Longer zoom?

Greetings,

My longest zoom is 100mm. I'm looking to get a longer zoom for my birthday. I'm not into safari or birding, but travel and street.

What do you think?

A. get a 100-300mm

B.14-140mm

C. One inch travel zoom camera with longer zoom

Would be interested in your thoughts, thanks

[No message]

This depends a little on how you compose your shots and your budget. I often use my 50-200 for street shooting, but you may find the 14-140 more useful overall with less need to change a lens. Since you already can zoom to 100mm, the 12-100 doesn't make sense. The 100-300 will probably be less useful for street, but may work well for your other shoots.

It always depends on what you want to shoot, what your budget is, how much do you want to carry, and what your base camera is.

Since I believe you use Panasonic bodies, the 100-300mm mark II lens is a nice lens and it is more affordable than say the 100-400mm lens, and the lens OIS should work well with the sensor shift IS in the recent Panasonic bodies. I have it, and it is a decent lens, though at times I prefer my classic 4/3rds 50-200mm + EC-14 + MMF-3 setup. I did have an issue with the 100-300mm mark II with an ocean splash during a whale watch, so I don't feel it is as splash resistant as my Olympus lenses (note the 100-300mm mark I did not claim to be splash resistant).

The Olympus 100-400mm, Panasonic 50-200mm, Panasonic 100-400mm, and Olympus 150-400mm lenses are more specialist lenses with corresponding higher prices, and bigger/heavier lenses. But if you are using them full time to capture birds or wildlife they are better than then 100-300mm. Obviously with a Panasonic body, you probably want the Panasonic 100-400mm or the 50-200mm lenses for dual OIS and sensor shift IS support.

The 14-140mm (or the Olympus 14-150mm) will give a bit more range, but not dramatically more. But it is an advantage that since it covers the 14-140mm range, in good light, you often don't need to change lenses. I used the Olympus 14-150mm in many years as my main vacation/outdoor lens. Two years ago, I updated to the Olympus 12-200mm, and it is nice to have both the additional 12-13mm range as well as the 151-200mm range. In the last 2 years in fact, the 12-200mm has become my default lens, with the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens now taking second place.

If you don't have other Olympus/OM lenses, the zoom and focus rings rotate in the opposite directions between Panasonic and Olympus/OM lenses. Last week, I was in Florida and doing a bit of birding. I had the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II mounted on the OM-1 and the Olympus 12-200mm mounted on the E-m5 mark III. I had to remind myself when switching cameras to change the direction I rotated the zoom ring.

Getting one of the fixed lens cameras with a long zoom range is another option, particularly for lighter usages. If you stick with the Panasonic models (FZ300, FZ2500, and I don't remember if the FZ1000 is still in production), the interface should be similar to what you are currently used to. And perhaps the battery is the same (my FZ300 uses the same DMW-BCL12 battery that my G85 uses, which is convenient). Due note, that the sensor is smaller and possibly the lens is slower, so these cameras aren't as good at high ISO as your micro 4/3rds gear. Of course if you don't normally carry 2 cameras, carrying the 2nd camera can be an issue (or possibly you choose to take either the fixed lens camera or your micro 4/3rds camera out for shooting depending on what you are going to shoot).

What lens(es) do you have?

If you have the 12-100, all these options will set you back.

But in comparison of your list; Did you consider the 12-200? IQ is same or better than A and B, with a superb range.

No, I haven't considered that. I'll check into it. Thx

14-140mm will give you coverage for travel and street, and be longer than what you have now, as well as being a relatively small lens.

If you want a long telephoto, the 100-300mm Mk II (make sure it's the Mk II, not first version) is a great choice. However, you will NOT be able to use it for street, as it's just too long in focal length to be useful in close area shooting.

The Oly 12-100mm is a great lens, but it's twice the size of the Panasonic 14-140mm, and more than twice the price, so it might not be an idea travel lens option for you.

The Oly 12-200mm is not small either, but it's not as big as the 12-100mm. It too, though is more expensive than the 14-140mm.

For travel, I'd probably get the 14-140mm, esp if you want to keep the size and cost down.

-J

I'm learning towards the 14-140.

By the way, would you suggest getting the first version or the second? It looks like the second is a bit lighter, but is that it? The first version is cheaper. Which one do you have? Thanks

Lepewhi said:

By the way, would you suggest getting the first version or the second? It looks like the second is a bit lighter, but is that it? The first version is cheaper. Which one do you have? Thanks

Click to expand...

I haven't owned any of the Panasonic 14-140mm lenses, but there are actually 3 versions of the 14-140mm. The first version had a different aperture range, and so the second version did not have a mark II notation, and the third version did have mark II, not mark III. IIRC, the main difference between the last two lenses is the current lens is splash resistant and the previous one wasn't. IIRC, the original lens was not well regarded, but the last 2 lenses were fairly decent.

Thanks for your response. It looks like the 14- 140 ASPH is 274-314€ while the 14-140 OIS version II is 409-469. I don't need splash proof. These are the prices on MPB.EU. What would the benefit of getting the more expensive lens? Thanks for you response.

Lepewhi said:

Thanks for your response. It looks like the 14- 140 ASPH is 274-314€ while the 14-140 OIS version II is 409-469. I don't need splash proof. These are the prices on MPB.EU. What would the benefit of getting the more expensive lens? Thanks for you response.

Click to expand...

On this one, I would only get the most current version.

The first version was a nice lens that was a brick, and not great OIS. (I had it, it was big and clumsy, but had nice output. But it was like toting around a brick, literally, and it did not have great OIS.) The second version, if I recall, had some kind of issue, but I do not remember what it was. The third is the one to get. Yes, it's the most expensive, as it's the current lens, but it's worth it to get it over the other versions.

-J

Thanks, as it'll be my 66th birthday present to myself, and my back isn't what it used to be, don't want to be carrying around a brick. I will, however, check to see what the issues of the second version is, as I don't need weather sealing.

Happy early birthday!

Marie

Hey, thanks

Lepewhi said:

Thanks for your response. It looks like the 14- 140 ASPH is 274-314€ while the 14-140 OIS version II is 409-469. I don't need splash proof. These are the prices on MPB.EU. What would the benefit of getting the more expensive lens? Thanks for you response.

Click to expand...

I believe you have a G100 which does not include sensor shift in-body stabilization. In that case, you would want OIS lenses. Now, you can shoot without stabilization, but in that case you would need to always make sure the shutter speed is fast enough (i.e. 1/500 as a minimum for the 14-140mm lens) and/or use a tripod. This is more of an issue with the longer lenses.

You won't be disappointed with it.

A great lens on size and weight (good for travelling), no lens swapping (convenience) and TBH IQ is not much different in real life to some highly rated pro lens in the range at a much lower cost.

I enjoy mine. Only shortage, it is not 12.

Which version do you have or recommend?

Panny has released 3 versions 14~140.

The oldest, heavier and slower one (f/4-5.8) should have IQ relatively behind it's two younger brothers. Not recommend it.


The 2nd and 3rd versions, having similar size and weight but smaller than the 1st version, is also slightly faster (f/3.5-5.6). I am shooting with the 2nd version, which optically is the same as the latest version. Just lack of WR.

If you prefer WR, the 3rd version (H-FSA14140) would be it. If you could source the cheaper 2nd version, it is also a fantastic lens.

Thanks, I don't need weather sealing. So, looks like the second version is more my line