New Panasonic II lenses - are changes just cosmetic?

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by Holoholo55, Jan 4, 2017.

  1. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    This is all purely speculation though, unless you have sources that have confirmed the component changes necessary to label the lens as freeze-proof.
     
  2. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Ah yes, those were just possibilities.
     
  3. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    These really have me reconsidering a few things. I was thinking the new 50-200 f/2.8-4.0 would be my next purchase. Now it might be between the 45-200, 50-200, and 100-300.
     
  4. JYPfoto

    JYPfoto Mu-43 Veteran

    368
    Aug 27, 2013
    The 100-300 now seems like a very transition lens if you have the 12-35, 35-100 and get the 100-300 now. I have a feeling that the 55-200 will end up being like $1,299-1,499.
     
  5. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I don't see any reason why it would be less than $1,500. The 12-60 is the same price as the 12-35 and 12-40. The 40-150 PRO is $1,500 list, and to get the same reach you would need to add the $350 1.4x TC.
     
  6. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    And here I was hoping that since the 12-60 f/3.5-5.6 is $500 and the f/2.8-4.0 is $1000; that since the 45-200 f/3.5-5.6 is $450 that the f/2.8-4.0 would only be $900. :oops:
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    :rofl:
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. Fred S

    Fred S Mu-43 Top Veteran

    580
    Feb 20, 2012
    Calgary
    Fred S
    The 100-300 II prices have been released at the Local camera store
    $ 900.00 Canuck Bucks
    I have an EM-10
    for that money it will really have to WoW me to buy one
    that is twice what I paid for my Oly 75-300 II which is a fine lens
     
  8. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    A very quick gander at Photoprice.ca puts the 100-300 version 1 at $800 CDN, and the 75-300 at $700 CDN.

    Panasonic H-FS100300 Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F/4.0-5.6 OIS
    Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm II f4.8-6.7

    For a brand new model, I'm not too fussed over a minor price difference, especially when it has so many feature upgrades.

    For what it's worth, I bought my P100-300 (version 1) a year or two ago from a member here for (I believe) $330 USD + shipping, tried it in the field a few times, and then re-sold it locally after about a year for $480 CDN when I found that I wasn't really using it at all. So not paying for the initial depreciation meant that I was able to rent the lens for free.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    The old 45-200mm and 100-300mm from the several copies I tried, were good a notch before their maximum focal length, ex. 45mm to 180mm and 100mm to 280mm. I'm pretty sure the 50-200mm will be good throughout the focal range, at a price premium. Though Panasonic might have made some tweaks like the 14-140mm II and the updated lenses could be sharper at the long end! ;)
     
  10. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    My guess is not, since the new lenses have almost an identical housing (plus some seals?), and all the other optical specs are the same. The 14-140mm II on the other hand was clearly a major redesign, with new optics, a totally different housing, even a different aperture range.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Having been an electronic technician for over 20 years, what @wjiang@wjiang said is spot on. Everything in an electronic device has a temperature range that it can operate at. Typically, parts that operate in the extremes are more expensive and it's why not everything is made to those specifications. My guess is they want to better compete with the Olympus Pro lenses and decided it was worth putting in the better associated parts to get the freeze proof ability. The only other thing that could make a lens freeze proof would be a small heater in the lens, which would bring about a lot of other problems.
     
  12. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I've used the first gen 35-100f2.8 @ -20C (so basically 0F) without issue.
     
  13. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    Yeah I'm not expecting miracles. To be honest though for what they're charging for the new 45-200mm II ($447.99 B&H), I'd rather get the 100-300mm II ($647.99 B&H) for that extended reach. The 45-200 just wasn't that great at 200mm and was easily bested by the 45-175mm X which is a very good lens.

    Olympus and Panasonic really need to get on-board making cheaper smaller primes weather sealed. I'm a bit jealous of Fuji and their 35mm f/2 and other cheaper WR primes.

    Weather sealed 20mm f/1.7 III anyone? :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Not saying it is not possible. All electronic parts are given conservative ranges, just like the CPU in your computer and it's why you can over clock them.
    That's because electronic components operating range is given conservative estimates to ensure they stand up to the stated claims. When I worked for Halliburton we specced a lot of components on the circuit boards that did were given temperature ranges lower then what the tool would see when downhole (the electronic tools they use in drilling are really sophisticated and can see some brutal temperatures). Since everything was manufactured and tested in house (circuit cards were tested in the area where they were made then everything was tested when fully assembled) the failure rate for the lesser components was cheaper then using better components.
     
  15. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    One of my best friends shoots Fuji and he wishes they went the way of Olympus. He hates that he had to buy both 35mm lenses because he needed the faster one for event photography but like me enjoys shooting in rain and needed the slower one for when it rains. The grass is not always greener.
     
  16. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    Decided to check this morning. This is from Panasonic's USA website. Rounded to nearest $.

    Leica 12-60 f2.8-4 $1,000
    Lumix G X 12-35 f2.8 II $1,000
    Lumix G X 35-100 f2.8 II $1,100
    Lumix G 45-200 f4-5.6 II $450
    Lumix G 100-300 f4-5.6 II $650

    Old Lumix G X 12-35 f2.8 $700
    Old Lumix G X 35-100 f2.8 still $1,300 ??

    Why is the old 35-100 f2.8 still $1,300? Dunno. Makes no sense if the II is less, eh?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I'm not really expecting significant optical changes. Just that the improved autofocus, aperture mechanism, and image stabilization will make them handle a bit better. The vI to vII of the 14-140 included a change in aperture range and size/weight which isn't the case with these unfortunately.

    I've either been lucky with the three 45-200 I've owned or unlucky with the three 45-175's. I might also have been influenced by my dislike of power zooms and that 350mm AOV is shorter then I would really like. For that matter so is 400mm AOV. When I was using Nikon APS-C bodies for this stuff I would use a 70-300mm or 80-400mm, so 450mm or 600mm AOV. But I found the 100-300 too big and a little slow.

    So I'll just have to wait for reviews of the updates to the older lenses. I expect the 50-200 will be much better optically, but at what price, size, and weight? I'm also pretty sure that for either the 50-200 or 100-300 I'll have to add a JB Grip to my GX85.
     
  18. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    I had a used 45-200 that I used to shoot kids soccer games. I found that at 200 mm, I couldn't get a decent image unless I stopped down to f8 or more. I ended up replacing it with a 50-200 SWD and got much better results. Since they apparently did not change the optical formula on most of the II lenses, although there are improvements elsewhere, I haven't been that interested.
     
  19. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Interesting, still almost nothing out on the 45-200 II. So far reports on the 100-300 II show a big improvement in OIS thanks to Dual IS.
     
  20. Palmguy

    Palmguy Mu-43 Regular

    98
    Mar 3, 2013
    NW Florida
    Brian
    I think I'm going to get the new 100-300 and probably sell my 45-175. The times that I want 175, I really want more than 175; and it should match up nicely with my other zooms (12-60, 35-100).

    Additionally, I'm recently coming from the Nikon 200-500, which was great, but much bigger than I ever really want to deal with; really looking forward to having more reach in a significantly smaller lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1