Thank you. As a new photographer for birding, (G9II) I bought the Lumix 100-400mm 4.0-6.3 and its been great. This will be my next lens to add on. I think for now, zoom lenses might make more sense rather than prime lenses.
I have the 12-60 lumix and I’m loookng a t this one next . I own a couple of primes but these lumixes aren’t that far behind in sharpness compared to the Leica zooms and even primes . And I think for the price it’s a very good deal and can get some really nice results . The light isn’t a issue if you have a new lumix body so
I have both G85 and G9, with the G9 being my main camera. I am a video professional (over 15 years) but have gotten back into photography photo the last couple of years. I have several Lumix lenses, Kit 12-60mm, 25mm 1.7, 42.5 1.7, 20mm 2.0, 12.-3 2.8 and Olympus 14-150mm, and was able to purchase the 12-35 at a great price. The 35-100mm next on my list, but cost is the reason it hasn't been added yet. I do a lot of stage performances and really could use the reach of the 35-100. The 12-35 isn't quite long enough and the kit 12-60 and Olympus 14-150 isn't fast enough. I currently use those two the most while exposing the best I can while boosting my iso. Topaz Labs or Lightroom's new noise reduction in post. This works out well, but adds quite a bit of time to my workflow. Having used the 12-35 2.8 and loving the results, using the 35-100 would definitely be the best option for me giving me stellar results.
I used this lens to record presentations in which the audience sits on either side of a long table and the presenter stands at one end. I set my camera up at the end of the table opposite the presenter, with the camera on a tabletop tripod. I was using a GH4 with a Leica 12-60, but it wasn't long enough, so I got the 35-100, and it worked perfectly. I've since upgraded to a GH6, so I'll continue to use it.
I use this lens much less since I got the 12-60. The additional range from 60-100mm isn't that much, usually I don't carry an extra lens for that. If I need more reach, I prefer the 100-300. I can live with the gap. It was different when I used the 12-35 and the 35-100. So this combination has been kind of pushed back into second row by the 12-60. But the main reason for this is, that I do more landscape and city stuff where I need DOF. If I expect to shoot people and portrait, I prefer the longer range and F2.8. The 35-100/2.8 is perfect and delivers more than enough shallow DOF for my taste. For people, weddings and such, the 35-100/2.8 is king.
Thanks! I have the Oly 12-40mm F2.8, grabbed it on sale, mint condition under $400, it's on my G9 95% of the time. I will definitely hunt for this Pana 35-100mm F2.8.
I prefer my OM (Olympus) ED 40-150 F4 PRO on my OM-1. Super sharp, great colours. Compact and light weight. Only drawback: F4 instead of F2.8. Not so dramatic, because I use it mainly for landscape.
I was fortunate to buy a 9+ used copy that was like new for almost 1/2 retail price in my local camera shop last year just after Christmas. You're right, it is sharp and when compared to FF equivalents, you ŕalize once again how fortunate we are as mft users. I too use it with my G9.
Hello friends! I am in a bit of a situation as my edc camera, a gx7 w 25mm 1.7, was stolen yesterday. I would like to find one that was as pristine a condition as mine was (I didn't have a single scratch on it) but it appears gx7s in condition like that are hard to find. Anyone have ideas where I could look?
Hey Grant Great channel thanks for all you do. I just picked up the 12-60mm 2.8-4 lens (came today) to replace my kit lens on my G85. The 35-100mm 2.8 is my next purchase. Which version is this Which version of the lens is this one a 1st gen or 2nd gen? and how do the compare to each other? thanks
Do you think it's worth it to hold off until the end of October to get the Leica version for $1200? I have the 14-140mm to film paintball but while I'll take a little less zoom unfortunately, I want a constant aperture lens but wondering if I should save the $400 since there is plenty of chances where I get shot and could afford almost 2 of these compared to one Leica.. I think the 50-200m Leica is a little pricey, so these are my options I am looking at.
Purchased the 35-100mm two weeks ago and loving it.
Thank you. As a new photographer for birding, (G9II) I bought the Lumix 100-400mm 4.0-6.3 and its been great. This will be my next lens to add on. I think for now, zoom lenses might make more sense rather than prime lenses.
I have the 12-60 lumix and I’m loookng a t this one next . I own a couple of primes but these lumixes aren’t that far behind in sharpness compared to the Leica zooms and even primes . And I think for the price it’s a very good deal and can get some really nice results . The light isn’t a issue if you have a new lumix body so
The Lumix 35-100/2.8 HD is my favorite compact street tele for my GX9. cheers
I have both G85 and G9, with the G9 being my main camera. I am a video professional (over 15 years) but have gotten back into photography photo the last couple of years.
