Olympus 40-150 f2.8 or Olympus 35-100 f2 or panasonic 35-100 f2.8

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Setb, Aug 7, 2015.

  1. Setb

    Setb Mu-43 Rookie

    24
    Oct 31, 2013
    hi all

    i'am looking for a extra lens got a great offer (850usd) on Olympus 35-100 f2 but this lens is huge and weight alot but is f2.0

    my other options are the oly 40-150 or pan 35-100 both f2.8 and are smaller and lighter

    I use a M1 and shoot party pics and concert pics who can give some advise
     
  2. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    The 40-150 is just brilliant. It is pretty big as is the 35-100 (for m43).

    You cannot really go wrong with any of them, so it should come down to reach and price, really. Natively, you are getting more on the long end with the 40-150 and you can add in the MC14 TC. Pricewise, the 40-150 is the most expensive of the lot.

    I have the 40-150 and use it all the time and am glad I got it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    A lens is a tool that solves a problem; know what problem you're trying to solve. If you need the reach of 150mm, then get a lens with that focal length. If size and weight are more of an issue the 35-100/2.8, at half the size and weight of the 40-150, makes sense. For my photography, the 35-100 was the better tool.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    You have to think about four things and decide which ones take the priority.

    - Size/weight (P35-100 best, O40-150 worst)
    - Maximum aperture (O35-100 best, P35-100/O40-150 worst)
    - Price (O35-100 best, O40-150 worst)
    - Focal length (O40-150, P35-100/O35-100 worst)

    Once you've prioritized, the answer should be pretty clear. Sure there will be slight differences in IQ but not enough of a difference to be the main concern.

    Personally, if it was me, I'd drop the extra coin for the O40-150/2.8. The additional 100mm range, the integrated lens hood and the option of adding the MC-14 teleconverter which would add another 220mm to the far end would be worth the extra money. Also, depending on what market you're in, sometimes you'll find a bundle with the O40-150/2.8 with the MC-14 for a lower price. I know at my local official Olympus store, they have the bundle and the MC-14 ends up being less than $200 extra ($350 separately).

    Although, the O35-100/2 is reportedly a great lens, the size and slower AF would be two strikes against it. Along with that, you'd have to factor in spending another $150 for the MMF-3 adapter which would bring you're total price to $1000 for that lens. Not sure if all the minuses are worth the 2/3 stop advantage plus $300 versus the O40-150/2.8 or $150 in savings versus the P35-100/2.8. Lastly, I'm sure you could find a used O40-150/2.8 or P35-100/2.8 for $1000 or less to make the price a non-issue.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    For a concert lens I would get the Oly 35-100, it's actually at the top of my next lens list. People have brought up the other lenses focus faster. I own several 4/3 lenses and maybe not as fast focusing as the m4/3, the 4/3 lenses are more then capable and certainly fast enough for your use. Some keep saying the 40-150 has more reach and you can add the MC-14 to get more reach if you need it. Well with the TC it will be 220 @ f/4.0. The Oly 35-100 can use the EC-14 for 140 @ f/2.8 (almost the same as the Oly Pro) or the EC-20 for 200 @ f/4.0 (again almost the same as the Oly Pro). That extra stop (someone said 2/3 stop but it is a full stop) is super handy a lot of times. I have found that f/2 on my 150 has been a life saver at times.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. MoonMind

    MoonMind Mu-43 Top Veteran

    633
    Oct 25, 2014
    Switzerland
    Matt
    For concert pics especially, I'd go with the 40-150mm hands down - especially on the E-M1 with its fantastic stabiliser that more than compensates for the single stop of brightness. You'll gain reach and fantastic optics without fiddling around with add-ons and converters and without lugging around a really huge lens. The 40-150mm is less than half the weight of the Olympus 35-100 f/2.0 - not counting the mount adapter!

    That said, of the three mentioned, I'd personally choose the Panasonic 35-100 - the size/weight advantage is considerable and, to me, more in keeping with the whole idea behind mFT. I know that the 40-150mm is said to be the even better lens - but if I wanted something of that size on my E-M10, I myself might actually feel more tempted to use the Nikon 70-200 f/4.0G with an adapter. I know, one stop less again, but even more reach - and great optics, too.

    M.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    For your interest.


     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    As far as I can see : party pics and concert pics would require two different bright-aperture lenses...
    If you're stuck with a zoom the 35-100 would be most discreet and lightweight for parties,
    but anything big and bright would be ideal for concerts at longer reach.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Are you a concert audience member or an official concert photographer? If you are the former, I'd say good luck getting any of these into the typical concert venue. The 35-100/2.8 maybe has a chance, but doubtful. 40-150 or 35-100 f2 are going to get flagged instantly. You probably want something like a Sigma 60mm f2.8 or 45mm f1.8.

    If you are an official concert photographer, then get a wide angle and shoot stage side and from the pit.
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 2