1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

45-200 or 40-150?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by jeffryscott, Apr 29, 2012.

  1. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 2, 2010
    Both of these can be found now for $199 new or refurb/demo ($159).

    So, which is better optically? Is the AF of the 40-150 better on the OM-D (I'm sure it is)?

    I previously owned the 40-150, but AF was so slow on my EP-2 so I sent it back. Optically it seemed fine, but it felt cheap (plastic lens mount, etc ...)

    Obviously the 45-200 has the additional reach, and OIS which is moot since I have an OM-D. But, having never seen one in person, I can only guess, like the other Panasonic lenses, that construction is good.

    What say you? (Ultimately I want to get the 100-300, but for now, these will do considering the prices).
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    Never used the 40-150, but regarding the 45-200, it probably has the best build quality of any entry level telephoto kit zoom I've used. It's quite sharp up to 150mm, but needs to be stopped down quite a bit at 200mm to extract the most sharpness. The 45-175 X is sharp throughout every focal length, but for the low price of the 45-200, I think it's the better deal.
  3. atomic

    atomic Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 3, 2011
    One thing to consider on the 45-200mm is the size and weight. Also, the in lens IS with a switch on the side is nice, for those of us that usually leave it off. It's a lot easier to leave it off on the camera and use the switch on the lens to activate it when needed. When you goto resell, Panasonic owners will be less hesitant to buy the lens as well.
  4. MrDoug

    MrDoug Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 5, 2011
    Boise, Idaho
  5. DizzyV6P

    DizzyV6P Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 13, 2012
    I'm considering the same two lenses. I ordered the 40-150 w/ my E-M5 to get the $150 deal. But if $50 will give me a better, sharper lens, I might take the 40-150 off my list and grab the pany 45-200.

    Any other opinions on this?

  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    I just like the fact the 45-200 has a metal mount. I wish Olympus would stop building their lenses to the extremes of quality (ex: 12 f2 all metal vs all plastic lenses) and just take the middle ground!
  7. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Nov 7, 2010
    I asked the same question a little while back: LINK.

    I still haven't purchased either one, but after leaning hard toward the 40-150 I am now pretty much set on the 45-200. That is driven totally by camera. I expect to keep my GH1, so the in-lens IS is important.
  8. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    The 45-200 is a terrific lens but it takes a little getting used to. I think it is probably the biggest bargain in affordable telephotos for m43. It has metal mount, switchable IS on the lens, and IMHO a bit more useful range than then 40-150. It's bigger and heavier but I was always very pleased with the results. I would say the 40-15 might be a bit sharper but not enough to make me take it over the 45-200.
  9. artsifrtsy

    artsifrtsy Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 2, 2011
    I've owned both and prefer the Panny. It's better built and sharper. The only downside is it's size, I ordered it from B and H and was surprised at the diameter of it. The Oly is compact - IMO that's the only win in it's column.
  10. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 2, 2010
    Went ahead and ordered the 45-200 tonight, should have it Monday. For $195 it seems I can't go wrong. The build quality swayed me to this lens, and the price drop, which may or may not end in 24 hours.

    While optically the Oly lens is good, the build (mostly the plastic mount) did not impress me when i briefly owned the lens before. I've had great experiences with Panasonic lenses, so trust that this will also be another positive experience.

    I still hope to eventually get the 100-300 for the extra reach.
  11. shizlefonizle

    shizlefonizle Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 21, 2012
    Recently got mine and construction seems solid, also nice to know its made in Japan
  12. LeeOsenton

    LeeOsenton Mu-43 Button Clicker

    Jun 25, 2010
    Hayes, Virginia, U.S.A.
    Lee Osenton
    I just sold my Olympus 40-150 and bought the Panasonic 45-200 while it was on sale. I rarely use a long zoom, and frequently wished for more reach when I did use it. Since the Panasonic was on sale; I sold my Olympus and made the switch. The OIS on the Panasonic is nice and works very well with my E-PL2. Overall, I like the Panasonic better and am glad I switched, but I have not seen any big difference in image quality. The Panasonic is larger as most have pointed out.

    Micro 4/3rds is so awesome because we can pick and choose! Both are nice lenses and will serve you well.

  13. MizOre

    MizOre Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 26, 2011
    Remember to update the firmware

    I didn't bother to shoot with mine until I did. It does what I want on the GF1.

    There's another thread on this for more details on how to do the update.
  14. robertro

    robertro Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 22, 2010
    I owned both when I had my E-PL1, and then sold both when I was too annoyed by the slow focusing. I used the 40-150 much more frequently than the 45-200, just because it was incredibly compact and light.

    When I bought my E-PM1, I bought the 40-150, mainly because the 45-200 was a less useful range and it is noticeably sharper than the Panasonic lens. The light weight and small size mean that the lens is more likely to be with me.

    I'd suggest the Panasonic only if you are using it on Panasonic bodies (that have no IS), or if you are shooting video (where the in-lens IS is superior), and you're willing to give up the short end of the range.
  15. phrenic

    phrenic Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 13, 2010
    I would go for the 40-150. Sharper, cheaper, and lighter..assuming you don't need the extra bit of reach
  16. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
  17. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 2, 2010
    Got the 45-200 this morning. Haven't updated the firmware yet as the camera battery was dying. Shot a quick photo before it did just to play. My dog's eye at 3200 ... Straight out of camera except for a bit of dodging on the eye to open that up a bit.

    First impressions are good, much better than my first impressions of the non-R Oly 40-150.

    Can't wait to use it, just have to wait for the battery, and time.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 2, 2010
    A couple from this afternoon. SOOC and resized in Aperture. Very pleased with the sharpness of the lens.

    The OM-D isn't a sports camera (although I do need to play with it more to see what configuration works best for my girls' swimming). Had a lot of missed focus, but I don't blame that on the lens.

    The tight shot is OOF on the eyes, but the lens does quite a good job with color rendition and is pleasant to use.
  19. FoToEdge


    May 11, 2012
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Panasonic 45-200mm is Amazing for the Low Cost

    I've had the Panasonic 45-200mm for about 8 months and it has become my favorite lens that I own. I only have an Olympus 14-42mm II for comparisons, and the 45-200 is better built and nicely balanced. The blur of the background is pleasant at the longer lengths and the images are sharp if I stay around 7.1 or smaller. I always use ISO 400 or 800 to eliminate any shake on my E-P3. For the money, I am amazed!
  20. Jermonic

    Jermonic Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 14, 2012
    I was a bit disappointed with the 45-200 mm.... very soft images even at 100 mm. So, I sent it back. Also, it's a bit on the large side in my opinion. But well-built, though.

    I was wondering if anybody has experience with using the 40-150 on a Pana body. Is it possible to keep stable at around 100-120 mm? (which probably will be the most of the range I'll be using). I'm talking about normal daylight, not too cloudy, conditions.

    It definitely has a size that makes more sense for the m43 system.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.