I have several Lumix lenses, Kit 12-60mm, 25mm 1.7, 42.5 1.7, 20mm 2.0, 12.-3 2.8 and Olympus 14-150mm, and was able to purchase the 12-35 at a great price.
The 35-100mm next on my list, but cost is the reason it hasn't been added yet.
I do a lot of stage performances and really could use the reach of the 35-100. The 12-35 isn't quite long enough and the kit 12-60 and Olympus 14-150 isn't fast enough. I currently use those two the most while exposing the best I can while boosting my iso. Topaz Labs or Lightroom's new noise reduction in post.
This works out well, but adds quite a bit of time to my workflow.
Having used the 12-35 2.8 and loving the results, using the 35-100 would definitely be the best option for me giving me stellar results.
I used this lens to record presentations in which the audience sits on either side of a long table and the presenter stands at one end. I set my camera up at the end of the table opposite the presenter, with the camera on a tabletop tripod. I was using a GH4 with a Leica 12-60, but it wasn't long enough, so I got the 35-100, and it worked perfectly. I've since upgraded to a GH6, so I'll continue to use it.
I’ve just picked up one second hand at a good price. Looking forward to using it.
I use this lens much less since I got the 12-60. The additional range from 60-100mm isn't that much, usually I don't carry an extra lens for that. If I need more reach, I prefer the 100-300. I can live with the gap.
It was different when I used the 12-35 and the 35-100. So this combination has been kind of pushed back into second row by the 12-60. But the main reason for this is, that I do more landscape and city stuff where I need DOF. If I expect to shoot people and portrait, I prefer the longer range and F2.8. The 35-100/2.8 is perfect and delivers more than enough shallow DOF for my taste. For people, weddings and such, the 35-100/2.8 is king.
You get a sub for having Simpsons on in the background. Oh, great review too! Just picked myself this lens to compliment my 12-40mm f2.8 Olympus!
Thanks :) that’s awesome
Paring it with the Olympus 12-40mm 2.8 Pro lens
had one.. but it had dust inside, so i replaced it and got the olympus 40-150 2.8 instead.
both are good, but i prefer the olympus more
Thanks! I have the Oly 12-40mm F2.8, grabbed it on sale, mint condition under $400, it's on my G9 95% of the time. I will definitely hunt for this Pana 35-100mm F2.8.
A great lens on my G9! I agree with your points and add most important is the awesome BOKEH !!! 👍
I prefer my OM (Olympus) ED 40-150 F4 PRO on my OM-1. Super sharp, great colours. Compact and light weight. Only drawback: F4 instead of F2.8. Not so dramatic, because I use it mainly for landscape.
I was fortunate to buy a 9+ used copy that was like new for almost 1/2 retail price in my local camera shop last year just after Christmas. You're right, it is sharp and when compared to FF equivalents, you ŕalize once again how fortunate we are as mft users. I too use it with my G9.
I love my 50-200, coupled with my 12-60.
Great reasons. I have it as well and use it mostly for video.
Great lens, but a bit expensive. Is it the lens that you ordered for the GX9?
No - I've had this one for years :) Yes - Little Expensive :)
Would this be a good lens to pair with the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8?
Hello friends! I am in a bit of a situation as my edc camera, a gx7 w 25mm 1.7, was stolen yesterday. I would like to find one that was as pristine a condition as mine was (I didn't have a single scratch on it) but it appears gx7s in condition like that are hard to find. Anyone have ideas where I could look?
Hey Grant Great channel thanks for all you do. I just picked up the 12-60mm 2.8-4 lens (came today) to replace my kit lens on my G85. The 35-100mm 2.8 is my next purchase. Which version is this Which version of the lens is this one a 1st gen or 2nd gen? and how do the compare to each other? thanks
I've only ever used the 2nd version - however people tell me the 1st version is just as good :)
@@grantrobertdavies Thank you
Version 1 isn't weather sealed
Is this the Leica version?
no
Do you think it's worth it to hold off until the end of October to get the Leica version for $1200? I have the 14-140mm to film paintball but while I'll take a little less zoom unfortunately, I want a constant aperture lens but wondering if I should save the $400 since there is plenty of chances where I get shot and could afford almost 2 of these compared to one Leica.. I think the 50-200m Leica is a little pricey, so these are my options I am looking at.
The original version will be fine
@@grantrobertdavies thank you
No one says "Grant" like an Ozzie.
I did not have luck with my copy I guess. Not sharp (those glowing edges) it was really frustrating. I really wanted to love it but I couldn’t
I’ll pop this on my wish list … are you still using this lens in 2024 ?
Yeah :)
Just bought one new for £417😃