** LUMIX GX 45 – 175: THE SMOOTH OPERATOR **

Stevie Boy Blue

Senior Member
Messages
2,373
Solutions
2
Reaction score
3,640
Location
Derbyshire, UK


I bought this lens primarily to shoot video coupled with my recently acquired G9 body, but it’s also proving to be very good for still images. In that regard alone, this GX is growing on me more each time I use it. Essentially, users have 45 – 175mm (90 – 350mm EFL) at their disposal, which comes in very handy for shooting many and varied subjects, from wildlife to compressed street and landscape, etc, etc.

For a fly-by-wire mechanism, I’m impressed by how quickly and smoothly the zoom can be moved from wide angle to full telephoto and back again, at least when utilising the front control ring rather than the alternative lever on the lens barrel. It’s almost as responsive as using a fully manual zoom minus the abrupt stop when reaching full extension that we experience with the more conventional design. As it is, once maximum focal length is reached with the power zoom, we can continue to turn the ring as much as we like without effect. To begin with this felt very strange to me, but I soon became accustomed to and began to appreciate the design, not only re the characteristics of operation but the whole package.

Because everything functions internally, there’s no protrusion of the lens barrel from the housing as we zoom to longer focal lengths. A pretty obvious advantage to its compactness is that we can shoot less conspicuously with the GX compared to any standard G-series lens with a similar ranging telescopic type zoom. Take Panasonic’s plastic fantastic and cheap as chips Lumix G 45 – 150mm as an example when out shooting street/people stuff. Say we want to grab a shot of a group of folks having a picnic and we want the scene to appear as natural as possible, eg with no-one looking straight down the lens because they’ve rumbled our poorly executed tactics.

When extending the more obvious telescopic 45 – 150, there’s a much higher chance that we’ll be noticed by at least one person in the group than if we use the internally-extending, much less conspicuous power zoom of the 45 – 175. (See the example shot I’ve included of the group enjoying time together under the tree, plus the older ladies resting on the garden bench as well as the 2 youngsters embracing in the final mono [B & W] image. The point to note is that I was in full view of everyone at the time of shooting, but all remained oblivious to my photographing them because of the internal zoom.) Using the PZ, nothing changes in external appearance. Whether we shoot at 45 or 175mm, the lens remains the same size, which is fairly small for the vast focal range it covers. As I say, that’s just one benefit that the power zoom has over the manual and extending type, be it for stills or video shooting.

On the subject of video, the sheer smoothness of the 45 – 175’s zoom operation is an invaluable asset – at least for me. I often use Bridge cameras in my armory of photo gear, their power zooms on which I rely for smooth looking footage where a transition from wide to telephoto or vice versa is included in the finished article. Well, I can confirm right now, as smooth as my FZ330 and particularly my two FZ2000s are for this type of work, the lens on review here is smoother still across all focal lengths that each set-up shares.

It’s just a shame that this MILC lens is restricted to 90mm EFL at the wider end. If it went to 24-ish mm like my bridge cameras do, they’d already be more or less redundant as video tools in good light. For want of a better analogy, zooming from wide to telephoto and back again with the 45 – 175 PZ is as smooth as putting a sharp knife through warm butter; not the slightest of interruptions, jerkiness, or instability in the process to be found anywhere. I’ve been utterly impressed with both that and the built-in IS – especially coupled with the IBIS included in the G9 body. It’s pretty much all rock steady, making for a largely enjoyable experience across the board.

To conclude, I rate this lens very highly for both video and stills in good light – especially as I bought mine used and in excellent condition for a bargain £110. Hence, I guess one question some readers may ask is: If I had to, would I pay full market RRP of £399ish for a brand new one?

Yes, absolutely I would. Whilst my 45 – 150 and particularly 14 – 140mm ii are each just a tad sharper for stills shooting at any focal lengths and aperture settings they share with the G X 45 – 175, it still renders output that is good enough for me to keep the lens pretty much permanently attached to my G9. Hence, I recommend it to anyone on the lookout for something a little different but largely no less useful than the manually operated type zoom. :-)

Put it this way, I’m far more impressed with results from this lens than I was with either the 45 – 200 mm or 100 – 300mm that I also tried out recently, both of which I returned for full refunds because neither met with my higher standard in Image quality and demands for fine feather and fur detail rendering, as this PZ does. Overall, I find this a more useful and higher performing lens, save to mention that weighing in at just 210g (0.46 lb,) it is by far the lighter of those three options.

And when push comes to shove, isn’t lightening our load a primary reason why many of us choose M4/3rd gear over larger and heavier formats? I know that certainly applies to me – and the lighter and smaller the whole package the better... at least within reason. ;-)

NOTE that the following images have all been resized and/or cropped for fast loading purposes. Otherwise they are Jpegs as they appeared straight from my camera.













































In closing, thanks very much for reading this review. I appreciate your time and I hope you find something useful here. :-)

Best wishes and happy shooting to all.

