Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

12-100 or 12-200?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 12-100 or 12-200?

    I currently have the 14-42 pancake and 40-150 "kit" lenses for my E-m10 mk2.

    After a recent holiday to Florida walking around many state and local parks I found I always had the wrong lens on and by the time I had changed it, the turtles had swam away or the birds had flown... so I have decided to buy one of the above for my travels... I recently went to a LCE and they had both lenses in for me to have a look at, but only really managed to get a couple of shots with each, so I still dont really know which will be best.
    Both lenses seemed well balanced on the camera, and the difference in weight was nothing.

    I dont want to buy the 12-100 and regret not having that extra reach, but at the same time, I dont want to buy the 12-200 and not be 100% satisfied with the images.

    Any advice will be gratefully received.
    Many thanks in advance
    T
    Tracey Jones

    Its a shame that humans dont come with autofocus, like cameras do!

  • #2
    Graham

    We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

      I think it’s too early to tell how good the 12-200 really is. Hopefully it will be at least as good, if not better, than your current lens between 14 and 150.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

        Thanks for your reply, but I like the "wide feel" of that extra 2mm especially with clouds so I have really set my heart on a 12-something. I think the long end of that lens would suit me though
        Tracey Jones

        Its a shame that humans dont come with autofocus, like cameras do!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

          Thanks for replying.
          I have had some lovely shots from both lenses, for kit lenses they really are good... its just that I always seem to have the wrong one on the camera when walking around...
          I do hope someone here buys a 12-200 and can give feedback.
          Tracey Jones

          Its a shame that humans dont come with autofocus, like cameras do!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

            All the sample images I've seen show the 12-200 to be a pretty average lens - at best. It's what you'd expect a lens of this class to be - a slow superzoom with questionable IQ at the long end. The 12-100 is however in a different league. Probably the best lens I've ever used in any system.
            Paul
            E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
            flickr
            Portfolio Site
            Instagram

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

              http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50156

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                I was in the same boat back in 2015. Back then I had the 12-40 and 40-150 on a trip to Gold Coast, Australia.

                I just swap to the 40-150 to shoot this..


                And my better half ask to have a photo under the shark. Reluctantly swap back to the 12-40 in a windy full of sand

                Yes, I ended up with dust in the sensor.

                So when I got home, I bought that Oly's mzd 14-150, telling myself that this will be my travel lens. Well, that feeling didn't last very long. In 2016 I was on a trip to see the northern lights. Most of the time it was that 12-40/2.8 on the camera as the daylight hours was rather short.

                So when that 12-100 was released, I jumped at it..




                Pretty amazing lens and it worked well except it was slightly heavy to me BUT in low light it was still that 12-40.

                So finally it parted way with me. it's now happily in the hand of another forumer here. The mzd 14-150 have also parted ways. Currently I am back to my Old Lumix/leica 14/150. But that another story.

                Will I go for that 12-200? Well depends..... I have yet to try it out.
                * Henry
                * Location: Subang Jaya, Selangor
                * Malaysia


                All my garbage so far.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                  Never used the 12-100mm so cannot comment. But it sounds good. My only reservation is that its top end is a bit limiting if you are after wildlife of most sorts.

                  Personally, when holidaying abroad, I take my 12-40mm Pro, and the 40-150mm Pro with the TC 1.4 attached. This gives me a good range for those boids etc.

                  Just my take...………………..(!)

                  Edit: And my little 7.5mm fisheye...….

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                    Like many others I have not used the 12-200, but the additional dual IS in the 12-100 was a game changer for me and I rarely use anything else these days

                    Regards
                    Andy
                    My Kit (OK I'm a hoarder...)
                    4/3 E500, E510, E30 + 35macro, 50macro, 7-14, 11-22, 14-45 (x2), 14-54, 40-150 (both types), 50-200, 70-300, 50-500,
                    m 4/3 EM1MkII + 60 macro, 12-100 Pro
                    FL20, FL36 x2 , FL50, cactus slaves etc.
                    The Boss (Mrs Shenstone) E620, EM10-II, 14-41Ez, 40-150R, 9 cap and whatever she can nick from me when she wants it

                    My places
                    http://www.shenstone.me.uk http://landroverkaty.blogspot.com/
                    https://vimeo.com/shenstone http://cardiffnaturalists.org.uk/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                      Depends on budget a lot, and also what you want the long end for, and expected light levels. A possible versatile combination when travelling is 12-100 Pro for most purposes, and a 75-300 II for outdoor widlife in good light. The latter is quite good for a consumer grade lens, and very carryable. If you don't like changing lenses then maybe a second body (e.g. a used E-M5 ii is affordable and compact) for the 75-300. And maybe a prime or two for low light; e.g. Pan 20 1.7 - affordable, compact and quality.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                        Few people on here the other day extoling the virtues of the 12-100.
                        Constant f4 would make it my preference out of the two.

                        I prefer using different lenses and for the longer stuff use a Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8
                        My travel kit comprises of the above lens with either the 12-40 or 12mm and 25mm f1.4

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                          Am a 12-100 PRO owner and it is one of the best lenses out there. Did get to try the 12-200 for several hours on a photo walk around Bristol courtesy of Clifton Cameras- used it on an EM1 2. I liked the lens and the images it produced. Good range, good weight. Lucky to have a Pen F and was thinking the lens would make a good all-rounder with that camera, the 12-100 being too big for it. Money comes in to your choice of course as does your choice of shots for the lens. No real substitute for trying out both lenses if at all possible.


                          Tim

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                            https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/r...-f35-63-review

                            12-200 - Best avoided if you like sharpness.

                            12-100 is exceptional.
                            Stuff from Cuba
                            More stuff from Cuba
                            It all started here

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

                              My 12-100 is rarely off the camera these days and has totally supplanted the 12-40/2.8 and the Panasonic 35-100/2.8, not withstanding they too are excellent lenses. Add in the 100-400 and virtually everything is covered in two lenses.
                              David

                              EM1ii, EM10ii

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X