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

opinion please Re certain Oly vs Pana zoom lens

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by cameranut, Mar 14, 2013.

  1. cameranut

    cameranut Mu-43 Rookie

    10
    Mar 14, 2013
    Virginia Beach, Va
    Joe
    .... looking for your "learned" opinions regarding quality differences between the Oly 40-150 lens and the Pans 45-175 lens [disregarding the price difference].Most of the "lens reviews" seem to say the Oly 40-150 is average at best, but many forum members [here and other places] think it is much better than "average"-- and many indicate it is better than the Oly 14-150 also. I cannot seem to find much info on the Pana 45-175, and even less regarding how it stacks up against either of the Oly zooms. I have the OMD E-M5 with the O 9-18, the P 20 1.7, and the P 12-35 2.8. I am thinking about adding one of these lens for for travel, grandkids, etc. , and would appreciate any opinions you all may have,
     
  2. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Many think the 45-175 the better of the 3 you have mentioned (14-150, 40-150, 45-175). But depending on when you want to pick something up I might wait and see what the Tamron 14-150 is like.

    Also, and only because I see you have the 12-35 f2.8, why not the 35-100 f2.8? There is one for sale on the boards right now. None of the ones you are looking at will have the image quality of the 12-35/35-100.
     
  3. cookme

    cookme Mu-43 Regular

    139
    May 25, 2012
    I found them to be about the same overall when researching on these two lenses. From all the sample images I went through, it seemed that the two don't differ on image quality much, with the panasonic fairing maybe slightly better. I ended up paying more attention on the physical attributes of the lenses before getting the 45-175. The non-internal-zoom 40-150 lens could slide out on its own when tilting downward and that was enough for me to make the call.

    I am happy with the 45-175 and have not ran into the infamous blurry problem yet.
     
  4. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    I've got both the Olympus 40-150 and the Panasonic PZ 45-175. Both are capable of producing very good pictures and I don't know that there's a huge difference between them in terms of quality of output. However, they represent more or less the opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of price among the :43: tele zooms mostly due to ergonomics. The Oly can be found for as low as $100-150 while the PZ 45-175 goes for $250-300.

    The Olympus definitely has a cheaper look and feel to it than the Panasonic. Although the lenses weigh roughly the same the Panasonic feels more subtantial to me. Someone once referred to the Olympus as a "gumball" lens because it feels as though it may have come out of a gumball machine, and I can't dispute that characterization.

    The Panasonic zooms internally (it doesn't extend when zooming) while the Olympus extends to zoom. Also the Panasonic is a power zoom while the Olympus is manual. Some prefer the power zoom (particularly for smoother zooming while shooting video), but some hate the feel of it. I'm still on the fence, personally.

    The other major consideration is that the Panasonic has image stabilization (OIS) built in, while the Olympus does not. This is less of a concern if you are shooting with an Olympus body, since they have in-body stabilization (IBIS).

    Overall, if I had to choose between the two, regardless of price, the P 45-175 would win hands down. Once you consider price, though, it's a LOT closer and I'd call it a dead heat.
     
  5. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    40-150 is a good lens

    I have the Olympus 40-150 and it is a good lens. Yes it almost doubles it's length when zoomed out, but my copy exhibits no wobble whatsoever even when zoomed to the extreme. My copy also has never moved on its' own when hanging down, I once had a Nikon lens that did this but my Oly zoom does not "creep" down when I carry it around. It is great if you want a very light kit which is why it's all plastic. I personally love carrying the Olympus 9-18 zoom with this 40-150 zoom and love the range and light weight this combo has (with E-PL5). I know I'm missing between the 18mm and 40mm focal lengths but I never have liked the "normal" focal lengths angle of view (boring). I might pick up the Panasonic/Leica 25mm one day if I ever feel that I missing something. Good luck in your choice.
    Bobby
     
  6. cameranut

    cameranut Mu-43 Rookie

    10
    Mar 14, 2013
    Virginia Beach, Va
    Joe
    Thanks for all the info provided! I am getting the impression that both [or all three, including the 14-150 Oly] will probably provide about the same quality... the choice then becomes how they handle [the Pana internal zoom things], and cost [which is very different!]

