Positive.

I have heard of trickery that makes it work but it's too much of a hack for most people to bother. Unless you're looking for a lens that doesn't exist for m4/3, I would pick a native lens over an adapted one.

I just noticed a bunch of typos, sorry. On the iPad.

Thankyou for the help strang, all the best.

Avoid the 40-150/3.5-4.5 on m4/3. The autofocus is very poor (it is not optimized for CDAF). There is a newer 4/3 40-150/4.0-5.6 which is somewhat better (it is optimized for CDAF). Even that len I wouldn't bother with though, unless the price is a lot less than the m4/3 version, which it doesn't sound like it is.

FWIW the f/3.5-4.5 version is also significantly larger and heavier than either of the newer variants.

DH

__________________
E-M5 | E-PM2 | mZD 12-50 | ZD 12-60 | P 14-42 X | mZD 40-150 R | PL 25 | mZD 45

The above is spot on. I have both 4/3 versions of this lens as well as the micro 4/3 40-150. You want the micro version if you value portability and quick focus.

The 4/3 f3.5-f4.0 version takes around 2-3 seconds to focus on an OMD. I just checked it indoors. The 4/3 f4.0-5,6 version is 2X faster, and used to be marketed with a bundled adapter for PEN's, so it is somewhat tolerable.