Is panasonics 35-100 all that?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Triggertrevor, Oct 5, 2013.

  1. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    Hi all, I've been thumbing this forum for quite sometime now and found it very interesting but now I feel I need to post so here goes.

    I have Panasonic G5 body with a few Panasonic/Olympus prime lenes which I am very happy with but as my son plays leauge football that's soccer to you guys as I'm over the pond I've took the plunge and bought myself the 35-100 2.8 from Panasonic.
    I couldn't wait to receive the lens and now I have I'm some what dissapointed with the image quality compared to my primes.
    Now seen as I've paid a pretty penny for this lens I expected more.
    Now Is this me being too picky or is this the norm for telephoto zoom lenes.

    I also find the panasonics burst rate slow for shooting football and this makes me feel a little like have I chosen the wrong system and should I have gone with a Good quality dslr with a good 75-200mm lens.

    I would relly appreciate some feedback on this

    Cheers all kev
  2. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Hmmm....I shot this today in CAF with sequential high & my E-PL5 with the M. Zuiko 75mm. It's possible without a DSLR, you just might have to think & shoot differently. :smile:

    Today's Soccer Match by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr
    • Like Like x 8
  3. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    Cheers for the prompt reply.
    I am right in saying that this is the 75mm prime.
    That's a lovely sharp image.
    I was wondering wether I should have gone for that lenes but agin liked the idea of the zoom.
    What's the burst rte like on the Olympus bodies s I was thinking of buying the new omd m1

    Cheers kev
  4. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    10 fps.

    More specifically...

    • Like Like x 1
  5. monk3y

    monk3y Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 14, 2013
    in The Cloud...
    Damn!! that second info right there is awesome!!Bursting up to 41 RAW files at 10fps.:2thumbs:
  6. Adubo

    Adubo SithLord Subscribing Member

    Nov 4, 2010
    Im not sure whether it is the body or the lens that is in question but heres my two cents.

    In my experience the 35-100 is plenty sharp enough and a lot faster to AF than the 75/1.8 (both used in an em5 body)

    Maybe its a matter of shooting style thats giving you a hard time. Try shooting differently try diff shooting modes diff settings etc etc.

    If that doesnt work try playing with other newer generation m43 in stores. My suggestion goes to the gh3.
  7. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 5, 2013
    I have a G5 and the cheap Oly 40-150 and I have had a good time learning to use that combo at American football games in bad light from too far away.

    I don't know what your standards are, perhaps you could show us some pictures and we can see what you are getting. Perhaps I am not as demanding as you are, but I have been pleased with some of my shots with my inexpensive combo. No, it's no pro Canon and 2.8 prime, but I am still having fun.

    <a href="[email protected]/9634653122/" title="P1010339 by dynasportfxdx, on Flickr"> 9634653122_2264e080c9_b.jpg "1024" height="799" alt="P1010339"></a>
  8. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    Could be could be.
    Tried shooting in af continuos today and found the burst rate slow. Checked the camera specs and found out the burst rate in that mode is slower than af single.

    It's all a learning curve.

    The main problem I have is nailing the focus on the faces when shooting multiple people playing football, they seem to be in focus but very soft in detail, maybe I should up my appeture rather than should say stops past wide open.

    Cheers kev
  9. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    That should have said shooting say 2 stops past wide open.

  10. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    I tried uploading some pictures tonight but it says there too large and I don't know how to upload them at a smaller size. Maybe you could help.

    Cheers kev
  11. Drdave944

    Drdave944 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Feb 2, 2012
    You don't specify what about the pictures is defective. I think you need a faster lens and to shoot wide open if you don't like the 100 mm /2.8. Remember image stabilization doesn't work on moving subjects,which could be part of the problem. I faces are shaded you could increase the exposure compensation, but that would make the motion blur worse. Evidently you are pushing the camera and lens beyond its capabilities. A DSL might get higher burst rates but a really fast telephoto comes at an astronomical price.
    You might like the 75mm F1.8 OLY
  12. Adubo

    Adubo SithLord Subscribing Member

    Nov 4, 2010

    i shoot with single AF point (middle). i find it to suit my style (focus-recompose) and it makes the AF faster and more accurate. it does make a big difference, in my opinion.

    i dont have any sports shots with the 35-100 but i did shoot street photography (and its plenty hard to shoot street with that FL) the 35-100 wins by far versus the 75/1.8 in AF speed.
  13. zapatista

    zapatista Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Mar 19, 2012
    Albuquerque, NM
    Mike Barber
    kev, reduce them to 1500x1150 max.
  14. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 5, 2013
    I upload them to and then link to them. There are other photo hosting sites people use as well, but I haven't used them. If you use Flickr, after you upload the photo, bring that photo up on the screen and then just below the photo and to the right, there will be a box with an arrow coming out of it. Click on that and select "Grab the HTML Code". Copy the text that comes up in that box and then paste it into your message here.

