Pany 35-100 f2.8 vs Oly 12-100 f4?

[D7k1]

So I am planning on going to the Amazon with a group of reptile folks next year. I already have my 2 bodies (Gx8 & G9) and will be taking 4 lenses - currently I have Oly 60mm, Pany 12-35, and PL100-400 making the trip.

I will be taking a Canon 500D for the PL100-400, but I am concerned about the darkness of the areas we will be looking for reptiles. Thus the need for a faster lens than my current 35-100 f4/5.6, a focal range I don't often use.

with either of the two lenses I would probably settle on using a Canon 500D for macro work. The Oly 12-100 I would mean that I could only be taking two lens on two bodies and using a D500 for macro. The Pany is smaller, lighter, and focuses closer as well as being a stop faster and having dual IS & DFD.

This trip is for creepy crawlers, everything from SA coral snakes to scorpions. It is a once in a life time trip with some of the best reptile folks in the world. We will be in the field 8-10 hours a day shooting both wildlife along rivers and in the deep jungle (taking a flash, maybe two).

Weather sealing is important.

I think the Oly would get more use at home, but the Pany has more things going for it in the deep forest, and since most of the snakes I really want are ambush predators lying still & hidden, I think DualIS could be important.

Cost is not an issue and I might pickup a second G9 for this trip.

Which would you chose and more importantly why? My gallery link shows the kind of images I normally do around home (Oregon).

 

[davidzvi]

I'm a fan of the Oly 12-100, but two bodies and a companion to your 12-35 might make more sense if you're concerned about low light.

 

[fader]

currently I have Oly 60mm, Pany 12-35, and PL100-400 making the trip.

I know that 12-100 owners rave about this lens, and it's on my shortlist for landscape work. My vote would be for the 35-100. Much comes down to how close you'll be and how much you'll use the flash (and how many extra batteries you can carry!)

35-100 positives
- perfect compliment for your 12-35mm f2.8
- Dual IS with your Panasonic bodies
- a bit less bulky in the camera bag

12-100 negatives
- f4 in heavy shade and no dual IS will require much higher ISOs to stop critter movements
- heavier: 561 grams vs. 357 for the Panasonic

The Panasonic 12-60 f2.8 is another option you could consider, which is also weather sealed. Since you've already got the PL100-400 it might be more versatile than the 35-100 depending on how close you're willing to be to the critters!

 

[davidzvi]

......The Panasonic 12-60 f2.8 is another option you could consider, which is also weather sealed. Since you've already got the PL100-400 it might be more versatile than the 35-100 depending on how close you're willing to be to the critters!

If you mean the PanLeica it's an f/2.8 - 4.0. So really only f/2.8 at the wide end.

 

[fader]

If you mean the PanLeica it's an f/2.8 - 4.0. So really only f/2.8 at the wide end.

ah - I had it in my head that the PL12-60 was consistent aperture. yeah, strike that off the list.

 

[D7k1]

Range= 5 to 6 feet, not within strike range. Scorpions & wandering spiders about 20" with the Canon 500D filters. @70 any bite or sting would be very serious.

 

[Macroramphosis]

I hate to be a pain, but as this is a once-in-a-lifetime trip I'd probably plump for whichever will get me some macro images should the O60 take a spill. I'd also then wonder whether the addition of a Raynox 150 or 250 to the O12-100 would sway the deal. The Raynox would be in my bag anyway for one simple reason - if you're walking about with a zoom lens and it's a damp environment, it is incredibly easier and safer to slap a Raynox from your top pocket onto the end of the lens you are using for a quick emergency macro shot rather than reload the body you're using with the 'proper' macro lens

 

[ijm5012]

12-100 negatives
- f4 in heavy shade and no dual IS will require much higher ISOs to stop critter movements

To be fair, dual IS does nothing to stop critter movements. No stabilization freezes subject movement. In order to freeze subject movement, you need a faster shutter speed, which either means a brighter lens, or a higher ISO.Higher ISO isn't a strong suit for m43, so the brighter aperture would be advantageous.

Having said that, you neglected to mention the 12-100 PRO's magnification as a "Pro" for the lens. It has MUCH better magnification than the 35-100, and can act as a pseudo-macro lens in instances where the 60mm Macro or 100-400+500D aren't mounted on one of the cameras.

Here's a shot with the 12-100 PRO, uncropped and shot at 100mm. In a pinch, it'll suffice for some decent magnification. For reference in terms of magnification, this is a male Brown Anole on a car tire.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[D7k1]

I will be carrying The Canon 500D filters that take just seconds to thread on and they are very, very good. Here is an example:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Since have one that fits the 35-100 mm it's one reason I may leave the 60mm @ home. But that doesn't change the equation much as I have one that fits either of these two lenses. Serious thinking that since I am taking a couple of small Newer flashes that perhaps the 12-100 has a bit of an advantage. For with it and the 500D, I'd never have to changes lens and both kits would be moisture proof. I've actually seen the Oly in the wild and that is why I posted here, don't want to make a $1000 mistake with either lens.

