1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

35-100 and 45-175 compared

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Kiwi Paul, Jan 9, 2013.

  1. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul Mu-43 Top Veteran

    729
    Aug 15, 2011
    Aberdeen Scotland
    Here's a limited comparison of the 35-100 and 45-175 taken with GH-3.

    I'll let you decide but my view is the 45-175 lacks the clarity of the 35-100, even when the 35-100 is shown at 100%.

    The 45-175 was wide open f5.6 the 35-100 @ f4 so stopped down a bit, but the quality doesn't really change for either lens stopped up or down by that change in f stop.

    RAW processed in LR4.3.

    Paul

    P1000661.
    35-100 as shot. (100mm)

    P1000661-2.
    35-100 (100% crop of above pic)

    P1000768.
    45-175 (175mm)approx 100% crop

    P1000769.
    45-175 (175mm) approx 100% crop
     
    • Like Like x 5
  2. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    Thanks for sharing that. It's a night and day difference in contrast and colour balance, the 35-100 looks a lot warmer.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. zucchiniboy

    zucchiniboy Mu-43 Regular

    136
    Oct 13, 2010
    San Francisco
    Do you have any similar comparisons at the same focal length, e.g. 100mm?

    Thanks for posting!
     
  4. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    Wow, that's a pretty marked difference to be sure.

    I have to say, going back and looking over older photos I see a similar delineation between shots taken on my lenses like the 14-140mm and the newer 12-35, & 35-100mm from Panasonic. The 60 and 75mm lenses from Olympus are also in that category but perhaps less of an obvious jump since there are/were other excellent prime lenses for the system already.

    It's not that the 14-140mm is a "bad" lens by any means - in fact I happen to think it's got quite decent optics for a superzoom. But there's a clear jump in contrast, sharpness and overall clarity going to these higher end optics, as this certainly illustrates.
     
  5. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    That has been my conclusion exactly. The 14-140 is a really convenient one-lens option, so I have kept mine, but it isn't in the same class.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul Mu-43 Top Veteran

    729
    Aug 15, 2011
    Aberdeen Scotland
    I don't have any pics at the same focal length, I weren't doing comparison shots when shooting just thought to compare them now. The 45-175 shots can be warmed up and with an increase in contrast in pp take on a similar look to the 35-100 shots but there is no denying the 35-100 has far better clarity, it seems you can shoot at 100mm with the 35-100 post crop for the same viewing size and get the same or better IQ than using the 45-175 at 175mm, although to be fair need to test it out more, the 45-175 isn't a bad lens.

    Paul
     
  7. goodsonr

    goodsonr Mu-43 Regular

    41
    Dec 7, 2011
    tks very much for that comparison .. especially interesting since I have a used 45-175 on its way to me. The 35-100 looks pounds better, better its just out of my comfort-zone for $$.
     
  8. mauro

    mauro Mu-43 Regular

    145
    Jun 26, 2012
    near Venice, Italy
    Pic with 45-175 have a incorrect WB and is a little bit overexposed.
    I will make a comparison with 45-175x, mzd 40-150 and 50-200swd as soon as possible :)
     
  9. Gillymaru

    Gillymaru Mu-43 Veteran

    My money is on the 50-200,
     
  10. mauro

    mauro Mu-43 Regular

    145
    Jun 26, 2012
    near Venice, Italy
    Are you sure? :rofl:

    No doubts it will win hands down!
     
  11. dyrmaker83

    dyrmaker83 Mu-43 Regular

    50
    Feb 19, 2011
    Washington, DC
    Mike
    That would be very helpful, especially at 100 and 150mm lengths.
     
  12. kevwilfoto

    kevwilfoto Mu-43 Veteran

    294
    Sep 23, 2011
    Colorado
    They don't seem as different as their price would imply, but yes the 35-100 does seem a touch sharper. I'd love to see them both compared @ 90mm f/8 so that neither lens is at any extreme of focal length or aperture. Adding the 50-200 SWD to the comparison is an excellent idea!
     
  13. 00r101

    00r101 Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Jan 21, 2012
    Actually, I would like to see a 3 way comparison of the Oly 75, the 45-175 and the 35-100 all at 75mm. I just got the 75 and man, is it sharp. The_Accountant.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  14. mauro

    mauro Mu-43 Regular

    145
    Jun 26, 2012
    near Venice, Italy
    Unfortunately you have to wait a couple of days or more, here in the north of Italy we are in the all day long foggy period:mad:
     
  15. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    I'm subscribing to this thread so as not to miss Mauro's HUGE lens test.
    No pressure ...:wink:

    The fact that Paul's 45-175 has just gone on sale says more than some photo comparisons, although I'd like to see pictures of the various lenses side by side in the same thread.
     
  16. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul Mu-43 Top Veteran

    729
    Aug 15, 2011
    Aberdeen Scotland
    The 35-100 is far better, much better clarity. I tend to test lenses as they are going to be used, testing them both at 90mm @ f8 is all very well but that's not where the lenses are going to be used very often so is not a very good "real world" test.
    I'll try to do some more shots with both wide open at 100mm (f2.8 and about f5.0) and both at f5.6.

    Paul
     
    • Like Like x 1