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

Oly 75mm f/1.8 or Pany 35-100mm f/2.8

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by WorldShooter, Mar 2, 2013.

  1. WorldShooter

    WorldShooter Mu-43 Regular

    36
    Jan 17, 2013
    Giethoorn, Netherlands
    Peter B.
    Hello everyone,

    Coming from a long history with Nikon equipment, I recently dove into the world of mFT by purchasing Oly's OM-D E-M5, HLD-6, 12mm f/2.0, 17mm f/1.8 and 45mm f/1.8.

    I'm still looking for a lens at the longer end.
    - Narrowed my choices down to the Oly 75mm f/1.8 or the Pany 35-100 f/2.8.
    - Read just about every review on the net :smile:. I know the Oly is a stellar, transparent and sharp lens :2thumbs:. The Pany is good, maybe even very good :thumbup:, but not as stellar as the Oly.
    - I also like shooting primes again. On the other hand, I've always loved my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR and loved the versatility of a zoom over these focal lengths.

    So which one to pick :confused: ? Getting both is prohibitive, given the price of either one :biggrin:. I'd like to get some feedback from fellow forum users who have personal experience with one (or both :smile:) of these lenses. What are the pros and cons? What do you like and what not? Maybe even a recommendation or two?

    Your replies are much appreciated!
    Thanks in advance, Peter
     
  2. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    773
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Peter, run ExposurePlot or another tool to analyse which focal lengths you used most with your 70-200.

    That may help your decision: if you tend to the low end, you probably don't need either - you have the 45. If the long end, you need the zoom; if it's the 140ish length, you know what to get :))
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. aukirk

    aukirk Mu-43 Regular

    183
    Sep 9, 2012
    I have both, but if I could only have one it would have to be the 35-100m. I am not a fan of zooms, but have found this on the camera a lot. I really like the 75m, but have had a tough time figuring out the best use for it, as I prefer the 45m for portraits.
     
  4. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    There's a good chance the 35-100 will also replace your 45.

    I'm in the saving mode for this 70-200 equivalent right now. It's just a really versatile range.
     
  5. WorldShooter

    WorldShooter Mu-43 Regular

    36
    Jan 17, 2013
    Giethoorn, Netherlands
    Peter B.
    Thanks for the reply, Aukirk!

    You find yourself using the Pany 35-100mm f/2.8 at lot more than the Oly 75mm f/1.8.
    If I understand you correctly that has mostly to do with usability (the zoom range is very convenient...).
    What about optical quality? The optical quality of the Oly 75mm f/1.8 is reported to be stellar, up with the best, but what about the optical quality of the Pany 35-100mm f/2.8? How would you rate it against the Oly?

    Kind regards, Peter
     
  6. WorldShooter

    WorldShooter Mu-43 Regular

    36
    Jan 17, 2013
    Giethoorn, Netherlands
    Peter B.
    Thanks for the reply, dav1dz!

    Well, I don't think so! :smile:
    The Oly 45mm f/1.8 is one of the gems of the mFT lens line-up.
    It's razor sharp, with a very nice bokeh, and focusses quietly and very fast (thanks to the MSC design).
    On top of that, after so many years of shooting with (D)SLR zooms, I really like using primes again. It makes me more conscious of my lens choices, and which perspective to use. Also "zooming with your feet" is not a bad thing!

    So even if I would get the Pany 35-100mm f/2.8 (which might very well be possible), I'll hold on to the Oly 45mm f/1.8.

    Kind regards, Peter
     
  7. metalmania

    metalmania Mu-43 Veteran

    244
    Jul 19, 2012
    NYC
    Get both if the price is right. I have Oly 75 but when I saw the $1075 35-100, I just couldn't resist. Now I have both.
     
  8. tdekany

    tdekany Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 8, 2011
    Oregon
    Where did you find it for that price?


     
  9. MAubrey

    MAubrey Photographer

    Jul 9, 2012
    Bellingham, WA
    Mike Aubrey
    Alternatively, you may very well drop the 45mm after getting the 75mm. I've been debating selling my 45 for over a month now. I just don't use it now...
     
  10. WorldShooter

    WorldShooter Mu-43 Regular

    36
    Jan 17, 2013
    Giethoorn, Netherlands
    Peter B.
    Thanks Metalmania!

    Well, that would be nice! But the dent in my wallet would be too big right now :smile:

    Lucky you :biggrin: ! I'm interested in their optical qualities. How would you rate either one?

    Kind regards, Peter
     
  11. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    To each their own. :drinks:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. metalmania

    metalmania Mu-43 Veteran

    244
    Jul 19, 2012
    NYC
    Check ebay everyday. Once in a while a mint condition 35-100 from US seller will pop up with a "Buy it Now" price close to Japanese seller's price. Mine is used but I care more about the price.
     
  13. metalmania

    metalmania Mu-43 Veteran

    244
    Jul 19, 2012
    NYC
    35-100 is really nice. Oly 75 is just a little bit sharper. There are some nice pictures from the 35-100 image thread.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. aukirk

    aukirk Mu-43 Regular

    183
    Sep 9, 2012
    I am no expert in lens comparisons or pixel peeping sharpness differences, but I can say that all of the shots coming out of the 35-100 are super sharp. To my eye, the pictures are just as sharp as what comes out of the 25, 45 and 75. I have also found that for the types of shots I am typically taking of moving kids, the 2.8 is actually reducing the number of missed focus shots, as it can be a pretty narrow window with 1.8 or less.