    Davidzvi noted that te 35-100 f2.8 Pana was much better--- I would certainly assume he is right on that [my 12-35 2.8 is by far the best zoom I have ever owned]-- but the cost is way up there comparied to the others, and I tend to use the long end less than the wide angle end, so am looking for small/light/cheaper[?] than the 35-100 2.8 right now [I may regret that in the future!]

    DeeJayK indicated that the Pana could be found for $250-300-- got any ideas where?... The best I have found it for is $365
     
  7. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    The prices I was quoting were for used lenses. I picked my copy up in the Buy & Sell forum here. I paid US$235 and it was in "like new" condition.

    That said, I'm seeing this lens new at reputable camera shops for US$300. B&H is selling it for $320.

    A quick Google search turns up what looks like a great bargain at a store called CompSource for $195. I don't have any knowledge of this store, but it seems to get relatively good reviews. It's worth noting that the listing is marked "no returns", but at that price you could probably re-sell it either here or on eBay and recoup your investment. In fact, that price is low enough that I am almost considering ordering one just to flip on eBay. At the very least I may post this in the Found Deals forum.
     
  8. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Well I shoot Nikon FX for a living so I understand good glass and have used more than my share. As I said the only ONLY reason I mentioned it was that you do have the one of the pair. In the Nikon world it's a trinity - 12-24, 24-70, & 70-200.

    You won't regret getting the convenience lens now and upgrading at some later point if you decide you want to. But if it's something you think you might do I would think about whether you would sell the lens you are currently looking at or add on. If sell then sell. If add on then I would look at either the 14-140/150 or 45-175 and not the 40/45-150 options. The 14-### options give you that convenient all in one zoom when you're out and don't want to carry stuff. The 45-175 gives you that extra 25mm (50mm angle of view) extra and might be a better complement to the 35-100.

    Just food for thought.
     
  9. jsusilo

    jsusilo Mu-43 Veteran

    233
    Aug 28, 2012
    Does the Revised 2nd version of Oly 40-150 R has better build quality than the first version? They are on sale now at Olympus online store.
     
  10. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    As far as I am aware the differences between these two are primarily cosmetic. The R version does look a bit better (to my eye) than the earlier version, but it retains the plastic body and I wouldn't expect that the feel is much different. To be fair, the "build quality" of the lens is fine, it's just that it feels a bit cheap (for lack of a better term) compared to the Panasonic lens.
     
  11. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Cosmetics and the lens coating, which is a better match for the newer AF system (supposedly).
     
  12. dd1

    dd1 Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Sep 9, 2011
    I had both, and currently only have the 45-175 as I only needed one and I could see the difference in image quality pretty easily.

    Whether I had a poor 40-150 or have a good 45-175 I don't know, but even printed at 8x10 there were discernable differences.
     
  13. savvy

    savvy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    714
    Sep 28, 2012
    SE Essex, UK
    Les
    Not better build quality, still plastic body and plastic mount, its an AF improvement.

    From Photozone on the M.Zuiko DIGITAL ED 40-150mm 4-5.6 R MSC

    "Given its specs it is a mid-range tele zoom lens suitable for a variety applications such as basic wildlife or portrait photography. The "R" model is an improved version of the initial 40-150mm which has been specifically improved regarding AF operations using the new MSC (Movie-Still-compatible) AF drive."
     
  14. cameranut

    cameranut Mu-43 Rookie

    10
    Mar 14, 2013
    Virginia Beach, Va
    Joe

    WOW!-- your google is better than mine ! both B&H and Adorama show $363 for me [I missed Samy's-- but cannot find the deal on CompSource except thru your link].... I also just might bite on that deal-- it now showing $206 vs. your $195
     
  15. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    Very weird. I guess maybe Google has learned enough about me through my search habits that they only show me the cheapskate deals.

    It's up to $206 on CompSource for me as well now. Still a very good deal.