Any real-world feedback on the Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
olrett Contributing Member • Posts: 669
Re: Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

Robbob67 wrote:

Firmware wrote:

Robbob67 wrote:

Thought I would bump this, as the question hasn't really been answered yet, and I would also like to know.

Presumably because few on the forum have it/have owned it?

If that is the case, I am surprised. For £ per mm it seems like the obvious choice for anyone on a budget.

Perhaps. The Pana 45-200 II can be had used for 300-350 euros (like new, with lens hood and box).

Still, it never occurred to me to get one.

I went with Oly's plastic fantastic 40-150 II which is smaller and lighter and not bad at all, and for the extra length there was the Pana 100-300.

 olrett's gear list:olrett's gear list
Olympus TG-6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus E-M1 II +19 more
alcelc
alcelc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,552
Re: Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?
1

Problem is its IQ is not outstanding at all among other lenses in similar range of reaching, says, the 14~140, the 45~150 and the 45~175PZ.

The different on reaching among 140/150 vs 200 is a step backward most of the time, and basically it is very close to 175. The beauty of others are they could get sharper image on wide open whereas 45~200 needs to stop down to f/7.1~8...

Could be a reason this lens is not as popular as others. I bought 45~150 to replace 45~200.

-- hide signature --

Albert
** Please forgive my typo error.
** Please feel free to download my image and edit it as you like **

 alcelc's gear list:alcelc's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic G85 +11 more
MiguelATF
OP MiguelATF Regular Member • Posts: 463
Re: Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

Just to be clear and (hopefully) refocus this thread back to my original question:

I'm really hoping to hear opinions or impressions from people who actually own or have used the newer (v.II or Mark II) version of this lens.

Many of us have opinions, both positive and negative, about the original (and much older, and generally maligned) version of the lens.  Many of us also have opinions about other zoom lenses which they prefer to the original (v.I) version of this lens. And at least a few of us, including myself, have opinions or theories about why there seem to be so few user reviews, either critical or laudatory, of the newer (v.2) version. All of those opinions are interesting and helpful, in their own way or ways. But I still believe, rightly or wrongly, that actually using a given camera or lens or whatever, can reveal interesting aspects  (sometimes positive, sometimes negative) of it.

Short verision: maybe it's "a fool's errand", but I still hope someone out here in DPreviewLand may share their experiences with v.2.

-- hide signature --

"I photograph to find out what something will look like photographed."
~Garry Winogrand~
Ipernity: http://www.ipernity.com/home/1647950
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/migueltejadaflores/
Blog: http://migueltejadaflores.wordpress.com

 MiguelATF's gear list:MiguelATF's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Pentax Q Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Pentax Q7 +11 more
Firmware Regular Member • Posts: 420
Re: 40-150?

Isabel Cutler wrote:

Robbob67 wrote:

I would also be interested to hear about it. It is on my shopping list as my first choice for a tele zoom.
I know the 45-150 delivers reasonable results, but the extra 50mm would come in useful.

I have recently been thinking about the 40 to 150 f/2.8 too for its superb image quality, but have some concerns, among them the fact that it lacks image stabilization and it is a 2014 lens. (I would think if Olympus hadn't been sold they might have been developing a Mark II version of the lens with stabilization. Its weight is surprisinglyly tolerable. It's a lot more pricey than the cheaper f/4-5.6 version you may be thinking of, but that isn't a bad lens, in fact, it's been praised a lot - it's just not a low light lens.

There might be another option for you - an image of the upcoming 40-150 f4 Pro from that rumors site...

I don't really NEED the 40-150 f/2.8 , but I should would love to have it. I find the Panasonic 100-400 to be very heavy, don't like the stiff zoom control with extending barrel and f/6.3 when it zooms. It does, however, have excellent image quality. A constant f/2.8 would be delightful. I took the 100-400 to Costa Rica and with f/6.3 rain forest photography was nearly impossible.

