35-100 vs. 40-150 f/2.8 fast teles

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
Simon97 Senior Member • Posts: 2,778
35-100 vs. 40-150 f/2.8 fast teles

I'm just daydreaming about owning one of these someday Both lenses are sharp across the frame even at f/2.8 and have no other optical inadequacies to worry about.

The Panasonic 35-100 starts a bit wider but is quite a bit shorter on the long end. It is like the popular 70-200 /2.8 lenses on full frame (more on equivalence below). What is amazing to me is that this lens is tiny. It is barely larger then the 40-150 "plastic fantastic" kit lens I have. This is what MFT is all about! $1000 is not unreasonable for this lens.

The Olympus 40-150 starts a bit longer but gives you the FF equivalent each out to 300. Having 150mm at f/2.8 is very welcome on an overcast day. It is quite a bit larger and heavier then the 35-100 but is still not a large lens. At $500 more than the 35-100, it is not cheap either but still reasonable for what it is.

I'd imagine both lenses handle teleconverters well for extra reach.

Before the "equivalence police" swoop in, I'm aware that these lenses are like f/5.6 on FF cameras in DOF and noise performance. However, FF lenses of f/5.6 in this zoom range are usually consumer grade and don't match the construction or optical performance of these MFT lenses, so in this case, the equivalence argument is not completely valid.

A tough decision on what I'd get. Both have their advantages. I'd say the 35-100 is more of a generalist lens that is travel friendly. While the 40-150 is more specialist with its extra reach. I'm leaning towards the 35-100. If only I had the cash

 Simon97's gear list:Simon97's gear list
Canon PowerShot ELPH 360 HS Olympus PEN E-PM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow