1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

all m. zuiko 40-150's have a plastic mount?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Jeroen, Sep 20, 2011.

  1. Jeroen

    Jeroen Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 16, 2010
    the netherlands
    I got very tempted to jump on the 40-150mm R all black lens which looks so gorgeous, and then realized the mount might be plastic.

    It seems that many companies are deliberately leaving out any information on the mount and even showing front and side images only.

    Now, there are many compromises i'm willing to accept for lens size and weight but a plastic mount isn't one of them.

    Would the 45-200 be a reasonable alternative? It looks heaps bigger and heavier and gets moderately positive reviews.. Am I plain out of luck here or do you guys know of any upcoming zooms that could be interesting?

    5887206064_c1bf33763c.
     
  2. robertro

    robertro Mu-43 Veteran

    223
    Apr 22, 2010
    I've had both, and frankly, I would not be concerned about the mount.

    The Panny is so much heavier that it probably benefits from the metal mount. The Oly is so lightweight that a well-engineered plastic is more than robust.
     
  3. nickthetasmaniac

    nickthetasmaniac Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 11, 2011
    Obviously it's up to you, but I honestly wouldn't worry about it. I've used the m.ZD 40-150 MkI extensively, including week-long bushwalking trips in the Tasmanian Southwest, and it's always felt very solid and secure in the camera.

    As Robert points out, the Oly has so little mass that it's just a non-issue...
     
  4. Caroline

    Caroline Mu-43 Regular

    87
    Mar 4, 2010
    London
    Yes the mount is plastic - at least it is on mine (kit lens with the E-PL3 so a recent version) so I assume it's the same for all of them. For a heavier lens yes I would want a metal mount but this one is so light I don't have much concern about it breaking or not being up to the job.

    HTH,
    Caroline
     
  5. Plastic lens mounts have been around for over a decade, and on full-frame SLR lenses, not just tiny m4/3 lenses. Out of curiousity I searched around a while back on the topic, and while there was plenty of supposition about their lack of longevity, there seemed very little actual evidence to support it.
     
  6. nueces snapper

    nueces snapper Mu-43 All-Pro

    +1 :thumbup:
     
  7. Jeroen

    Jeroen Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 16, 2010
    the netherlands
    thanks everyone. I have no reason to doubt that the plastic is sturdy enough, but its just a matter of principle for me. mounts (and tripod screws/sockets!) should, in my view, be made of metal, just like lenses should be made of glass.

    I don't wish to support a manufacturer that wants to cut down on production cost and then saying it's to reduce weight,(honestly, i think no one would be offended by the extra weight from a metal mount). They are essentially messing with the very basics of lens design.

    There's a reason why the majority of mounts are metal and I don't believe it's just to support the weight of a lens.

    Who knows, maybe I'll get over it one day and swallow my pride. until then, no zoom.
    thanks again guys.
     
  8. MrKal_El

    MrKal_El Mu-43 Top Veteran

    661
    Mar 24, 2011
    While I agree w/ many of your points, you can always pick one up & see its quality for yourself. Don't loose out on the opportunity for a very nice lens w/out knowing it first hand.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. nueces snapper

    nueces snapper Mu-43 All-Pro

    Can't really argue with that. :smile:

    In a similar vein ... it's pretty cheap of Oly not to include lens hoods with their lenses. I have no idea what their profit margin is but they certainly act like they are just barely skimping by. :rolleyes:
     
  10. nickthetasmaniac

    nickthetasmaniac Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 11, 2011
    That I'll agree with. I mean really, how much would it actually cost to manufacture a little bit of plastic tube? At least 10c I would guess...
     
  11. goldenlight

    goldenlight Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 30, 2010
    Essex
    John
    If you are concerned about the plastic mount of the Olympus and the suitability of the Panny 45-200mm, then why not wait for the forthcoming Panasonic 45-175mm power zoom and see what that's like?

    BTW I know of someone who took a tumble whilst carrying their DSLR. The impact was so great it actually bent the metal camera mount out of alignment. If the lens mount had been plastic it probably would have broken but left the camera mount undamaged. Given that the 40-150mm is reasonably priced I'd say a plastic mount in this situation would be an advantage. :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    There is the 14-150 oly if you want to have a metal mount, and it would replace the plastic mount 14-42 kit lens as well, if you have it.
     
  13. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    The Panny does have a metal mount and is a very good performer up to about 150mm. Toward 200mm it softens up a bit, closing down about 2/3 of a stop helps a lot.
     
  14. Jeroen

    Jeroen Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 16, 2010
    the netherlands
    the 45-175 might be an option. The 14-150 could be but i already have 3 lenses that cover the 14mm end.

    the 45-200 i'll have to fit on my e-p2 to see how it balances. The OIS could be much better than the IBIS.
     
  15. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    that's part of my point...sell two and let the 14-150 replace both, and give you a metal mount, and cover the range with one lens. Keep the lumix 14 pancake(I'm assuming this is one of the three) and sell the other two to help finance the 14-150. Less glass to carry round,and sturdier build. Solves your issue with the 40-150 and the kit 14-42 as well.
     
  16. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    That's exactly what I did. Can never go back to a hassle of two lens setup. 14-150mm covers all essential daytime focal lengths. You never know what you're about to shoot, changing lenses 10 times a day is a pain and m43 is all about pleasure and convinience.
     
  17. Jeroen

    Jeroen Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 16, 2010
    the netherlands
    are you seriously suggesting i sell the mighty 9-18 to get a mediocre zoom instead? puzzling!
    despite the fact that it covers 14mm, i got the 14mm pancake recently too for the F2.5 and ultra portable size. My kit zoom is the mk1 with a metal mount. I couldn't sell it no matter how hard I try. The net is flooded with these lenses and they are almost worthless.
     
  18. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    No offense, but I don't understand why you would have the 9-18 and still keep the 14 2.5, isn't that a little redundant, I assumed you had a couple of 14-42. The oly wide angle is another beast altogether that I have been wanting for awhile. I wouldn't even class it in the same group as any of the other 14's, it is a superior piece of glass in comparison. Ditch both your other 14's unles 2.5 makes a world of difference to you, I couldn't be bothered to carry the extra glass for triple coverage of 14mm. That's just me though, I have the 14-150 and the 45-200, and unless I know I'll need the extra reach I leave it on the shelf as the thing is a brick. It's a great lens, but since it has the redundant OIS to add to size and weight, as I shoot oly bodies only it just isn't the first choice unless I really need the reach. It weighs almost as much as all my other native glass together(17,20,25,14-150). To each his own, good luck with whatever you choose. Hope your happy with the trade offs, I just don't buy panny if I have to pay( cost and weight) for something I won't use or need in a lens. In fact I may sell my 45-200, and get the oly 75-300 in time, as again it's a more suitable lens for my requirements in size and weight matched with oly bodies.
     
  19. phrenic

    phrenic Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 13, 2010
    I suppose the value of the 14mm is being super tiny. The 9-18 is very, very small..but still adds depth to the camera and you sure can't pocket it. That said, if you have anything but the GF3 or EPM1 I agree, not as much value compared to the 9-18 (one of my fav lenses!).
     
  20. Jeroen

    Jeroen Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 16, 2010
    the netherlands
    did you ever see the 14/2.5?
    the 9-18mm, when extended to 14mm is 3 times the length of the pancake, with a max aperture of f4.9

    besides, primes will always be better at their one and only focal length than any zoom.

    in my experience, they complement eachother nicely. there is no such thing as a one lens solution, otherwise we could all stick to fixed lens cameras.

    thanks for your thoughts.