12-100 F4 or 75 F1.8?

James Pilcher wrote:

Po Sen Tsui wrote:

So, I am currently using a 12-40 F2.8 and 100-300 II on my EM1 Mk II, as you may have notice, I have a gap of focal length between 40-100, which is kind of the short-medium telephoto range. To fill this gap, I am considering 1. sell my 12-40 to buy the 12-100 so that I can have the 12-300 focal length fully cover, and rely on my 17 f1.8 for low light, or doing the cheap way 2. buy the 75 f1.8 to cover the missing range, which is about 60% of the price of the 12-100, way faster and extremely sharp as well.

What would be your recommendation on this issue? Thank you very much.

If you don’t mind swapping lenses occasionally, having an f/2.8 + f/1.8 pair is really very nice.

The M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro and the M.Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 are a wonderful travel combo. I have traveled with this pair. Yes, the 12-40mm stays on my camera most of the time, but having an f/1.8 telephoto in the bag can be very handy.

Sure, the 12-100mm f/4 brings that down to one lens, but at the cost of as much as 2-1/3 stops of light. That’s a serious consideration. One lens or two, both are correct choices depending upon the photographer or the situation.

The lens IS of the 12-100mm f/4 Pro is, although useful, overblown IMO. Your camera IBIS is 80% to 90% of the image stabilization anyway. Sure, the 12-100mm makes it better, but you still have IS with the two lenses I mention above.

Oh, and having a focal length gap is often no big deal. Most people if they were to analyze their zoom photos will find a surprisingly large number of their used focal lengths at one end of the zoom range or the other. They unconsciously leave a gap anyway. Never once have I swapped out my 12-40mm f/2.8 for the 75mm f/1.8 and wished I had a 55mm lens.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life in the Rocky Mountains

Agree. These are all sharp lenses, but the 12-40 mm and 75mm are faster lenses. They are about the same size and balance fine on all except the smallest M43 cameras. Unless one shoots all the time in good daylight and cannot change lenses, I see very little reason to consider the slow zoom even if costs is not a concern. M43 has limitations due to its sensor size and that is exacerbated by slow lenses.

brentbrent wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Here you go, results to go with the user anecdotes .

I need to check imaging resources because I do not see in your graph if this is just about the center or center and corners.

From: https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/olympus/12-100mm-f4-is-pro-m.zuiko-digital-ed/review/

Sharpness

If you had any concerns that this all-in-one 24-200mm eq. zoom lens would need to sacrifice sharpness for versatility, worry not; the Olympus 12-100mm lens is extremely sharp. Even wide-open and at all focal lengths, the Olympus 12-100 offers fantastic sharpness across the entire frame. In our testing, we saw very little variation in sharpness at the center compared to the corners. Stopping down does little to increase sharpness, as the lens is pretty much as sharp as it can get wide open.

That being said, we do see a subtle decrease in measurable sharpness out at 100mm, with a very slight softness in the corners at f/4. Stopping down to f/5.6 will sharpen the corners back up, though. Overall, 100mm is not significantly softer than the other tested focal lengths by any means, though; just very minor corner softness.

* * *

Conclusion

Olympus continues to crank out stunning lenses. The 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro is yet another remarkable lens for their professional line of lenses. The Olympus Zuiko Pro family now has a smattering of primes as well as a trio of f/2.8 zooms, but now the 12-100mm squeezes into the lineup, aiming at those MFT photographers wanting "Pro" image quality, build quality and performance, but in an all-in-one package.

Optically, the 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro is excellent, with tack-sharp images across its entire zoom range, even wide-open -- that's a really tough feat, and often a point of compromise for other long-zoom interchangeable lenses of the "travel zoom" category. Other optical qualities are also top-notch, and the rugged build quality is classic "Zuiko Pro." At around $1,300, however, the 12-100mm f/4 is a bit on the pricey side.

If you're shooting with the Micro Four Thirds system and want a top-notch single lens setup, perhaps for traveling, hiking, or just keeping your camera bag's weight at a minimum, the 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro is that lens. Its versatility and quality make it a winner for pretty much whatever you want to throw at it.

Grin, I still like my dinky little Olympus 75/1.8 for what it can do - at 75mm the light weight and very sharp performance gives the 12-100/4.0 a run for its money at its optimum prime focal length.  But I am not about to give the 12-100 any black marks myself - it is a great lens but the fact is that the 75/1.8 is different strokes for different uses and is not really a direct comparison.

If you want versatility and don’t mind cost, weight, lens extension at zoom then the 12-100 is the perfect no-brainer.  But if around 75mm and sharp low light performance from a very compact package suits well then this lens is right on track.

Best have both :). But if one lens only can be bought - tough call and versatile versus made for specific purpose has to be the choice.

Harold66 wrote:

Po Sen Tsui wrote:

So, I am currently using a 12-40 F2.8 and 100-300 II on my EM1 Mk II, as you may have notice, I have a gap of focal length between 40-100, which is kind of the short-medium telephoto range. To fill this gap, I am considering 1. sell my 12-40 to buy the 12-100 so that I can have the 12-300 focal length fully cover, and rely on my 17 f1.8 for low light, or doing the cheap way 2. buy the 75 f1.8 to cover the missing range, which is about 60% of the price of the 12-100, way faster and extremely sharp as well.

What would be your recommendation on this issue? Thank you very much.

I do not know what you typically shoot but I would stay away from the 1.8/75mm . it is an odd focal length . if you are looking for a portrait lens , better choose between the Panasonic 1.7/42.5mm , 1.8/45mm or the Sigma 1.4/56mm

since you have the 17mm you could get your 12-100 and 100-30mm plus the two primes

Harold

There's nothing odd with 75mm, esp if you consider OP's reason for raising this matter. OP wants to have more reach than his 12-40mm can provide.

If you have to work in more confined space and don't need so much reach, there is also the amazing Sigma 60mm f/2.8, which is optically as good as the 75mm, but still reasonably fast and a real bargain. OP can buy both primes and probably still save some money than swapping to the 12-100mm f/4.