P35-100 f2.8 - will i be happy ?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by damianmkv, Jan 13, 2016.

  1. damianmkv

    damianmkv Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 7, 2014
    Surrey, England
    I've just sold my 40-150R in the quest for more speed and better sharpness so am looking at the 35-100 f2.8 to replace it

    I'd love the 40-150 Pro but i can't justify the cost and the size is also putting me off. The Panny fits with my m43 ethos of going small..I've had a look through the image thread and all looks good but am wondering what people feel about it ? Is it sharp and quick focusing ?

  2. dogs100

    dogs100 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Nov 12, 2011
    N Devon UK
    I use mine on my e-m1 and e-m5ii and used it on my e-m5 before someone stole it and like it ... a lot. It is better than the 40-150r for me because it is faster, and Yes! it is sharp.

    I find it comes into it's own when I am shooting working tests for dogs etc. A friend borrowed it and used it for shooting weddings and was delighted with it.

    Hope this helps
    • Like Like x 2
  3. damianmkv

    damianmkv Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 7, 2014
    Surrey, England
    Thanks Geoff. Best see what I can find then
  4. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    I can't believe you won't be happy with the quality.
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Taurahe

    Taurahe Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 24, 2015
    As far as performance goes theb35-100 2.8 is a stellar performer. Fast focusing, sharp and lightweight. I doubt you will be disappointed
    • Like Like x 1
  6. afg08

    afg08 Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 26, 2015
    It's a lens I am seriously considering as well. I really like the 12-40 and would like something of equal quality in a longer length. The size of the 40-150 PRO is something I can't seem to get past. The reviews I have read of the 35-100 are mostly all positive and the FL will likely work out fine for me. I just went through my photo library and didn't find many over 100mm. If I need to go farther I have the Oly 75-300 for wildlife and longer shots
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2016
  7. e_kjellgren

    e_kjellgren Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 17, 2011
    Has anyone compared it to the compact 35-100/4-5,6? It's roughly a third of the weight and price of the 2.8.
  8. jrsilva

    jrsilva Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 1, 2012
    After getting used to primes (including the fantastic Oly 75mm) I get myself a second-hand 35-100 f/2.8 with a irrecusable price.
    I can say that the image quality is very very good, even wide open.
    When I need to bring something more flexible and portable with me the 35-100 is the best choice.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    I use my 35-100 f2.8 quite a bit, and haven't had any issues. One thing I do like about it is that it is an internal zoom, so it doesn't change length.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    It's a top class lens. Sharp, great micro contrast, fast focussing, compact, lightweight, fast. I often carry a Thinktank Mirrorless Mover 20 with the 12-35, 35-100 and E-M1 with 17/1.8 attached. It's a great small, lightweight kit that delivers stunning quality shots. For me, the 40-150 Pro is just too big for my conception of u43. The 35-100 is about as big as I'd want a u43 lens to be. For an optically-stabilised 70-200 f2.8 equivalent it delivers fully on the u43 promise in a way the 40-150 simply doesn't.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Generationfourth

    Generationfourth Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 11, 2015
    I love it. I made the mistake of borrowing one when I only had the GM5 and primes. In turn I ended up getting a larger body (gx8) and the 12-35 to complement it. It is amazingly sharp and because of the long length there is really good (although slightly nervous) bokeh for portraits as well. I prefer to use it for isolating forms in landscapes.

    I'm not too technical when it comes to lenses but compared to my primes I was really surprised at how the lens renders. Although the primes are slightly sharper I find that the 2.8 zoom lenses have better micro contrast and really good depth/'pop' to them. Those are the types of detail I usually try to bring out in post, but with the 35-100 I don't need to do that type of PP anymore.

    Like another mentioned, the 35-100 f4-5.6 might be worth checking out. I have no experience with it but do with the 12-32 3.5-5.6. They are surprisingly sharp and extremely compact.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    The only lens that will compete with the 35-100f2.8 is the 75f1.8 and it is not weather sealed or a zoom.

    Taking a break - 35-100f2.8 @2.8 and 100.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. damianmkv

    damianmkv Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 7, 2014
    Surrey, England
    Thanks all. You've talked me into being poorer :)
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Well, you are going to be as much rich in a different way :)
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    Trade $1000 for $1000 lens = net worth stays same, right? :daz:
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Hahah, I've never seen that smiley used so appropriately.
  17. RoadTraveler

    RoadTraveler Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 23, 2012
    I'm rarely an early adopter, though I was converting from FF to MFT and did buy the 35-70 f/2.8 when it was new, for full price, to replace the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 I sold. I've never regretted that purchase, some of the best money I've spent on photo gear. Love the lens, it's a fantastic tool with which I've done better work than with the Canon 70-200, largely because of its smaller size/portability.
  18. damianmkv

    damianmkv Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 7, 2014
    Surrey, England
    Still not found one :crying:
  19. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
  20. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    I owned both the Olympus 40-150R and the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 at one time for close to a year before trading the 40-150R for a FT 70-300 and kept the Panasonic. The Panasonic is definitely sharper, has better color contrast and nicer color rendering and bokeh as opposed to the 40-150. I didn't want to get the 40-150 since that's covered already with my 70-300 which is optically good from 70-200mm anyhow and slightly faster.

    You won't regret the 35-100 f/2.8. It's part of my trio travel and hiking kit.
    • Like Like x 1