    The 45 has a solid place for me, especially indoors and when I want to carry a small lens. That lens can easily fit into a pocket without causing any discomfort (as opposed to the 35-100, which you will definitely know is there).

    I really haven't had much reason to use the 75 since getting the 35-100, but could see it coming to an indoor concert or something that would benefit from the 1.8 and smaller size. (I am sure I will also force myself to use it other times when I am just shooting for the sake of shooting, as opposed to capturing something I make sure I get.)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. iGonzoid

    iGonzoid Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Feb 6, 2011
    Tasmania, Australia
    Have had the Oly 75mm f1.8 for about two weeks now, and except for the usual spider pix with my P/L 45 macro, it has not been off my OM-D. It is gorgeous —*high quality of detail and colour rendering wide open. The reach is ideal for unobtrusive street photography and I have got some great child portraits with it — grabbed thanks to the fast autofocus. I just LOVE this lens. It's up there with the P/L 25mm f1.4.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. WorldShooter

    WorldShooter Mu-43 Regular

    36
    Jan 17, 2013
    Giethoorn, Netherlands
    Peter B.
    Thanks Aukirk!
    That's really useful info!

    Kind regards, Peter
     
  17. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I think this sort of thing is very much down to taste; I don't own either lens (yet), but owned a 70-200/2.8 IS and own a 135/2.0 for full frame Canon. I very much prefer the latter, despite the lack of versatility. It wasn't even about the bulk, although I will admit the 70-200 didn't come out and play as often as the 135 because of its size, but on occasions when I had both available I almost always grabbed the 135. Exceptions were situations where I needed the IS, which is a non-issue for an E-M5.

    I'm a bit atypical, however, since I don't particularly like the 45 (85-90mm FF) angle of view for portraiture; I'd rather have shorter (25mm/50mm FF) or longer (65-75mm/135-150mm FF). Same was true for my crop DSLR back in the day; didn't like the 50mm all that much, loved shooting the 105mm macro, and used it for some of my all-time favorite portraits.

    If you're shooting events, don't have a lot of room to maneuver, the 35-100 can be incredibly handy/versatile. But personally, at the tele end of things, I'd rather have a good prime for people/medium telephoto range (up to 100mm) and a good to decent super telephoto zoom (for wildlife, unless I have multiple bodies set up). I may give the 35-100 a try if I can find one at a cannot-resist-it price, but I would be far more interested in a 50-200/2.8-3.5 or similar and take the 75/1.8
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    784
    Jan 10, 2013
    I enjoy the versatility of the zoom lenses and see the 35-100 as a necessity for quality event work.

    But there is something special about the 75mm. While its focal length limits, some creative things can occur with it. I brought it on vacation and found myself shooting details of objects seen around a quaint town; along with portraits and street kind of work done at distance that the focal length invites.

    In short, the 75mm's challenges and results were genuinely enjoyable.

    I look forward to going dual bodies one day with the 75mm being on one of them.

    I think the other part of it for me was the elusiveness, costs and just plain work associated with getting anywhere near the 75mm sharpness with my Canon gear. We used Lens Align, charts, pored over all manner of advice on fine tuning focus and, when improved, came away with doubts about having achieved the best that it could be.
     
  19. slothead

    slothead Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 14, 2012
    Frederick, MD
    I would get both WorldShooter! Sell off some of that Nikon stuff and equip yourself properly - That's what I did (and am still doing it). I LOVE the 75mm, but an equivalent 150mm is not for every application. I also use a Panny 14-140, and a Panny 100-200 (let alone all the 7.5FE, 20, 45, and the Voigtlander 58 and the leftover Nikon lenses - some of which I have kept for my D5000IR). Like in any hobby (or professional endeavor) looking for the perfect tool for the application can be an unending objective. Keep resale in mind (and hope for strong economies) and be prepared to roll your equipment when something becomes redundant. My $0.02.

    I love the look of the OMD with the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 strapped on, but manually focusing a shallow DoF can be a challenge, so ti gets used very infrequently (and with the Oly 75 it becomes less valuable).

    _D8L1537a2.

    Sorry, that was off-topic and totally uncalled for... :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. aukirk

    aukirk Mu-43 Regular

    183
    Sep 9, 2012
    Not to contradict what I posted earlier, but I did experience today during an indoor kids party that the 35-100 2.8 struggled a bit with no flash. Had trouble getting fast enough shutter speed to stop action without using really high ISO. However, when I swapped it for the 75m at 1.8, it really delivered some crisp shots. Of course, focus was a challenge, but I ended up really wishing I also had my 45mm with me (I had planned to leave the 45 and 75 home, and threw the 75 in the bag at the last minute).

    Still really love the 35-100, and it is going to get a ton of use, but I think this makes me realize that that it can't replace the fast primes.
     
    • Like Like x 1