Compare panasonic 14-140ll with 35-100 f2.8

Here's some more. All this discussion made me curious, so I went out and did some more tests with the 14-140, 35-100 and 45-200. I shot each handheld at 50mm & 100mm, f5.6, ISO 200, 1/500, with OIS active. I also shot the 35-100 at f2.8, since some of you expressed concern about that lens' performance wide open.

At 50mm the differences seem very minor and related to sharpness and local contrast. At 100mm the differences are of the same character but somewhat bigger. At both focal lengths, I rank 'em this way:

• First Place: 35-100mm @ f5.6
• Second Place: tie between 14-140 @ f5.6 and 35-100 @ f2.8
• Third Place: 45-200 @ f5.6

Now that I have the 14-140, I'll be selling the 45-200. I have no hesitation about making big prints from the 14-140 at f5.6 or the 35-100 at f2.8.

Panasonic 14-140 @ 50mm f5.6

Panasonic 35-100 @ 50mm f2.8

Panasonic 35-100 @ 50mm f5.6

Panasonic 45-200 @ 50mm f5.6

Panasonic 14-140 @ 100mm f5.6

Panasonic 35-100 @ 100mm f2.8

Panasonic 35-100 @ 100mm f5.6

Panasonic 45-200 @ 100mm f5.6

FWIW, the light changed slightly from frame to frame, so I have done a quick & dirty equalization of brightness, amounting to no more than 1/3 stop for any given frame. I also standardized WB.

P.S.: These were processed using Aperture's defaults. I processed again, this time with DxO (with default lens corrections, but no microcontrast or USM applied), and everything is a bit sharper and the differences are even smaller. Almost indistinguishable at 50mm, and at 100mm the differences are reduced by 30-50%, making even the 45-200 look pretty good. Rank order remains the same.