DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 over Olympus 40-150 f2.8?

Started Dec 16, 2015 | Discussions thread
DLBlack Forum Pro • Posts: 15,865
Re: If you hike at all it's a no brainer

NCV wrote:

Gary from Seattle wrote:

The 35-100 is so compact for a lens of it's range it is a no brainer versus the 40-150. I often carry three lenses and on some trips, especially with opportunities for wildlife or majestic peaks I wouldn't be caught without the 35-100.

The thought of hauling the 40 150 up a mountain makes me wince and think of the bad old days with the D300 and 3 2.8 lenses.

I too find the 35 100 great for hiking. I hate arriving at destination knackered. Ones photography suffers.

For me if I was hiking with the Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 and would also have the 75-300 F4.?-6.7 with me and those two lenses together is even more weight than the 40-150 F2.8.  Plus I would most likely also have my 60 f2.8 macro with me.  So for me the 12-40 F2.8 and the 40-150 F2.8 along with the 1.4xTC is perfect for a hike.  It will take me from FF equivalent of 24mm to 420mm.  The 40-150 F2.8 has very close focusing ability so I will not pack my macro.  So those two lenses would cover nearly all my expected and unexpected situations and weight less than I would take if I had the 35-100 F2.8 in my normal hiking kit.  I am all into saving weight and the 40-150 f2.8 helps be save weight.

 DLBlack's gear list:DLBlack's gear list
Pentax K-7 Pentax K-5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II +46 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow