• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

next PZ lens test report: Olympus M.Zuiko 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 13 May 2017 - 11:27 AM

Within its scope it's pretty nice actually (unless you had unrealistic expectations):

 

http://www.photozone...ympus12100f4pro


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#2 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,581 posts

Posted 13 May 2017 - 12:21 PM

A very decent all rounder!



#3 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 550 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 13 May 2017 - 02:01 PM

Thanks for the review Klaus, very appreciated.
The results are above my expectations.
Impressive, really.
Not taking into account the scope, I find the performance of the lens, especially sharpness, very good hence my surprise at the rating of 3*.
I'd have assumed this type of performance would at least get 3.5 or 4*...
  • thxbb12 likes this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#4 JN

JN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
  • LocationDublin

Posted 13 May 2017 - 07:12 PM

Hi Klaus, thanks for the review. Would you consider this Olympus to be a BIG step up from the Leica four thirds 14-150mm.? The older lens you tested on a older body so I find it hard to compare. I think you had the older lens yourself for a while also.

#5 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 13 May 2017 - 08:12 PM

"Due to diffraction Micro-Four-Thirds has its sweat sport..."

:D


  • Brightcolours likes this

#6 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 983 posts

Posted 13 May 2017 - 10:45 PM

'cept for 12mm raw vignetting is well controlled. Do you have a feel for how quickly it drop (12mm is 1.5 stops and 25mm is .3 stops.

 

Impressive consistency (for mtf) from 12mm to 100mm you could almost test it at one point and reuse the same graph (though edge resolution and to a lesser degree center resolution) is dropping slightly. Also very low loca in your bokeh shot.

-

Surprise the optics didn't perform better than 3 stars. True it is not as good as a good prime but hard to find a zoom that will beat it - esp a super zoom - can you think of one from any vendor ?



#7 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 May 2017 - 12:19 AM

"Due to diffraction Micro-Four-Thirds has its sweat sport..."

:D

 

:D Of course, I did that on purpose!  B)


  • Rover likes this
Chief Editor
photozone.de

#8 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 May 2017 - 12:27 AM

Hi Klaus, thanks for the review. Would you consider this Olympus to be a BIG step up from the Leica four thirds 14-150mm.? The older lens you tested on a older body so I find it hard to compare. I think you had the older lens yourself for a while also.

 

Yes, it broke my heart when I sold it.  I'd very hard to tell whether the Oly is better. I used the Leica on a 10mp camera (the L10 - ah, a heavily underrated camera).  The thing is that the Leica was fully corrected (just 2.9% barrel distortions at 14mm) so it didn't rely on auto-correction. That should put it into advantage at the wide end at least.   


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#9 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 May 2017 - 12:34 AM

Although - thinking about it - I also used the Leica on the GH2 via adapter (did I mention that I miss that multi-format sensor - Panasonic damn you!). The GH2 had 16mp. Worked like a breeze. The AF wasn't great with the Leica 14-150mm but it wasn't terrible.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#10 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 May 2017 - 12:36 AM

I think I should set up a petition for MFT to bring that multi-format sensor back.  :angry: Can't cost them more than 20 bucks per camera.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#11 JN

JN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
  • LocationDublin

Posted 15 May 2017 - 12:33 AM

Yes, it broke my heart when I sold it.  I'd very hard to tell whether the Oly is better. I used the Leica on a 10mp camera (the L10 - ah, a heavily underrated camera).  The thing is that the Leica was fully corrected (just 2.9% barrel distortions at 14mm) so it didn't rely on auto-correction. That should put it into advantage at the wide end at least.


Thanks for your feedback on that Klaus. I was thinking the same, i.e. probably less auto-correction on the Leica. I use it with an adapter on a second-hand Oly. em1, AF works not too bad because of the phase detect, better than say, GH4, pretty poor with only caf. The IS is also pretty good with the Olympus EM1.

Of course the olympus has less ca's and doesn't need an adapter, lots of exotic elements etc. better AF. If I didn't have the Leica I'd probably go for the Olympus.

#12 Austrian

Austrian

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 15 May 2017 - 09:29 AM

Dear Klaus, dear all!

 

Thanks again for the informative test as usual.

 

I d like to mention the Panasonic 14-140 3,5-5,6 as a candidate for comparison.

 

I think it is good to very good, better then the previous version tested hier on PZ on 12MP.

 

The interesting thing is that it is roughly half size and weight compared to the Oly 12-100. And this is why, for me this lens is a real differentiator for mFT compared to other systems when one need a universal zoom in a very compact package.

 

Mine is a GM1 and this 14-140 with less than 0.5 kg, which is the basis for me using this kit e.g. for action or landscape high up in the mountains.

 

The only other universal zoom lens in that weight class is the  Nikon 1 10-100 (sensor too small) and recently the Canon EOS-M 18-150, so lets see.

 

Any experiences with this Pana 14-140 in the PZ forum? Klaus, have you touched this lens or any plans for a test?

 

Thank you and all the best

 

Andresa



#13 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 550 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 15 May 2017 - 10:15 AM

Indeed, the Pany 14-140 mkII is quite a bit smaller than the 14-140 mkI as we can see here:

 

2be2c5ad37d03694feb6716de2ecfc.jpg

 

 

In fact, the mkII is almost the same size (very slightly larger) as the Pany 45-150:

 

33861255603_a2efae4f89_b.jpg

 

Here is a comparison of the size of the 3 lenses (Pany 14-140 mkI, Pnay 45-150 which is the same size as the mkII and the Oly 12-100):

 

34630435876_fb0bd0e348_b.jpg

 

That would be very interesting to see how well the mkII fares here at PZ.

Klaus, do you have any plans on reviewing it?


--Florent

Flickr Page


#14 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,353 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 15 May 2017 - 12:18 PM

I'm aware of the itch at least ...  :rolleyes:

However, the two Leicas are clearly first.


Chief Editor
photozone.de




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de