Panasonic 35-100 f/4-5.6 vs Olympus 40-150 f/4-5.6 IQ?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by SkiHound, Jul 5, 2016.

  1. SkiHound

    SkiHound Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 28, 2012
    The little Panasonic has been getting really good reviews. Is the IQ from that lens distinctly better than the Olympus 40-150?
  2. DanS

    DanS Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 8, 2016
    Central IL
  3. marcl

    marcl Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 8, 2012
    I had both. The Olympus performs really well for the price point - no doubt. But since I own a GM5, I bought the Panasonic because it fits that camera so well. In terms of IQ, I would put the Panasonic on top by a small margin, just because the images seem to have a bit more punch.
  4. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    I have both, and the previous two posts pretty much sum it up. Both lenses are great deals for the price and the Olympus has more range. The Panny, however, is sharper across the frame and is remarkably small for a telephoto.
  5. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011
    I still own both of these. Sometimes I have liked the Olympus better and it is a great lens but lately I have been liking the Panasonic better for IQ. I don't have any hard data. Love both of them. Both are relatively small for what they do but the Panasonic wins in the size race.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Svein Wilhelm

    Svein Wilhelm Mu-43 Rookie

    Aug 25, 2013
    Svein Wilhelm Kristiansen
    I have the small 35-100 and the big one (2,8). To be frankly, the small one is supersharp! And small/extremely lightweight. The only bad thing is 4-5,6. I use them both, on the GM-5. My definitive favorite bodey. I have both the EM-1 and EM-5, but they are (too) often in my homebag. Just love those small great cameraes, a couple of GM5, and a GM-1.

    Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 mobile app
  7. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Nov 18, 2013
    My travel kit for cities is now EP5/Oly 9-18/Pany 35-100 f4-5.6. Actually I could be happy with just this as a kit (plus my Canon 500D for the 35-100). I do own the Oly also, the extra range is useful but I tend to use the 75-300 II instead.
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    I don't think you can dismiss the 50% of telephoto reach so easily, though. 100mm isn't exactly a lot of zoom.

    The 45-150 isn't too much bigger, even on a GM5: Compact Camera Meter
  9. gcogger

    gcogger Mu-43 Veteran

    May 25, 2010
    I agree, the extra 50% is significant. My basic travel kit is the GM5 with 12-32mm and 45-150mm, as that seems a good compromise between size and functionality.
  10. alan1972

    alan1972 Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jun 23, 2012
    Malaga, Spain
    Alan Grant
    On the size, what I like about the Panasonic is that it doesn't get very long at any point in the zoom range. The Olympus is not all that much bigger when stored but feels bigger in practice because it extends a lot more. So when there are a lot of people around as in a city, the Panasonic is easier to use without getting in anyone's way. I also like the extra bit of width in that kind of situation, it makes a surprising difference in reducing the need for lens changes.

    On the other hand it is also true that the extra 50mm is significant, so for a day's hiking for example where the above points are less relevant I would still use the 40-150.
  11. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2013
    IQ wise they are pretty similar. The appeal is really the size of the panny, but the Olympus isn't that big, unless it's extended. The panny is just tiny though. Two great (and cheap) lenses.
  12. Mountain

    Mountain Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 2, 2013
    I bought the 35-100 4-5.6 to fill in the gap between the 12-32 and 100-300 for my small, light setup with the GX-1. It fits this need pretty well. I have been impressed with the lens so far, but have a prime example of where the 40-150 could come in handy.

    I had just scored an unbelievable Craiglist deal on a GX-8 with 100-400 that I couldn't pass up (despite being perfectly content with the 100-300) before going to Yellowstone. So I had been carrying two bodies for the majority of the trip with the 100-400 on one and the 12-32 on the other (for landscape vs chance wildlife encounters). On our last day in the Tetons we went for a day hike on a well traveled trail. I decided to go light for the first time on the trip (lots of miles with an infant carrier backpack start to add up) and just brought a single body with the 12-32 and 35-100, since all the people on the trail would likely spook any big animals. Well, it turned out that neither the bull moose nor the the cinnamon coat black bear were too bothered by the people. The 35-100 allowed me to get a "hey we saw this" kind of shot, but the extra 50mm reach of the Oly may have been enough to get a more interesting image.

    So, for me the 35-100 works because I usually carry a longer lens when I think that there will be animals about, but if I didn't have the longer option, I would probably spring for the extra reach of the Oly. Unfortunately, this highlighted that I really appreciate small and compact, and now have the job of deciding which long lens to sell, the smaller 100-300, or the weather proof and higher quality 100-400, which is a MUCH harder decision than I expected, especially since I sold a motorcycle to justify the cost of the 100-400 (ah, fatherhood).
  13. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Nov 18, 2013
    Don't sell the 100-400, the more you use it the more you will love it. One big advantage that no one has has mentioned is that the 35-100 has DFD and Dual IS. On the Gx8 that is a big deal, but of course not on my EP5.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. PhotoYeti

    PhotoYeti Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 24, 2016
    I have both the Panasonic 35-100 f/4–5.6 and the Olympus 40–150 f/4-5.6, and my unscientific opinion is that the Panasonic has better IQ, and is more contrasty. Based only on shooting, no direct head-to-head tests.

    The biggest thing is the size difference—the Panasonic is downright tiny for the reach it gives you.
  15. jimr.pdx

    jimr.pdx Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    near Longview ~1hr from PDX
    Jim R
    I've had consistently excellent images from Oly's 40-150 and the Lumix 35-100 and 45-150. All three did great work and I'd choose on some other parameter than IQ. Perhaps the Oly gave more consistent results.. but it was on an Oly body so I'd expect them to work well together.

    If I were the type to pixel-stare I might know more - or I might need a guide-dog to shoot for me :cool:
  16. battleaxe

    battleaxe Mu-43 Top Veteran

    What about the 35-100 vs 45-150mm?
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.