    Hopefully I got all that right. If I messed it up, maybe someone else can correct it, but that's how I do it.
  15. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    Thanks for that I'll give it a go tomorrow.
  16. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Doing sports photography is as much about technique as gear. The 35-100 is a fine lens, but it's worth considering the following:

    - 100mm is on the short side for tightly cropped images at football/soccer matches unless you're close to the action.

    - AF on all u43 bodies, except the E-M1, is sub-optimal for moving subjects (and this is certainly true of the G5). Of course, this doesn't make it impossible - just harder.

    - High burst capability makes getting a good shot easier. Not sure what the G5's rating is, but I suspect it's not top of the line.

    - Keeping the shutter speed as high as possible is important. Keep the lens fully open and push the ISO up if need be - a bit of noise is far preferable to motion blur.

    - If CAF can't keep up, use single shot AF. If that can't keep up, then use a preset focus point.

    Hope this helps!
  17. Triggertrevor

    Triggertrevor Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 30, 2013
    Cheers for all that info

    I'm keeping my shutter speed above 1/1000,today it was 1/1300 but I have to switch to aperture priority if I want to up my f stop but I normally leave my iso on auto.
    Tried continuos af today but burst rate was slow so have to go back to af single tomorrow.
    Focus point has been on small box
    I think it all stems from shooting primes then going over to zooms and I'm expecting prime quality which I don't think I'm going to get but practice makes perfect.
    Plus I'm thinking of changing bodies to either the gh3 or omd m1 so that might help.

    Thnks gin kev
  18. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 5, 2013
    The G5 can shoot at 6fps. I select single AF box, make if fairly small and put it in the middle. I use single AF, set the burst rate as high as it will go and shoot short bursts. I am a little selective of the kinds of action I am trying to capture and try to use my knowledge of the game to anticipate where good shots may be. Still, I don't get tons I am happy with, but the failures don't cost me anything.

    I also crank the ISO up higher than most recommend, but where I am shooting is not well lit and the games are in the evening, so I have to use high ISOs. I actually need to go higher, as I often end up with some motion blur anyway.

    I used to shoot sports with a Canon APS-C camera and pretty fast lenses. The G5's constant AF doesn't work for me, but I find I can still get pretty good shots using the single AF mode. Even the Canon C-AF had issues in the consumer line. At least mine did, the new ones may be better.
  19. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 20, 2011
    I find that it takes time to learn the in and outs of a lens. I don't really feel comfortable with a lens where it fits in with what I see for at least a month or two of heavy shooting r even upwards f a few month if I'm not heavily shooting. Especially with zooms... so many tempting bad habits with a 70-200 type lens that can really derange a composition.
  20. hookgrip

    hookgrip Mu-43 Regular

    May 21, 2013

    If one of your main uses for it is shooting soccer, I think going to a Canon or Nikon DSLR with a 70-200 f/2.8 lens would suit you much better than any mirrorless camera. Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 II is in fact sharper than many primes in that same range. Yes, it will be bigger and heavier than a M 4/3 system, but it will be much better for shooting sports, or basically anything else where the subject is moving at a decent pace. I used to shoot sports for the university newspaper with Nikon 70-200 and 300mm f/2.8 on D2 and D3 bodies, and the difference was night and day compared to any Micro 4/3 camera. Micro 4/3 is great for a lot of things, but I just don't think sports or fast action is one of them.

    The other issue with using M4/3 to shoot sports is that it is difficult to blur out backgrounds, so often times other players and distracting elements are left in the picture. The Panasonic 35-100 may be a f/2.8 lens in terms of light gathering ability, but in terms of depth of field it's only equivalent to f/5.6 on a full-frame DSLR, which is definitely a big difference from a f/2.8 lens on a full-frame camera.