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

O40 - 150 R vs. O14 - 150

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by dornblaser, Aug 22, 2012.

  1. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    I have the Oly 40 - 150R and have not handled the O14 -150. In the 40 - 150 focal lengths does anyone know what or if there is any significant difference between the two lenses?
     
  2. Robstar1963

    Robstar1963 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    895
    Jun 10, 2011
    Isle of Wight England UK
    Robert (Rob)
    Hi
    The 14 - 150 is a heavier better made lens imo with a metal mount in comparison to the generally rather plasticky 40 - 150
    Having said that the image quality is said to be on a parr or possibly slightly better on the 40 - 150
    Both lenses have the same filter size of 58mm I believe and the same bayonet at the end onto which you can easily and quickly mount the MCON - P01 Macro adaptor

    I find the increased focal range to be very useful on the 14 - 150 and as a result it can be used as an everyday walk around lens very much like the very much heavier and bigger Panasonic 14 - 140
    Not sure if I answered your question correctly ?
    Regards
    Rob
     
  3. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    You did answer my question, thank you. If I have a 150mm lens I will have a second or third lens as well so I am not interested in a one lens does it all solution. My question really does hinge on the 40 - 150 focal length image quality. While I like the 40 - 150 it is not the same quality as the 12mm, 45mm, etc.; I think that m43's long lenses can stand some improvement.
     
  4. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    411
    Feb 25, 2012
    London
    Malc
    I bought the 14-150 a couple of months back - my thinking was there's very little optical difference, so why not have the extra close range without having to change lenses.

    I did find it in a good bundle deal with a 'free' e-pl1' though.

    It's been useful very as a travel lens, and drives my other half a bit less nuts with waiting for lens changes :thumbup:

    Totally agree about there not being much choice in sharp long lenses though...I'm assuming the panny 35-100 will cost similarly to the 12-35 :eek:
     
  5. Robstar1963

    Robstar1963 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    895
    Jun 10, 2011
    Isle of Wight England UK
    Robert (Rob)
    Hi Totally off the subject I know but your ID 'Arch Stanton' isn't that the name on 'the grave' in The Good The Bad and The Ugly ?? (or one of the other spaghetti Westerns)
    Rob
     
  6. strang

    strang Mu-43 Veteran

    287
    May 7, 2012
    I got the 14-150 because super zooms are just so easy while you're traveling.

    If there is no rain, I would have no problem with just a 2 lens kit: 14-150, 25.
     
  7. dshipp

    dshipp Mu-43 Rookie

    11
    Apr 15, 2011
    I don't have the 40-150 but supposedly it's sharper than the 14-150 especially at the longer end. I've not been that happy with the results from the 14-150 between about 100 and 150. I've just swapped to the Lumix 45-175 and I'm much happier with that, it seems considerably sharper than my 14-150 at the long end. There are some good comparison charts on slrgear. My intention is to replace to wide end with a Lumix 12-35mm, but that will have to wait a bit.

    I've decided my ideal travel kit is the 12-35mm, 45-175mm and a 20mm for late evening shots in bars and markets. I originally thought that the 14-150mm and 20mm would be a good travel kit, but I've found value having sharper shots over the convenience of the superzoom range. Also the 45-175mm is lighter than the 14-150mm.

    My advice is to be sure you can live with the image quality from the 14-150mm before swapping your 40-150mm for it.
     
  8. flojoto

    flojoto Mu-43 Rookie

    11
    Aug 16, 2012
    I recently changed from a Pana 14-45+45-200 to a Pana 14-140 setup. Didn't regret it a day. If I really want good quality I use primes and to have the Superzoom is often very handy i I'm on the go with friends or family who don't like waiting 10 Minutes till I have taken a foto.

    If you go with zooms (expect for the new Pana 2.8s maybe), it's alway a quality compromise, so compromising that little bit more is barely noticeable in my experiene. Go with the Superzoom, you will enjoy the flexibility and take far more close up shots, because you don't have to switch the lens all the time.

    Also for better Teleperformance you could look at the Oly 75-300 or Pana 100-300 they are quite a bit better then the middle Telezooms.
     
  9. marcl

    marcl Mu-43 Regular

    184
    Jul 8, 2012
    I have both. At the long end, the 40-150 seems a bit sharper to me. It's also worth noting that at 40mm, the 14-150 is at 5.3-5.4 wide open, while the 40-150 is at 4.0. It's almost one stop of light less.
     
  10. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    Thanks, Marci and everyone.
     
  11. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    411
    Feb 25, 2012
    London
    Malc
    Yay! Sorry for going off-topic OP, but someone finally noticed - good to see another fan :)

    Yep, I'm the man next to the man with no name :wink:

    I have had some shots at the long end of the 14-150 not as sharp as I hoped - at the time I couldn't decide if it was the ibis on my e-pl3 screwing up (about 1/200s) or the lens itself. Having said that, as others have said, it's a lens for when I need the convenience so it's totally staying in the bag. Currently looking for some non-mu43 long tele primes to fill the long/sharp gap.
    Good thread going on about that here:
    https://www.mu-43.com/f40/adapted-portrait-lens-what-do-you-use-31781/