 

[ijm5012]

@D7k1 , just an FYI but the 12-100's MFD is not 5' like you had previously stated. It's much shorter than that. Here's the Macro excerpt from Imaging Resources review of the lens:

Macro
Though not designed for true 1:1 macro photography, the Olympus 12-100mm provides quite impressive close-focusing capabilities, with a minimum focusing distance of just 0.15m (0.49 ft) and a maximum shooting magnification of 0.6x (35mm equivalent) at 12mm. At the telephoto end, it offers up to 0.42x eq. magnification with a close-focusing distance of 0.45 m (1.48 ft).​

The lens by itself isn't half bad for non-dedicated macro solution. Throw in something like the 500D (which conveniently has 72mm filter threads, just like the 12-100 PRO), and the magnification only improves.

This is what they had to say for the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8:

Macro
The lens isn't designed as a macro lens, and produces poor results in this category, offering just 0.10x magnification at a minimum close-focusing distance of 85cm (2.8 feet).​

 

[ooheadsoo]

The 35-100 is rated at 0.1x magnification while the 12-100 is rated at 0.3x. According to IR, mfd on the 12-100 is 1.48'. If you can, definitely try before you buy.

 

[D7k1]

I changed my post as I had miss read 5" as 5', didn't notice the .4 x of the Olympus. If I were making the decision today I'd probably go with the Oly but I am going think on this a bit. Of course then the question is do I sell my last Gx8 and get another G9 (EM1II but I think I want to keep with one menu system) for this trip

 

[D7k1]

I could see if I could rent from the local camera shoot (Pro Photo Supply) for a weekend.

 

[ijm5012]

I could see if I could rent from the local camera shoot (Pro Photo Supply) for a weekend.

I would definitely recommend renting the two to see which you prefer. Your Amazon trip sounds amazing, so you’ll want to be sure you’re bringing the right gear to get the images you want.

Honestly though, I’d be surprised if you went with the 35-100 over the 12-100. The 12-100 is simply an incredible lens. Of course, you’ll see this first hand if you decide to rent a copy and test it out over the course of a weekend.

 

[ooheadsoo]

I see the 35-100/2.8 as a video/portraiture zoom compromise. For your purposes, especially since you are bringing flashes, the 12-100 is an easy decision.

 

[D7k1]

Of course I do the own the 35-100 f4/5.6 (pairs with my 14 & GWC1 or Oly 9-18 as a travel kit on the Gx85), but I don't want any none moisture proof lenses with me on this trip. I love the lens but just not a range I use a lot, where as the 12-100 maybe a good replacement for my 12-35 and no need for the f2.8 35-100. But I'd keep the 12-35 due to size.

 

[TNcasual]

Caveat: Weather resistance is not part of the mft specs. Therefore, there is no guarantee of sealing between brands. This does not mean that a sealed Oly lens on a sealed Panny body is not resistant. It can be, and many users do trust it. But it is not within the mft spec to be so.

 

[ijm5012]

Caveat: Weather resistance is not part of the mft specs. Therefore, there is no guarantee of sealing between brands. This does not mean that a sealed Oly lens on a sealed Panny body is not resistant. It can be, and many users do trust it. But it is not within the mft spec to be so.

Yes, this is a good point. However, even with a Panasonic lens on a Panasonic body, they provide no level of IPx resistance, so you really don't know what it can or cannot withstand.

@D7k1, I know you like the idea of having two G9's, but is there any value in getting an E-M1 II to use with the 12-100 to make use of the camera's automated focus stacking? Just a thought...

 

[Hypilein]

The last time I was in the jungle (in Indonesia) shooting monkeys I was very, very glad about the f2.8 aperture of my 35-100. Even though I love the idea of the 12-100 as a landscape lens, this is one of those cases where every bit of light gathering will most likely count. If minimum focussing distance is relevant maybe the 40-150 f2.8 PRO should be considered. I don't think the 12-100 is suited for the job.

 

[ijm5012]

The last time I was in the jungle (in Indonesia) shooting monkeys I was very, very glad about the f2.8 aperture of my 35-100. Even though I love the idea of the 12-100 as a landscape lens, this is one of those cases where every bit of light gathering will most likely count. If minimum focussing distance is relevant maybe the 40-150 f2.8 PRO should be considered. I don't think the 12-100 is suited for the job.

That's a good point. The 40-150 PRO does the same level of magnification as the 12-100, but gives a bit more working distance. It too has a 72mm filter thread, so it can accept the 500D on the front of the lens without requiring step-up rings.

While you lose out on the wide end, you maintain the macro-ability while gaining a stop of light to help with situations where it's required. 40-150 PRO's are plentiful on the used market as well, meaning that the OP could buy one, use it for the trip, and then sell it upon his return and have it not cost him more than ~$75 (factoring in PayPal and shipping fees).