You should watch some of the YouTube videos on the 40-150 f/2.8.

Isabel

spike29 Senior Member • Posts: 2,469
Re: Any real-world feedback on the Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

MiguelATF wrote:

To REFOCUS this thread a little - and I am the OP (Original Poster) - while I appreciate the many comments, both positive and critical, about the original Mk.1 version of the lens, nonetheless I still really hope to elicit feedback or comments from folks who may have actually used the NEWER VERSION (v.II) of this lens.

Apart from a very small handful of professional reviews, there have been almost no detailed user accounts of it, over the past few years since Mk II was released.

If anyone out there has a 2nd generation copy - or has access to one - it would be great to hear some impressions

I had it briefly, returned it and bought the l100-300mmvii.

Why?

1 wide open it was fussy iq and had a slow AF, not locked as firmly and consistent as my 14-140mmf3.5-5.6.

2 my version had a strange noise in manual Aperture movement.

3 it looked like a "bearcan", not really a quality issue more estetic.

4 my 14-140mm at 140mm wide open and cropped was better then the 200mm zoom wide open. I hoped to got a walkaround nature lens, 45 close enough for flowers and such and 200mm for the wildlive, birds and such. It wassen't my lens i think.

The 100-300mmii was instant much more crispy and fast lock AF.

And yes i swap more now.

Pl12-60mm to l100-300 and 14-140mm to 100-300mm.

The PL50-200mm is my wish to buy sometimes but the pricetag is holding me back.

-- hide signature --

knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When i see a animal or insect i aim, shoot ...several times... take it home process it and hang it on the wall..... so he or she can live on freely where it belong wile i enjoy his presentation of live.

 spike29's gear list:spike29's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Isabel Cutler
Isabel Cutler Forum Pro • Posts: 18,883
Re: 40-150?

Firmware wrote:

There might be another option for you - an image of the upcoming 40-150 f4 Pro from that rumors site...

I don't really NEED the 40-150 f/2.8 , but I should would love to have it. I find the Panasonic 100-400 to be very heavy, don't like the stiff zoom control with extending barrel and f/6.3 when it zooms. It does, however, have excellent image quality. A constant f/2.8 would be delightful. I took the 100-400 to Costa Rica and with f/6.3 rain forest photography was nearly impossible.

You should watch some of the YouTube videos on the 40-150 f/2.8.

Isabel

Not interested in f/4 max aperture.  Too slow for low light work.

Isabel

-- hide signature --

"If you're not prepared to be wrong you'll never come up with anything original" Sir Ken Robinson
http://www.pBase.com/isabel95
https://www.flickr.com/photos/isabel95/

 Isabel Cutler's gear list:Isabel Cutler's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Sony a7 III +2 more
olrett Contributing Member • Posts: 669
Re: Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

MiguelATF wrote:

Just to be clear and (hopefully) refocus this thread back to my original question:

I'm really hoping to hear opinions or impressions from people who actually own or have used the newer (v.II or Mark II) version of this lens.

Many of us have opinions, both positive and negative, about the original (and much older, and generally maligned) version of the lens. Many of us also have opinions about other zoom lenses which they prefer to the original (v.I) version of this lens. And at least a few of us, including myself, have opinions or theories about why there seem to be so few user reviews, either critical or laudatory, of the newer (v.2) version. All of those opinions are interesting and helpful, in their own way or ways. But I still believe, rightly or wrongly, that actually using a given camera or lens or whatever, can reveal interesting aspects (sometimes positive, sometimes negative) of it.

Short verision: maybe it's "a fool's errand", but I still hope someone out here in DPreviewLand may share their experiences with v.2.

