though I debate how useful it is for most still shooting is useful for video. The 40-150mm looks very good but fo me it is a wee bit too specalist use and I would be unlikley to get as much value out of it. Its not a bad choice to have

But the Oly is consistently used with it. Given the sunny weather I don't understand why it is not used.

Jorginho said:

But the Oly is consistently used with it. Given the sunny weather I don't understand why it is not used.

Click to expand...

He forgot to bring it , he mentions it in the video

Derek Dean said:

I like to go back and watch a video like that a bit more closely a 2nd time, pausing at certain points. One place that got my attention was when they were comparing resolution and shooting that sign post.

For a brief moment they had a side by side (split frame) comparison shot of the both lenses at f 2.8. For me, the Panasonic seems just a tiny bit sharper, but probably nothing that an adjustment in post couldn't fix.

However, in that same frame, if you look at the bokeh of the out of focus background area, I definitely prefer how the Olympus looks, with a softer, gentler bokeh.

I do a LOT of close focus telephoto shots at f2.8 specifically to get that nice bokeh, so that's an important trait for me, and while this particular shot wasn't designed with that in mind, for me it gives the edge to the Olympus.

But, in the final mix of things, I think there are quite a few differences in these lenses that will sway somebody one way or the the other, like size, weight, extra wide angle, extra long zoom, built-in stabilization, etc.

It's certainly nice to know that which ever way you decide, you're going to end up with a mighty fine lens.

Click to expand...

I also noticed that the panasonic seemed a little sharper.

But it seems there is variability due to using different cameras. They should have both used the same panasonic camera to stop that.

The only thing I really did notice is that the Panasonic seems to have a lot more vignetting going on at the wide end. Look at the boat on the river picture, light falloff is rather important on the Panasonic.

Rohith Thumati said:

A fun video ... that's ultimately not really helpful for someone like me who's trying to decide between the two. Their conclusion is that both are great, with comparable image quality and focus speed. The decision comes down to longer reach v. optical image stabilization + smaller/lighter (as I had thought)

They make a couple errors - the OIS on the Panasonic isn't only useful for video, for example - but it's till worth a watch, nonetheless.

Click to expand...

I feel the Panasonic is ideal for street photography more while the Olympus is ideal for nature. All Panasonic has to do is update this lens a bit to reclaim the #1 telephoto spot.

Both seem to be excellent lenses. Personally I will get the 35-100 as planned due to its much smaller size, and because I'm a panny shooter and want the in-lens OIS. In this case I would probably go for the smaller lens even if Olympus had opted to add in-lens OIS to appeal to Panny shooters but it would have been a much closer call.

Haven't been too impressed with the bokeh on the 40-150mm, but at this quality level it's just splitting hairs. Both are fantastic lenses with considerably different strengths in spite of being two 2.8 teles...

amtberg said:

Both seem to be excellent lenses. Personally I will get the 35-100 as planned due to its much smaller size, and because I'm a panny shooter and want the in-lens OIS. In this case I would probably go for the smaller lens even if Olympus had opted to add in-lens OIS to appeal to Panny shooters but it would have been a much closer call.

Click to expand...

With the Panasonic I can fit it in a pocket which shooting with a shorter lens and quickly change as needed. There is no lens on the market that can compete with its size and quality.

The Olympus is going to be a great choice for those who want a longer focal length and nature photographers. The near macro capability is very nice too. I can see people hiking in snow and rain carrying this lens with no worries.

I thought it was good video. I think the panasonic guy nailed it when he said (something like) that if M43 is your main system the Oly is the one to get as your main tele zoom, but if main system is a bigger one the panasonic is best as it's more in keeping with the small size ethos that got many of us into M43 in the first place.

jim stirling said:

Jorginho said:

But the Oly is consistently used with it. Given the sunny weather I don't understand why it is not used.

Click to expand...

He forgot to bring it , he mentions it in the video

Click to expand...

Not a very good reason to my mind. Just go and get it.

Jorginho said:

jim stirling said:

Jorginho said:

But the Oly is consistently used with it. Given the sunny weather I don't understand why it is not used.

Click to expand...

He forgot to bring it , he mentions it in the video

Click to expand...

Not a very good reason to my mind. Just go and get it.

Click to expand...

I notice the Olympus almost always had the the hood extended which made it look a lot longer.

I rarely bring the hood on my 35-100 because I can keep it in a pocket without one.