Just throwing it out there. It seems like Panasonic is doing what things better than Olympus, such as the faster zooms in both mid-range and short telephoto, better pancakes, faster primes and wider UWA zooms.

When I look at the lens chart that I built for myself, seems like it just makes sense to invest in Panasonic more.

Panasonic has larger collection of MFT native lenses than Olympus but I won't rate Panasonic higher than Olympus .
Cheers
Bhupinder

__________________
OMD Silver with battery Grip
Olympus 45mm 1.8
Panny 20mm 1.7
Olympus 4/314-54mm MrkII,
Fuji X100 Black LE

I feel that currently they are outdoing Olympus...but I don't think they're superior. Oly has some terrific lenses, and Panasonic has some terrific lenses...it just happens that at the moment, my preference goes to Panasonic.

Now that I think about...I own an Oly body, and not one Oly lens. I don't see that changing in the near future either.

__________________
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm F2.8
Panasonic Leica Summilux 25mm F1.4
Panasonic Lumix 45-175mm F4-5.6

OTOH, Olympus has a bunch of fast primes, like the 45 1.8, the 75 1.8, and the 12 f2 that everyone seems to agree are stellar. And Panasonic's 14-42 and 45-200 are pretty much typical consumer zooms. The 100-300 maybe a bit better than that, but certainly no competition of Canon or Nikon pro-level zooms.

I don't think one is better than the other, but they've focused on different areas. Panasonic is rumored to be coming out with a fast prime tele (whatever that means). Oly is rumored to be preparing a fast 25mm lens at a lower price point than the PanLeica. It wouldn't surprise me to see Oly update some of its zoom range.

__________________
I'm not lazy. I'm energy efficient.

My list of ideal (i.e. money no object) prime lenses would currently be all Olympus bar the PL 25/1.4, and my list of ideal zooms would be all Panasonic.

__________________
Nic
E-M5, GH1
Flickr Photostream
>> Insert quote here <<

You don't feel like having OIS is kind of a duplication of IBIS and the money you spent for it is unnecessary?

I look at the 12-35/2.8 and the 35-100/2.8 and I'm telling my self that these are the lenses. They're the lenses that I use the most in a Canon or Nikon system. They would allow me to not worry about having the 12, 45, 75. They would be extended with a 100-300 being the extreme telephoto, another Panasonic. Get the 25/1.4, 7-14 and I have a full kit.

But then I look at the size and weight and just think to myself, what if Olympus came out gunning in September with similar zooms, perhaps a constant f/4 or a f/2.8-3.5 at 2/3 the weight and size? The rumoured 25/1.8? The speculation and GAS is killing me.

No...Panasonic incorporates OIS in several of their lower-priced lenses, so I don't see it as something that adds significantly to the price of the lenses I have purchased from them.

Aside from that, lenses are a longer investment for me...my next body could easily be Panasonic, where the redundant OIS will pay off.

__________________
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm F2.8
Panasonic Leica Summilux 25mm F1.4
Panasonic Lumix 45-175mm F4-5.6

Olympus needs to come out with a normal 35mm or 50mm eqv lens that matches the quality of the 45mm or better (I would prefer it be similar to the 12mm or 75mm) or an affordable pancake (the rumored 25mm f1.8?) since the two good choices are both Panasonic with the 20mm and 25mm and theres also that rumor about the PL17.5mm (drool).

Similar focal length zooms at f4 probably wouldn't interest me, unless they were both a lot cheaper than the Panny 12-35 and a lot higher quality than the 14-45. A 2.8 - 3.5, maybe. But even the 12-35 (and the 35-100, based on photos of the two prototype lenses) is dramatically smaller than its APS-C equivalent mounted to a decent APS-C body. I don't find it to be "too big" at all.

__________________
I'm not lazy. I'm energy efficient.

Both companies have some excelent offerings which are, up to this point, highly complimentary of each other.

For my highly subjective needs (not going into "wants" at this point), Oly 12mm, 45mm and 75mm would be an ideal combo. The only Pany I'd need/want is the 25mm f/1.4, but, sincerely, I have postponed an order at the last minute a number of times, since rumors of a smaller, less expensive Oly 25mm f/1.8 came out. If it is in the same league as the 45mm, this would be my choice.

I though hard about the Pany 12-35 and, though it seems an exquisite lens, it wouldn't cover what I want from a zoom. This is a wide to short portrait lens; what I would like is a longer telephoto range. Ergo, I hope the rumored Oly 12-60 comes out and is as good as its 4/3 brother.

So, even is I'm not biased against Panasonic lenses, and in fact find some of them lovely (the 45mm macro comes to mind) I don't find one that I could justify paying a substantial amount to have in my arsenal. Another thing is, using Olympus bodies at the moment, I have no need for lens IS. Which is something you pay for when buying a Pany lens that has it; but that's secondary.

I offer the above as an example showing, I hope, it's not the "objectively" better lenses that always "win", but the lenses you really need. A relevant situation exists with Canon vs Nikon lenses. There are people who have bought into one or the other system, based on lenses available for their work. Fortunately, with we have no such dilemma, we can enjoy the best there is on offer from both companies.

__________________
http://500px.com/Eyes_Unclouded_Photography
http://eyesunclouded-photography.blogspot.gr/
http://www.facebook.com/eyesunclouded