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

Olympus 40-150mm lens

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Pap, Dec 7, 2010.

  1. Pap

    Pap Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Jun 16, 2010
    Fleetwood, PA
    as this is now part of a bundle offering on the EPL-1 how good is this lens? I tried a search but pretty much came up blank.
    Thanks, Pap!
     
  2. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
    Is this the 4/3 version or the m4/3 version?
     
  3. Pap

    Pap Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Jun 16, 2010
    Fleetwood, PA
    M43 version

    thanks!
    Pap
     
  4. Pap

    Pap Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Jun 16, 2010
    Fleetwood, PA
    anyone?

    am I to understand that no one is using this lens?
    Pap
     
  5. s0nus

    s0nus Mu-43 Veteran

    424
    Dec 13, 2010
    Chicago
    I have the 40-150, which is a 4/3 lens adapted via the Oly MMF-2 adapter to m4/3. I'm using it with an EPL1.

    I'm pretty happy with this lens. It's sharp with a nice bokeh. Keep in mind that I'm coming from an old Olympus C3020 point and shoot, so this is my first foray into the world of interchangable lenses. My only gripe is the loud autofocus, which is a problem when shooting video with the built in mic as the noise comes up very loud in the recorded video. I need to remember to use manual focus in the future.

    Some sample shots from a recent trip to Tanzania are below, most of which are at full tele (150mm). Some of these are cropped a bit, some not:

    1/200 sec, f/5.6, 150mm


    1/160 sec, f/5.6, 150mm


    1/500 sec, f/10, 150mm


    1/320 sec, f/5.6, 150mm


    1/320 sec, f/7.1, 150mm


    1/200 sec, f/5.6, 114mm


    1/250 sec, f/5.6, 102mm
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. playak47

    playak47 Mu-43 Veteran

    297
    Nov 4, 2010
    I just received it today. I am still at work but cannot wait to try it out. I am surprised too that not many people care about this lens. I have yet to see a review of the lens. I would glad if its same as the 4/3 version for what the price.
     
  7. s0nus

    s0nus Mu-43 Veteran

    424
    Dec 13, 2010
    Chicago
    From four-thirds.org

    The 4/3 version (which I have, adapted):
    • Lens construction = 12 elements in 9 groups
    • Closest focusing distance = 0.9m / 35.43 in.
    • Maximum image magnification = 0.14x (0.28x : 35mm equivalent)
    • Filter size = 58mm
    • Dimensions = φ65.5 x 72mm / φ2.58 x 2.83 in.
    • Weight = 220g / 7.8 oz.

    The new m4/3 version:
    • Lens construction = 13 elements in 10 groups
    • Closest focusing distance = 0.9m / 35.43 in.
    • Maximum image magnification = 0.16x
    • (0.32x : 35mm equivalent)
    • Filter size = 58mm
    • Dimensions = φ63.5 x 83mm / φ2.50x 3.27 in.
    • Weight = 190g / 6.7 oz.

    I don't know much about it, but it looks like a pretty similar lens formula. I would be interested in seeing a head to head comparison.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Kosta

    Kosta Mu-43 Veteran

    435
    Sep 29, 2010
    Australia
    I am looking for a tele zoom for m4/3 and i think this one might do the trick. I want to go hiking in Peru but haven't used tele zooms before and just want to make sure the range is "enough" i don't want to take more than three lenses and i think this one, the pana 20 and the 9-18 would be perfect?
     
  9. ccunningham

    ccunningham Mu-43 Veteran

    453
    Jul 23, 2010
    Seconded.

    I also have the older 4/3 40-150 w/mmf-2 adapter, and I'm pretty happy with it too. I don't know how the new lens stacks up, but the old one is pretty light and compact, and for the approx. $100 US I paid for it new, I still think it was a good deal.

    This is a closeup from it, mounted on a G1:
    [​IMG]

    It doesn't look all that sharp at first, but the point of focus was on the frog's eye, and if you enlarge the image, it's amazing the detail that's there, considering it was $100 zoom.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  10. Kosta

    Kosta Mu-43 Veteran

    435
    Sep 29, 2010
    Australia
    hopefully the m4/3 version is as good because I would love a tele zoom to round off the kit :)
     
  11. ccunningham

    ccunningham Mu-43 Veteran

    453
    Jul 23, 2010
    I've not seen alot of tests of the m4/3 version. But admittedly, I haven't been looking alot either.

    At the time I bought my 40-150, the m. 40-150 hadn't been announced, and I didn't expect to use the 40-150 often, just every now and then. Which has turned out to be about how much I use it actually, so it turned out well. There are ways it could be better, but for the most part it exceeded my expectations of $100 US lens. I already had the adapter, but at the time I bought mine they were selling a lens+ mmf-2 kit for a bit of discount off the prices of the items separately, which would have been a pretty nice way to get the adapter too.
     
  12. jbart

    jbart Mu-43 Regular

    44
    Jun 1, 2010
    Ottawa
    I will start with apologizing for not posting samples either.
    (EDIT)
    Im adding an image where I used this lens
    (EDIT)
    I have the 4/3 40-150mm. The m43 was not announced and I wanted a low $ lens for telephoto. I love how light this lens is.
    My favourite photos using this lens are definitely the portraits I have taken. It would be nice if it was a faster lens and the AF is a bit slower than M43 lenses.

    I am currently lamenting the lack of AF-assist with the EPL1 as my wifes Canon S90 has one built in, but I understand its about understanding the limitations. With that in mind, I would say, even the m43 lens will have limitations as well with it being a slow(ish) zoom and the AF may not be as good as we expect. However, the quality of the 43 lens is great for my purposes. I really like the bokeh as well. I have only tried a few full-frame adapted lenses for comparison on my EPL1 and I must say, this Olympus lens is very sharp and clear. I tried the Panasonic 45-200 in the store and the AF worked quite well so you might want to consider trying both side-by-side even in a store. I think these are very comparable lenses and the 200mm might give you a little more reach. At the time my priority was $ so I was not willing to spend lots on the lens. I still primarily use the kit 14-42mm and love the results.
    I need to get the 17 or 20mm pancake for low-light though as thats where I struggle the most. I use a 28mm 2.8 canon lens but its not wide enough indoors most of the time.

    Hope this helps!
    976202392_p8186798.

    Some other linked images (hope this works)
    http://vanislanders.smugmug.com/Holidays/Algonquin/P8176604/976201233_YnsB9-XL.jpg
    http://vanislanders.smugmug.com/Holidays/Algonquin/P8186759/976202194_4Ks8z-XL.jpg
     
    • Like Like x 2