PS: For anyone interested: Since joining DPR in 2009, I’ve compiled various user-reviews intended to help readers by giving them some insight into my favourite Panasonic products, links for which are supplied below. Please note that I use my time freely and completely absent of remuneration or freebie goods from anyone or any company. If a product impresses me enough, I enjoy spreading the word. I speak as I find and I just happen to like Panasonic cameras and lenses more than any other makes. That’s why I buy and recommend them – nothing more, nothing less.

Lumix G100 Camera: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65550733

Panasonic 25mm F1.7 lens: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66591863

Panasonic 42.5mm F1.7 lens: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4665967

Panasonic 14-140mm ii lens: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65695092

FZ2000 Review Part 1: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64288303

FZ2000 Review Part 2: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66360652

FZ300 Review Part 1: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63244070

FZ300 Review Part 2: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65012028

Cheers...
 

Attachments

  • 4353613.jpg
    4353613.jpg
    985 KB · Views: 1
  • 4353602.jpg
    4353602.jpg
    811.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 4353603.jpg
    4353603.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353604.jpg
    4353604.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353605.jpg
    4353605.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353606.jpg
    4353606.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353608.jpg
    4353608.jpg
    912.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 4353609.jpg
    4353609.jpg
    922.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 4353610.jpg
    4353610.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353611.jpg
    4353611.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 0
  • 4353612.jpg
    4353612.jpg
    884.2 KB · Views: 0
You are a very talented snapper, Steve, I notice that you shoot jpeg, any particular reason why? I do too, only because I am too old to change my ways. I used to use an FZ50 with internal zoom, Loved it so much, I bought another. Later I sold one but it got lost in the post, I felt obliged to honour the deal and sent the other one, sad, Now I use a G2 and a G10 with various lenses including the Panny 45 200. Good to hear you are still activeand enjoying photography. Best wishes.
 
Yes 45-175PZ is quite a good lens for its class (the Panny 45-150 f/4-5.6 and Olympus 40-150 f/4-5.6). If you need the internal zooming, it is the only option from Panny. When it was released, the nano coating allowed this lens to ask for a higher price.

On IQ, in real life it is very similar to the cheaper 45-150. It is also larger (on parking position) which was my main reason to take 45-150 instead of 45-175PZ to replace 45-200 a few years ago. Able to zoom quickly was my another reason.

Interesting enough, by firmware 45-150 is now DUAL IS 2 compatible (on G85/95, G9 and GH5/6) and DUAL IS compatible on GX85/9. The 45-175PZ is only DUAL IS compatible for all IBIS Panny bodies (except GX7).

Now the market price (gray market new) for both 45-150 and 45-175PZ are within a price difference of < few tenth $.

For lens OS, DUAL IS Pannys, either lenses are solid choices.

If you need the power zoom (for video), it is a better option.

Some Lab test from DXOMark:



857edba904774c0aac87c0a007765b18.jpg




9b4cd45a96bf4b38afce51ea28c4cef0.jpg




761d4c842677436680838c0b86ee5bfc.jpg




--
Albert
** Please forgive my typo error.
** Please feel free to download my image and edit it as you like :-) **
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the time you have invested here

Cheers
 
Nice images - thanks for sharing. I am pleasantly surprised by bokeh quality esp. when having busy background - this is sometimes problem with M43 lenses.
 
I love the 45-175 on my G80. There are some great examples of what this lens can do here on the MU-43 site.
 
Yes, an unusual lens, for its remote control capability and lightweight, which makes it a candidate for inexpensive remote controlled gimbals. First image in the album linked below was taken via Wifi and the Image app.

 
You are a very talented snapper, Steve, I notice that you shoot jpeg, any particular reason why? I do too, only because I am too old to change my ways. I used to use an FZ50 with internal zoom, Loved it so much, I bought another. Later I sold one but it got lost in the post, I felt obliged to honour the deal and sent the other one, sad, Now I use a G2 and a G10 with various lenses including the Panny 45 200. Good to hear you are still activeand enjoying photography. Best wishes.
Thank you for your kind compliment, John. I very much appreciate it.

The short and quick answer is that I shoot Jpeg because I don’t need RAW to obtain results with which I’m usually more than happy. The longer version is that, as an old school photographer, more often than not I get everything right at the time of shooting. For me, that’s pretty much the crucial bit. :-)

In my experience, digital sensors behave differently to film in terms of exposure. Whilst I could over expose film by at least one stop on virtually any occasion and still be able to preserve or recover highlights at the processing/printing stage, digital responds better to negative exposure compensation values if clipping detail in brighter areas is to be avoided.

Whether we shoot Raw or Jpeg, once detail (say feathers on a Mute Swan or Great Egret) is burnt completely to white from over exposure, it cannot be recovered. Hence with digital I always expose to brighter parts of the scene with some degree of negative EV unless the main subject is backlit (requiring positive EV) or the scene is balanced to a degree that ‘0’ exposure compensation is more appropriate.

