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

    Feb 21, 2013
    Portland, OR, USA

    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?


    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

    Jul 2, 2010
    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
    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)
    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)
  5. manypix

    manypix Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 21, 2013
    Portland, OR, USA

    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.

  6. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

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

    Swandy Mu-43 Veteran

    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.