[toni-a]

The new Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM looks attractive in comparison (price/weight wise) even though it does not go as wide (29-240mm FF equivalent) and it is a tad slower on the long end (and not weather sealed). It was my first reaction to this f4 Oly..... Pro (high price) with f8 FF equivalent aperture? What is the sense of that?

A do it all zoom for photojournalists ?

[thxbb12]

One could use the Oly 14-150 or the Pany 14-140 II in a much much more compact package. I'm not convinced the brightness difference is a big deal for photojournalists. The Pany is supposed to be pretty good (for what it is) but unfortunately wasn't reviewed  by PZ.

[Klaus]

Think of the Canon 28-300mm L. A monster lens, slow, yet loved by a certain community. And way, way bigger than the Oly.

[thxbb12]

The Canon 28-300 f3.5-5.6 would be equivalent to a 14-150 f1.75-2.8 in MFT land. Hardly comparable to the 12-100 f4 aforementioned. Such a 14-150 lens would undoubtedly be huge too. Furthermore, I'm not convinced a FF 24-200 f8 would be much bigger (if at all) than the 12-100 f4.

[Klaus]

Pro lenses aren't often heavy because of the optical components but because of the construction.

I'm sure you could put the 28-300L into a plastic housing with a total weight of less than half of the current lens.

The 12-100mm could certainly be shaved by at least 150g using consumer-grade housing.

[Guest]

Pro lenses aren't often heavy because of the optical components but because of the construction.

I'm sure you could put the 28-300L into a plastic housing with a total weight of less than half of the current lens.

The 12-100mm could certainly be shaved by at least 150g using consumer-grade housing.

The nice thing is that mFT now finally has some choices for the traveler ranging from expensive "pro" zooms like this one and the announced panaleica's (e.g., 12-60 F2.8-4) and the cheaper and much lighter consumer zooms from Pana and Oly. The format is starting to become really attarctive, to me at least.

[Guest]

So which will be the better option 12-100f4 or 12-60f2.8-4. Curious how the price/performance turns out for the pair.

[thxbb12]

So which will be the better option 12-100f4 or 12-60f2.8-4. Curious how the price/performance turns out for the pair.

 

I find the 12-100 way too bulky.

The 12-60 is probably going to be significantly smaller while being brighter.

Plus, if you really need reach 100mm won't cut it anyway.

Personally, I'd go with the 12-60 (on paper at least).

[Guest]

I find the 12-100 way too bulky.

The 12-60 is probably going to be significantly smaller while being brighter.

Plus, if you really need reach 100mm won't cut it anyway.

Personally, I'd go with the 12-60 (on paper at least).

Unfortunately while the 12-60 F2.8-4 may just be a little smaller on the outside (98.5mm x 79.5mm), it's actually a little heavier at 575 g.... so forget about that aspect. Plus usually the brightness advantage disappears quickly and would only be fully available at the less useful wide angle side which for all intents and purposes makes it a f4 lens as well.

 

It will come down to optics for me because I don't see much else being different (incl. price)

[thxbb12]

Unfortunately while the 12-60 F2.8-4 may just be a little smaller on the outside (98.5mm x 79.5mm), it's actually a little heavier at 575 g.... so forget about that aspect. Plus usually the brightness advantage disappears quickly and would only be fully available at the less useful wide angle side which for all intents and purposes makes it a f4 lens as well.

 

It will come down to optics for me because I don't see much else being different (incl. price)

 

I wasn't aware Panasonic released their lenses' specs. Where did you see it?