1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Would you...

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by OB1, Aug 19, 2014.

  1. OB1

    OB1 New to Mu-43

    Jul 22, 2014
    Sell the 45mm f1.8 to fund a Pany35-100mm purchase? Or would selling the 45 to get something like a cheaper Oly40-150mm or Pany45-175mm do the trick if one was looking for some more length on an EM5? I understand this is a very subjective question, though by way of info, I don't shoot super long most days. On the other hand, I am looking for a little bit more length than 45mm at times but did not want to add another expensive prime (I don't own the 75mm). I could go cheap but I'm a bit worried about the speed of those latter 2 lenses and the f2.8 of the 35-100 intrigues me somewhat as I do enjoy nighttime photography.

    Any personal experience/suggestions concerning the 3 lenses mentioned above are welcome.
  2. Livnius

    Livnius Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Jul 7, 2011
    Melbourne. Australia
    Firstly, the Oly 45mm is a fine lens, great results at a really competitive price. Build quality isn't all too great though, which really makes it our very own 'plastic fantastic'. I understand your desire to have something with a little extra reach and it can be a tricky decision to make, especially when your options are between cheap and cheary like the Oly 40-150 and the premium Panasonic 35-100.

    You could go for one of the cheaper options like the Oly 40-150 (or the small and excellent Pana 45-150...which I have and think rocks), both of these lenses can be had for less than $200 which means you may be able to hold on to the Oly 45. On the other hand, the Pana 35-100 is a superb lens in every conceivable way from materials and build quality to optics, a true 'no compromise' solution...but, it may mean you have to sell off the Oly 45 to fund the purchase.

    I had the Panasonic 35-100 for a few months and it really is a brilliant lens, but, I was however not making enough use of it to justify keeping it so I sold it off and purchased the Panasonic 45-150 which I think like the Oly 45 really punches above its weight regarding price vs performance. This solution works well enough for me...it's super small and light, performs really really well in good to okay light, is super cheap and can rest comfortably in the bottom of my kit bag ready for the rare occasions when I need it. I've also owned the Olympus 40-150 and IMO, I feel the Pana 45-150 is just that little bit better in every way...smaller, has a metal mount, focus and zoom rings feel smoother and to my eye optically better as well.

    I'd probably recommend you try either of the cheaper zooms (40/45-150) and hold on to the excellent Oly 45mm.....if you find you really enjoy the zooms, then you can of course at some point in the future consider the considerably bigger investment and get the Pana 35-100 or the Oly 40-150 'Pro' zoom which may be available early next year.

    Good luck.
  3. physicsdude

    physicsdude Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 11, 2014
    I actually bought a used Oly 40-150mm just the other week for 67$ incl shipping.
    That was a steal, but you can get it for 100$ on average here/ebay (I actually saw it once for 50$ in this forum)

    I dont own the other 2 mentioned lenses, but I'd agree with Livnius..
  4. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter Subscribing Member

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    You can grab a refurbished Oly 40-150 at the Olympus sale for about $100 and keep the 45.
  5. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Or look at using the 2x teleconverter, see if that quality is good enough for you.
  6. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2013
    Get a 40-150...great lens in good light...cheap too..and one of the 60mm (oly or Sigma...$209 at adorama recently)..both are outstanding and give a bit more compression to scenes..and work great for portraits too. I lust for the 35-100 myself, but the price tag is out of reach right now. I'd sell the 75 if I decided to get it. The 35-100 gallery thread is very nice..and under appreciated. I wouldn't sell the 45 to get the other zooms, unless you were getting the 35-100. Just my $.02. Depends what you shoot.
  7. val

    val Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 19, 2013
    I had the 35-100mm F2.8

    It's a good lens, it's very much a workhorse where it's reliable, small and fast. The fact you can shoot at F2.8 and still have a decent size depth of field also helps.

    for me though it was too short for telephoto and not enough bokeh so I sold it and so I currently use the Fujifilm 55-200mm until the 150mm F2.8 comes out.
  8. biomed

    biomed Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 22, 2013
    Seattle area
    The 35-100/2.8 is by far my favorite zoom. It is sharp, well made and reasonably small. It is also sealed so I take it and my GH3 into the rain without worry. Here are some example photos. All that being said it is not an inexpensive lens as far as u4/3 lenses go. I would not have the 35-100/2.8 or the 12-35/2.8 If I hadn't sold some of my film gear. Now that I have used the 35-100 for several months I include it my indispensable group of lenses.
  9. emorgan451

    emorgan451 Mu-43 Veteran

    For me I couldn't really justify the cost of the 35-100 2.8 since I don't use the focal range that much except for portraits, and I use the 45 for that. For extra reach I use the cheap but good 40-150 which I got for $70 used. I do wish I had a faster lens at longer focal lengths, but I would find 100mm not long enough on the 35-100. When I use the 40-150 I find myself at the 150 end alot, wanting even more reach. For the money of a new the 35-100 you could keep the 45, get a nice used 40-150, and get a used panasonic 100-300, and a sigma 60 2.8.

    That way you can stay fast and light with oly 45 and sigma 60, stay light and have good length on days with good lighting with 40-150, and have extra reach with the 100-300.

    This of course is only possible if you're like me and don't have a real need to have a fast zoom in that range to avoid lens changes.
  10. I had similar deliberations, but realised I would need longer than 100mm and tended to shoot telephoto in good light anyway, so got a cheap used O40-150. That worked out really well, and I've felt no need to get the P35-100 yet. I am itching a little bit for more than 150mm though...
  11. davidzvi

    davidzvi Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    Honestly I'm confused here.

    The 45 is selling for $225 - $275 (maybe) and the 35-100 is going for around $1000 - $1100 used/international sellers. That's about $750 or a 75mm 1.8 plus a 40-150. And with the deals on refurbished 75's you'd still have $$$ leftover. Keep the 45 and get something else. If you need the 35-100 for nighttime work then get one, but if you can afford the 35-100 why would you need to even consider selling the 45 in order to get the 40-150/45-175? :confused: 
  12. bigboysdad

    bigboysdad Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 25, 2013
    Sydney/ London
    With the multitude of Lumix lenses at f3.5 & slower, it was easy for me to miss the 45-150 but I think I'm going to buy it now. Very very useful comment, thanks.
    • Like Like x 1
  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.