Choosing a more premium long zoom for GH5

I shoot with GH5 primarily for video only. I currently have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 in my arsenal for the rare occassion on shoots that call for a longer lens. I picked it up for $110 and it fits my need so far.

Up until now, when I travel, I still carry the Nikon D800 with its premium lenses for my still. I recently upgraded to GH5 from GH4 and in the process of streamlining my arsenal. I am more leaning towards shooting with only one camera for both still and video, with much heavier emphasis on video. I am looking for a long zoom that would give me the pleasing experience as my Nikon 80-400 G AF-S f4.5-5.6 and I know the Lumix Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 is no match for it. When I research for a more premium lens, I have found the following that seems to fit the bill:

A. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO approx. used market price $850
B. Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH Power OIS approx. used market price $950

So far this is what I found:

The Olympus seems to be more solid in term of build. Big plus is the fix F2.8 aperture (which equates to f5.6 in FF). The draw back is the lack of anti-vibration.

The Leica lens seems to have build slightly less than the Olympus and the aperture is practically f4 at the long end. But it is 100mm (equivalent) longer. I like the double anti-vibration when working with the GH5.

With the Olympus, if I turn on the IBIS of the GH5, how effective is the anti-vibration? Is it something that I can handhold when shooting still?

I would like to hear your comments regarding the pros and cons of these two lens to help me formulate my decision.

Many thanks.

DMKAlex wrote:

I shoot with GH5 primarily for video only. I currently have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 in my arsenal for the rare occassion on shoots that call for a longer lens. I picked it up for $110 and it fits my need so far.

Up until now, when I travel, I still carry the Nikon D800 with its premium lenses for my still. I recently upgraded to GH5 from GH4 and in the process of streamlining my arsenal. I am more leaning towards shooting with only one camera for both still and video, with much heavier emphasis on video. I am looking for a long zoom that would give me the pleasing experience as my Nikon 80-400 G AF-S f4.5-5.6 and I know the Lumix Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 is no match for it. When I research for a more premium lens, I have found the following that seems to fit the bill:

A. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO approx. used market price $850
B. Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH Power OIS approx. used market price $950

So far this is what I found:

The Olympus seems to be more solid in term of build. Big plus is the fix F2.8 aperture (which equates to f5.6 in FF). The draw back is the lack of anti-vibration.

The Leica lens seems to have build slightly less than the Olympus and the aperture is practically f4 at the long end. But it is 100mm (equivalent) longer. I like the double anti-vibration when working with the GH5.

With the Olympus, if I turn on the IBIS of the GH5, how effective is the anti-vibration? Is it something that I can handhold when shooting still?

I would like to hear your comments regarding the pros and cons of these two lens to help me formulate my decision.

Many thanks.

I cannot comment on the Panasonic but the Olympus 40-150 f2.8 is a stunning lens, Ernie thinks so'

Stabilisation on Olympus is great and the lens is sharp, the lens hood is for some a negative. I replaced mine with a 72-77mm stepping ring and a metal lens hood for a few pounds. and it makes the appearance of the lens a lot smaller I don't need to use the lens mount very often so have replaced that with the Olympus cosmetic ring DR-66.I have used it in pouting rain shooting cycling. It's simply a pro lens.

DMKAlex wrote:

I shoot with GH5 primarily for video only. I currently have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 in my arsenal for the rare occassion on shoots that call for a longer lens. I picked it up for $110 and it fits my need so far.

Up until now, when I travel, I still carry the Nikon D800 with its premium lenses for my still. I recently upgraded to GH5 from GH4 and in the process of streamlining my arsenal. I am more leaning towards shooting with only one camera for both still and video, with much heavier emphasis on video. I am looking for a long zoom that would give me the pleasing experience as my Nikon 80-400 G AF-S f4.5-5.6 and I know the Lumix Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 is no match for it. When I research for a more premium lens, I have found the following that seems to fit the bill:

A. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO approx. used market price $850
B. Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH Power OIS approx. used market price $950

So far this is what I found:

The Olympus seems to be more solid in term of build. Big plus is the fix F2.8 aperture (which equates to f5.6 in FF). The draw back is the lack of anti-vibration.

The Leica lens seems to have build slightly less than the Olympus and the aperture is practically f4 at the long end. But it is 100mm (equivalent) longer. I like the double anti-vibration when working with the GH5.

With the Olympus, if I turn on the IBIS of the GH5, how effective is the anti-vibration? Is it something that I can handhold when shooting still?

I would like to hear your comments regarding the pros and cons of these two lens to help me formulate my decision.

Many thanks.

I have a GH5 a G9 and an EM1MKII

for video on the GH5 i use the B option

not only the IBIS is not so effective on its own at those focal but the olympus gets very messy as soon as you run out of reach and add teleconverters 
the panasonic is also lighter and more compact and in terms of pure image quality better

Unless f2.8 is essential to you and you are ready to give up the rest get the panasonic lens

forgot to mention one important aspect of the 50-200mm the frame is stabilised before you click record which is very important at long range

lenstip has tests of both lenses and they are reliable

DMKAlex wrote:

I shoot with GH5 primarily for video only. I currently have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 in my arsenal for the rare occassion on shoots that call for a longer lens. I picked it up for $110 and it fits my need so far.

