Need some help RE versions of the Olympus 40-150

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by manypix, Aug 30, 2013.

  1. manypix

    manypix Mu-43 Regular

    54
    Feb 21, 2013
    Portland, OR, USA
    Hi!

    These are the 40-150 lenses I know of:

    1. 4/3 mount (not micro): Zuiko Digital 40mm-150mm f/3.5-4.5 EZ. Not CDAF-optimized. Solid. 425g.
    2. 4/3 mount (not micro): Zuiko Digital 40mm-150mm f/4-5.6 ED. CDAF-optimized. 220g.
    3. Micro 4/3 mount. M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6 ED. Plastic mount. 190g.
    4. Micro 4/3 mount. M.Zuiko Digital 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 ED R MSC. Plastic mount. 190g.


    I have none of them, and have a few questions:

    A. Has anyone tried more than one of these on an m43 body? On an E-M5?

    B. I've read that focusing on the first two is much slower than on the native pair of lenses. Is focusing much slower on #1 than on #2?

    C. I've read that clarity and other optical features are superior on the 43 versus the m43 lenses, and particularly superior on #1. Is this what you have seen?

    Cheers!


    Note: I have a 43 to m43 adapter, so it's not a problem that use of the first two would require one.
     
  2. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    505
    Jul 2, 2010
    Arizona
    You are going to have much better AF performance with either 3 or 4, which are optically identical, just redesigned body on the R version.

    I owned #1 when I had E1's and it is a great little lens, especially for the price, but it would be rather big on m43, especially compared to either native lens choice.

    With used prices of the m43 lens under $150 (sometimes can be found for about $100) it just doesn't make sense, to me, to not go with the native m43 lens - and optically I don't think either 43 lens is noticeably better to warrant the size or performance hit.

    Good luck.
     
  3. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    Well described!

    I have three of them, only not the black m4/3rds without the "R"

    1 & 2 focus slowish on m4/3rds with an adapter, but the bigger heavier #1 is the slowest to focus and 'clunks' about a bit.
    Optically#1 is a smidgen better than the others and has half an F-number advantage, but on m4/3rds bodies I've found it more prone to misfocus than the lightweight #2.
    #4 feels very light, cheap and flimsy : really good lens though! Fast reliable focus, sharp, not bad stabilisation from inside Olympus bodies.

    I understand what you're asking : buy #3/#4

    #1 is my favourite lens on the DSLRs but not on m4/3rds.
     
  4. Robstar1963

    Robstar1963 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 10, 2011
    Isle of Wight England UK
    Robert (Rob)
    Hi
    I prefer no 3 out of the two M43 versions as the construction is a bit tougher and seems to be harder wearing compared to no 4 (as mentioned in the previous post - the R version does feel more lightweight and 'plasticky)
    Regards
    Rob
     
  5. manypix

    manypix Mu-43 Regular

    54
    Feb 21, 2013
    Portland, OR, USA
    Hi!

    I really appreciate the feedback. I won't be getting one of the 43 lenses, and if I get a 40-150 at all, I'll look for the non-R m43 one.

    Thanks!
     
  6. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    505
    Jul 2, 2010
    Arizona
    R or non-R are optically identical, pick the one you like best (design wise) or is cheapest.
     
  7. Swandy

    Swandy Mu-43 Veteran

    362
    Dec 15, 2009
    I have had all four over the years and like others have said, the #1 is probably a bit better optically than the other three - but in all honesty if you are not a pixel peeper - or making HUGE enlargements - you probably would not see it.
    I sold my #2 when I saw how slow it AF was on my first m4/3 camera (EP1) and got the original m4/3 (your #2).
    #3 and #4 are constructed as far as lens configuration identically and if there is an IQ difference, I never saw one. As far as the build quality "difference" between the R and non-R models, I really don't see/feel it. They both feel and operate great for what they are - very reasonable cost mid to long tele zooms. Very good for their cost.
     
  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.