Reviews and image samples I've been seeing all seem to indicate that this lens is by far the sharpest m43 telephoto zoom lens with better color and contrast especially at the longer end compared to both Oly 40-150 and Pana 45-200.

I've tried Oly 40-150 in the past. While it's definitely a good bang for the buck (if purchased at or under $150), I always considered the lens somewhat average. It’s sharp at close distances but softens up as it gets closer to infinity (mind you, I don't use slow telephoto zooms for portraits, prefer bright primes for that). The color and contrast are no match to the primes I shoot most of the time (Panny 20, 14 and Oly 45). Its build quality is below decency level, IMO. So eventually I sold this lens due to low rate of keepers. I was never really interested in Pana 45-200 due to much larger size and weight.

Now, Panasonic 45-175 seem to be the smallest overall package due to internal zooming and 46mm filter thread. But it also seems to be the sharpest at all focal lengths with noticeably better contrast and well controlled CAs? The only issues I was reading about were all related to OIS which I won’t be using on Oly body. It’s a daytime lens for me so just like with Oly 40-150 I would have no problem reaching at least 1/800s.

I like to use telephoto zoom to shoot my friends surfing and sailing including video. Also, I go to national and state parks several times a year (Yosemite, Yellowstone, Everglades, Grand Canyon, you name it...). By all accounts Pana 100-300 seem to be an excellent lens and more appropriate for some of those types of shooting but it's way too bulky at which point photography becomes a burden and not fun anymore. Therefore, pixel level sharpness is rather critical to me as I am cropping quite a bit and hoping to achieve that with Pana 45-175. Thoughts?

I don't think you will get the sharpness with 45-175mm at 100% + crop, at least I haven't been able to get it so far... but each lens varies a bit so you might have a better luck. However mine works just fine for all intents and purposes as long as you are not looking at "pixel level sharpness". Plus I love the internal zoom so I don't have to worry about lens sliding out on its own when I carry it on my wrist.

14-140 is my long lens now and I'm quite happy with it. (Not much of a super long lens user.) But I'm always interested to hear how the best, new longer lenses perform.

__________________
Don

At the moment I have both the Panny 45-200mm and X 45-175mm. Indeed, optically the 45-175mm is much better: less vignetting, hardly any purple fringing wide-open while the 45-200mm has it even at f/8 and the images are more sparkling, the 45-200mm can be somewhat greyish. The 45-200's sharpness is OK (this is my 3rd sample, the other ones had defects).

The bad news is the OIS issue the 45-175mm is suffering from. Mind you, even with OIS switched off on a tripod you can get the infamous double-line effect with shutter speeds between roughly 1/80 and 1/800s. See my thread on this. I've also seen a report of an E-M5 user with this problem. If you're using shutter speeds of 1/800s or faster you won't have a problem. Also, below 100mm or so the unsharpness is hardly distinguishable and, from other reports and my own limited experience, it's also alleviated when focussing closer (a few metres).

In light of all this I'm actually considering to return the 45-200mm and live with the 45-175's OIS issue. Maybe someone knows: will the G5 with its electronic first curtain not provoke shutter-shock induced blur? Just guessing...

__________________
Best regards, Ad.

Pictures | Equipment | Minolta collection | All lenses

sound like DOA. Have you compared it to Oly 40-150? No wonder Panasonic is quickly releasing a new 45-150 zoom, no internal or power zoom (back to older design I guess).
I'm gonna give 45-175 a try on E-PM1.

You didn't mention if you ll be using it on a Panasonic or Olympus body. For Olympus you can have the excellent 75-300. I had a chance to try it with OmD and it was very nice. Quite light too.
I have the 45-175 and though I haven't tested it extensively, it seems better at the lower end of its range. I don't have much experience with lenses so I don't know if that is common behavior. I really like the internal zooming. Makes it very easy to handle. I don't know if other zooms do this, but I also like that you can see the focal length on the screen or viewfinder as you are zooming in or out.
Even though it was initially marketed as a premium zoom, there s been price drops lately that make it not much more than basic zoom like 45-200.
The new number Panasonic 50-150 seems like a more portable replacement from the 45-200.

__________________
GX-1
20mm/1.7, 14mm/2.5, 14-42mm X, 45-175mm X, Rokinon 7.5mm

My Zenfolio

Sorry, no. The Oly 40-150mm is not for me because I need a telezoom with OIS on my GH2 and G1 .

__________________
Best regards, Ad.

Pictures | Equipment | Minolta collection | All lenses

Interesting to hear how the opinions differ. I sold 800 euro Pana 14-140 because of poor tele end performance. Now I have 99 euro Oly 40-150 and I'm perfectly happy with it. Okay, it feels 99 euro lens so not perfectly happy but it performs like pro. Sorry, I don't know anything about the 45-175, but seems that the common truth is that 45-200 is average and 100-300 better. How about 100-300?

on paper, 45-175 seems like a step up from Oly 40-150 with internal zooming, metal mount, power zoom option for video and perhaps superior optics, all for $100 more. I ordered one so will find out soon.

Just got my 45-175. Sure focuses quick on my E-PM2.

Anyone else's rattle when shaken? Only happens when the camera is off or the lens is not mounted. I assume it is the OIS. A little disconcerting.

Also its amazingly light. How do they do that? Any glass in there at all?!?!

Have not taken any serious photos with it so I can't comment about the IQ.

__________________
Olympus PEN E-PM2, Panasonic Lumix G5, ZD 14-54 II, PZ 45-175 X, P14/2.5, Sigma 30/2.8, Zuiko 24/2.8, FL-36R, DMW-MA1