Well, every *unrelated* post bumps your question back to the top into view increasing your chances of actually hearing from someone who owns the new version of this lens...

 olrett's gear list:olrett's gear list
Olympus TG-6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus E-M1 II +19 more
Robbob67 Contributing Member • Posts: 640
Re: Any real-world feedback on the Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

spike29 wrote:

MiguelATF wrote:

To REFOCUS this thread a little - and I am the OP (Original Poster) - while I appreciate the many comments, both positive and critical, about the original Mk.1 version of the lens, nonetheless I still really hope to elicit feedback or comments from folks who may have actually used the NEWER VERSION (v.II) of this lens.

Apart from a very small handful of professional reviews, there have been almost no detailed user accounts of it, over the past few years since Mk II was released.

If anyone out there has a 2nd generation copy - or has access to one - it would be great to hear some impressions

I had it briefly, returned it and bought the l100-300mmvii.

Why?

1 wide open it was fussy iq and had a slow AF, not locked as firmly and consistent as my 14-140mmf3.5-5.6.

Can I clarify, you are talking about the mkii?
It is supposed to have faster focus than the original.

2 my version had a strange noise in manual Aperture movement.

3 it looked like a "bearcan", not really a quality issue more estetic.

4 my 14-140mm at 140mm wide open and cropped was better then the 200mm zoom wide open. I hoped to got a walkaround nature lens, 45 close enough for flowers and such and 200mm for the wildlive, birds and such. It wassen't my lens i think.

The 100-300mmii was instant much more crispy and fast lock AF.

And yes i swap more now.

Pl12-60mm to l100-300 and 14-140mm to 100-300mm.

The PL50-200mm is my wish to buy sometimes but the pricetag is holding me back.

-- hide signature --

knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When i see a animal or insect i aim, shoot ...several times... take it home process it and hang it on the wall..... so he or she can live on freely where it belong wile i enjoy his presentation of live.

 Robbob67's gear list:Robbob67's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH
spike29 Senior Member • Posts: 2,469
Re: Any real-world feedback on the Lumix Vario 45-200mm v.II?

Robbob67 wrote:

spike29 wrote:

MiguelATF wrote:

To REFOCUS this thread a little - and I am the OP (Original Poster) - while I appreciate the many comments, both positive and critical, about the original Mk.1 version of the lens, nonetheless I still really hope to elicit feedback or comments from folks who may have actually used the NEWER VERSION (v.II) of this lens.

Apart from a very small handful of professional reviews, there have been almost no detailed user accounts of it, over the past few years since Mk II was released.

If anyone out there has a 2nd generation copy - or has access to one - it would be great to hear some impressions

I had it briefly, returned it and bought the l100-300mmvii.

Why?

1 wide open it was fussy iq and had a slow AF, not locked as firmly and consistent as my 14-140mmf3.5-5.6.

Can I clarify, you are talking about the mkii?
It is supposed to have faster focus than the original.

yes, i did bought the mkii.  point is i think shuttershock is a major part of the issue which is a bomshell for this lens. Long focallength, slow , long exposuretimes, dual is2 looks great on preview, but after the shutterclick it's less.

AF is't bad as in not working but more hesitating compared to my other lenses.

Stopped down to f7 it's much better i think due the larger DoF.

Remember the 100-300mm needs also f7 f8 to be sharp at the end of his focallength.

Just try it yourself for a week.

2 my version had a strange noise in manual Aperture movement.

3 it looked like a "bearcan", not really a quality issue more estetic.

4 my 14-140mm at 140mm wide open and cropped was better then the 200mm zoom wide open. I hoped to got a walkaround nature lens, 45 close enough for flowers and such and 200mm for the wildlive, birds and such. It wassen't my lens i think.

The 100-300mmii was instant much more crispy and fast lock AF.

And yes i swap more now.

Pl12-60mm to l100-300 and 14-140mm to 100-300mm.

The PL50-200mm is my wish to buy sometimes but the pricetag is holding me back.

-- hide signature --

knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When i see a animal or insect i aim, shoot ...several times... take it home process it and hang it on the wall..... so he or she can live on freely where it belong wile i enjoy his presentation of live.

 spike29's gear list:spike29's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH +2 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads