The perennial 12-100 vs 12-200 question...

[ionh]

I know this has come up on this forum before, but having reviewed quite a few posts (here and elsewhere) I haven't come away with a clear answer -- which I suspect says a lot already...

I have an OM-1 which is glued (metaphorically!) to a 90mm f/3.5 macro. I'm preparing for a big overseas holiday, and the 35mm gear is getting to be just too much to be hefting round, so as an alternative I'm looking hard at a single walk-round lens for the Oly that will do everything -- perfectly(!).

It's essentially 'just' for holiday snaps, but my holiday snaps tend to include quite a lot of bugs, flowers, and birds. So, like many before me, I'm torn between the two obvious m.zuiko offerings:

• 12-100 Better IQ, focus stacking, IS, faster aperture, just a better-quality lens all round, and
• 12-200 Lighter, cheaper, and (potentially importantly) better reach at both close-up and, especially, tele ends

What I haven't been able to pin down is if, by cropping a shot with the 12-100 at 100mm, I'd be very much worse off than using the 12-200 at 200mm for (say) birds? Anyone actually conducted the experiment?

My feeling is that optical zoom will always beat software zoom, even if the 12-200 is a bit softer. Plus the 12-200 has a bigger magnification factor than the 12-100 for close-up. The extra grab at both ends of the range is quite significant for me...but the 12-100 is clearly the better lens optically. And i do have the 1.4x TC...

Please, someone tell me what to buy 😆!

Thanks, ian

[Keith-369]

Just to give you an example, here is a picture I took in 2017 in Goa, using my EM1ii and the 12-100 pro. Yes, it is cropped - the beatles are approx 15mm long.


I have the 60mm macro but only use the 12-100 for all close/scenic stuff now.

My wife has the 12-200 which does very well but it just hasn't quite got the sharpness of the 12-100.

[ionh]

Stunning beasties!

[Keith-369]

Thank you, yes, they are lovely. They are Red Cotton Stainer - Dysdercus cingulatus - and is a species of true bug. It is a serious pest of cotton crops.

[TravelingChick]

I just went literally around the world with the 12-100. If I recall the 1.4 doesn't work with it. I did OK on birds and bugs and flowers. I use Topaz Photo AI if I absolutely have to save/fix a shot, but lots of times I'll include the critter in its environment so not the close-up I might get with a longer lens. Also the 12-100 is weather sealed, not sure about the 12-200. I love not having to worry about that.

[Bikie John]

Can't help with the 12-200, sorry. But ... I think the Oly 1.4x TC won't fit on the 12-100. Best to check with somebody more knowledgeable than me before basing decisions on it!

John

[ronidog]

The 12 - 200 is a nice light lens. However I think it’s not a very good quality image beyond 100 for birds insects etc. The actually zoom
distance available beyond 100 is limited.

the 12-100 is a much better lens but is heavier and costs more.

neither lens can be used with the 1.4 or 2.4 converters

[Melaka]

The 12-100 is never off my camera.

[RobEW]

A bridge camera then?

[Melaka]

Not really. If the body with the 100-400 goes down I can swap.

[ionh]

Plus even with MFT you've probably got a bigger sensor

[BDennis]

Last year we went on a 2 week walking holiday to Switzerland. I took the 12-100mm f4 and used it for the whole trip. It was a good choice I thought. I used it for scenics mostly but also for flowers and insects like butterflies we saw in the meadows. I wasn’t that fired up about birds as it wasn’t a birding trip, I’d really want 300mm to 400mm reach on m43 for that. I did do some in camera focus stacking of butterflies - a feature supported by the 12-100mm. If you want the option to do focus stacks it’s worth checking the lens you decide on supports this - I’m not sure if the 200mm zoom does?

Bill

[ionh]

Thanks all, that's an unexpectedly solid set of responses in support of the 12-100...that's given an excellent steer, and it's particularly good to have input from folk in more or less the same circumstances as i'll be in.

(Good to learn that it won't take the TC, too -- hadn't realised that)

[Dennis Russ]

I've recently acquired the 12-100 and find it a Superb Lens. Nice and sharp.Used it on my OM1 mk1 & E-M1X.

[blu-by-u]

I am loving my 12-200. I have it on my camera on holidays. I have a f0.5 better than the 12-100 at the wide end and superb for lowlights Here is the night walk along the malacca river with it.

[pdk42]

I don't run m43 gear any more, but if there is one thing that would bring me back it would be the 12-100. I miss that lens practically every time I use my Panasonic FF gear. The 12-200? - it's a pale shadow of the 12-100. The 12-200 represents a typical "superzoom" offering; the 12-100 has special sauce sprinkled on it. It's by far the best reason for a landscape photograpgher to use m43.

[Phill D]

Henry is the best advocate for the use of the 12-200 I know and he definitely knows how the 12-100 performs as well because he used to have one. I know because I bought it off him! As the others have said the 12-100 lens is just a superb all rounder and is my most used lens. Is it a bit on the heavy side but worth it. I thought I would miss the reach but I don't really, crops work very well. If I want a lot longer I'll go for the 300mm and it won't generally be a simple travel trip then. If you really want lighter and that bit more reach then yes go for the 12-200 Henry has confirmed it is pretty good. But if you don't want to have to worry about image quality and for the superb sync IS go for the 12-100.

[blu-by-u]

Well said Uncle Phill D. The 12-100 is superb in IQ. That cannot be denied. I still can't forget that 12-100's capabilities.

This is a fine example of it's low light.


The 12-200 is also amazing with enough light. Here, At 200mm,


If you need that in lens IS, the in camera focus stacking. That 12-100 is what you should go for. If you want some thing versatile, the reach, 12-200

[ianinsuffolk]

Only got the 12 to 100 which, with it's excellent image stabilisation is also a superb lens for handheld video. I've done two weddings, both of which had demanding requirements and was only allowed one camera in the church and the results were very pleasing. Some sequences were handheld at 100mm and very acceptable!

Ian

[Tram]

Another outstanding feature of the 12-100 is its stabilisation, I use mine with a G9 so rely purely on the lens OIS.
No problem at all and never had any issues getting the results I require.
Some say the earlier models from China are superior to the later Vietnam produced samples.
No idea if that is true, all I can say is my Chinese produced lens is consistently sharp throughout its focal range.