Luckily I’ve been in the game long enough to recognise in advance the adjustments I’ll need to make before I bring the camera to my eye, which helps if speed is of the essence to capture any particular shot. Many (but certainly not ALL) raw shooters use the uncompressed format as a safety net that to some extent helps them to improve results via their favourite software. No matter the reasons why anyone selects raw or jpeg, there’s no right or wrong here; just personal preference.

All I’ll add is that in my experience, if needs must (perhaps to lift shadow areas, or whatever), Jpegs lend themselves much better to tweaks/enhancements in post adjustment than many people give them credit for.

Finally, I shoot on average 65,000 photos per year, around half of which I’ll save for my records, despite the fact that only a comparatively small percentage are selected for print or digital/internet display. Truth is, if I were to shoot and save 30,000 Raw files year on year, I’d require much more storage space than I can afford to buy. As I say, I’m more than happy with Jpegs straight out of my cameras, subject to having made various tweaks well away from Panasonic’s factory-set defaults for noise reduction, sharpening, saturation, etc. For me, factory set defaults yield dreadful and usually overly soft results that thankfully can be vastly improved upon via user adjustments... all to personal taste, of course. :-)

Hope this helps, John. Thanks again for posting, and "best wishes to you", too.

Regards,

Steve.

PS: To all who have posted below, I’ll respond to you individually later as I’m pushed for time at the moment. Thanks for now. :-) Cheers...
 
Last edited:
The Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm is also quite nice and very compact. I used it on the first gen Blackmagic Pocket Cine.

This 14-42 and 45-175 PZ lenses both on my "keep on the lookout for" list.
 
Thanks for the very useful review. I also have this lens and fully appreciate it.

I have often seen it panned because of its power zoom. This seems ridiculous as although it has power zoom this can be ignored completely as you have noted and the manual fly by wire zoom works perfectly.

Of course we can always use the power zoom should it be desirable.

One extra benefit I should mention is that the lens can be set to start at a given zoom lens - there are situations where it is very useful for the last zoomed position to be remembered.

It is a very sharp lens as well. It also is a good companion to its somewhat larger and and faster sibling - the 35-100/2.8. Which is also internal focus and zoom.
 
This lens has often been praised by its owners. Your convincing sold me.

Found a great looking one on fleebay, last night, and pulled the trigger.

I have a thing for internal zooming lenses.

Paid120£ plus shipping and import duties. Il cones close to 200€,. That seemed an overly fair price

Sure not the typical 70-ish you pay for a plastic-fantastic 40-150 but the gx lens looks better built, has that extra 15% reach and is IF....

Will see..

Cheers
 
One of my favourite lenses. Not only a very capable mid-telephoto piece of glass, but also a good cheap solution for macro when needed. Its internal zooming makes it very useful with a Raynox or two...

d1b3c88c51ed4f6c8930cedfee014039.jpg


I have some pics here if anyone wants to see what sort of tune I can get out of the lens - serious photographers may be able to get an entire opera out of it. However, I think everyone on this thread has been bored by these pics in the past already :D , for which I apologise, but the fact that you can carry a 350mm equivalent lens in a deep pocket is simply mind-blowing.

Looking forward to some photos, Felice!

_____________________________________
Some of the coolest things in life are really, really small.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/roddyhays/
 
Last edited:
Congrats on your excellent work with this lens!

Add-on raynix nay actually further expand its usability!

I am kind if excited and looking forward to get my hands on it : 😉

Cheers

F
 
This lens has often been praised by its owners. Your convincing sold me.

Found a great looking one on fleebay, last night, and pulled the trigger.

I have a thing for internal zooming lenses.

Paid120£ plus shipping and import duties. Il cones close to 200€,. That seemed an overly fair price

Sure not the typical 70-ish you pay for a plastic-fantastic 40-150 but the gx lens looks better built, has that extra 15% reach and is IF....

Will see..

Cheers
Great stuff. Looks like you found a real bargain and I'm pleased my Review helped with your decision.

Please post some of your images as and when you're ready, and let us all know what you think of your new toy. :-)

All the best for now,

Cheers...
 
Last edited:
Nice images - thanks for sharing. I am pleasantly surprised by bokeh quality esp. when having busy background - this is sometimes problem with M43 lenses.
Thank you, Vlad, glad you like the images. :-)

I know what you mean about M4/3 and blurred backgrounds. I don’t know about you, but always find it helpful to be as close to the subject as possible at full focal length, certainly as far as small birds are concerned. It’s also best to be as selective as we can be in terms of the backgrounds we choose before shooting, the less tatty the better. :-)

Much obliged for your input here,

Cheers...
 
Yes, looking forward!

Cheers

F
 
Yes, an unusual lens, for its remote control capability and lightweight, which makes it a candidate for inexpensive remote controlled gimbals. First image in the album linked below was taken via Wifi and the Image app.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dieselgolfer/albums/72157712787108552/with/49905366526/
Thanks for the post, Stuart.

Whilst I prefer the challenge of getting as close as possible to birds whilst still holding and operating the camera in hand, I’m sure many readers will appreciate the remote aspects re this lens that you outline here. :-)

Cheers...
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top