Up until now, when I travel, I still carry the Nikon D800 with its premium lenses for my still. I recently upgraded to GH5 from GH4 and in the process of streamlining my arsenal. I am more leaning towards shooting with only one camera for both still and video, with much heavier emphasis on video. I am looking for a long zoom that would give me the pleasing experience as my Nikon 80-400 G AF-S f4.5-5.6 and I know the Lumix Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 is no match for it. When I research for a more premium lens, I have found the following that seems to fit the bill:

A. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO approx. used market price $850
B. Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH Power OIS approx. used market price $950

So far this is what I found:

The Olympus seems to be more solid in term of build. Big plus is the fix F2.8 aperture (which equates to f5.6 in FF). The draw back is the lack of anti-vibration.

The Leica lens seems to have build slightly less than the Olympus and the aperture is practically f4 at the long end. But it is 100mm (equivalent) longer. I like the double anti-vibration when working with the GH5.

With the Olympus, if I turn on the IBIS of the GH5, how effective is the anti-vibration? Is it something that I can handhold when shooting still?

I would like to hear your comments regarding the pros and cons of these two lens to help me formulate my decision.

Many thanks.

See Cameralabs review of the P/L 50-200. Read the whole thing as it is the best comparison of the P/l 50-200 and the Olympus 40-150 Pro that I have seen. He does a very good comparison with pictures. in MHO the Olympus is sharper, but both are excellent - and yes, I now have both. Get the Oly MC 1.4 extender - very small - and get 210mm at the top end with the Oly.

Leica 50-200mm f2.8-4 review | Cameralabs www.cameralabs.com › panasonic-leica-dg-50-200mm-...

Well, I see that doesn't work. Google it and you will find it.

Peace.

John

C Sean wrote:

I haven't used the Olympus 40-150mm 2.8 but the lens is a bit bigger than the PL100-400.

I have both lenses and without lens hoods the 40-150 is around 20mm shorter than the 100-400

Without hoods or tripod mounts the 40-250 weigh's 788g, the Panasonic 100-400 weigh's 975grams.

I have the 50-200mm 2.8-4 and it's a very good lens and more portable than my PL100-400. However, since I don't own or tried the 40-150mm 2.8 I can't compare the lenses where I could with say the PL100-400 or 35-100mm 2.8.

I guess what I like about the 50-200 is the compact size, very good IQ and the 3d pop to the image.

kcdogger wrote:

DMKAlex wrote:

I shoot with GH5 primarily for video only. I currently have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 in my arsenal for the rare occassion on shoots that call for a longer lens. I picked it up for $110 and it fits my need so far.

Up until now, when I travel, I still carry the Nikon D800 with its premium lenses for my still. I recently upgraded to GH5 from GH4 and in the process of streamlining my arsenal. I am more leaning towards shooting with only one camera for both still and video, with much heavier emphasis on video. I am looking for a long zoom that would give me the pleasing experience as my Nikon 80-400 G AF-S f4.5-5.6 and I know the Lumix Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 is no match for it. When I research for a more premium lens, I have found the following that seems to fit the bill:

A. Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO approx. used market price $850
B. Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH Power OIS approx. used market price $950

So far this is what I found:

The Olympus seems to be more solid in term of build. Big plus is the fix F2.8 aperture (which equates to f5.6 in FF). The draw back is the lack of anti-vibration.

The Leica lens seems to have build slightly less than the Olympus and the aperture is practically f4 at the long end. But it is 100mm (equivalent) longer. I like the double anti-vibration when working with the GH5.

With the Olympus, if I turn on the IBIS of the GH5, how effective is the anti-vibration? Is it something that I can handhold when shooting still?

I would like to hear your comments regarding the pros and cons of these two lens to help me formulate my decision.

Many thanks.

See Cameralabs review of the P/L 50-200. Read the whole thing as it is the best comparison of the P/l 50-200 and the Olympus 40-150 Pro that I have seen. He does a very good comparison with pictures. in MHO the Olympus is sharper, but both are excellent - and yes, I now have both. Get the Oly MC 1.4 extender - very small - and get 210mm at the top end with the Oly.

I have read on these forums that the 2x convertor is actually better than the 1.4x on this lens.

Leica 50-200mm f2.8-4 review | Cameralabs www.cameralabs.com › panasonic-leica-dg-50-200mm-...

Well, I see that doesn't work. Google it and you will find it.

Peace.

John

I just had to make the same choice as you and went for the 50-200 (it's arriving today!) even if I have only olympus bodies.

Main reasons being

1- size!

2- extra reach on the telephoto end (not worried about the missed 10 on the wide end as you can easily walk that difference

3- I can use the 1.4x converter to kind of replace and improve on 100-300 I'm trading that lens for, thus removing one lens from my camera bag

Yeah.  Size got me too.  Why I got it.  Great lens!

Peace.

John

PL 50-200mm?

Yes Here is the first photo I took with the new PL 50-200mm from this morning

pietroroman wrote:

Yes Here is the first photo I took with the new PL 50-200mm from this morning

Fantastic!!!!

Love them squirrels! 😃

Go for the 50-200. You get Dual IS, which at telephoto range will actually be useful. And you will get DFD focusing, which will make focusing better for more challenging situations. Other than that, it's smaller and lighter and has a nicer range (personal preference). Also, I really dislike the bokeh that Olympus produces.

Both lenses accept teleconverters, and while I don't have any proof, I would bet on Panasonic with x1.4 TC to offer better image quality than Olympus with x2 TC.