Need help. Oly m43 40-150 vs 4/3 50-200 SWD

Specificaly
1) M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R

https://us.buyolympus.com/lenses/m-zuiko-digital-lenses-pen-series/m-zuiko-digital-ed-40-150mm-f4-0-5-6-r.html

vs

2) Zuiko Lens ED 50-200mm f2.8-3.5 SWD

https://us.buyolympus.com/lenses/zuiko-digital/high-grade-lenses/zuiko-lens-ed-50-200mm-f2-8-3-5-swd.html
+
MMF-3 Adapter

I know the 50-200 is a much better lens optically, but it is also bigger, 5 times heavier (putting the whole set into SLR territory) and 8 times more expensive (the 40-150 can be had for $150 with a camera). And requires MMF-3.

So the question is, which one will autofocus faster on a m43 body in large not so well lit gyms? Especially for AF-C and video. Does anybody have a first-hand experience to compare them?

peevee1 said:

So the question is, which one will autofocus faster on a m43 body in large not so well lit gyms? Especially for AF-C and video. Does anybody have a first-hand experience to compare them?

Click to expand...

The 50-200 will focus especially slowly on m4/3rds bodies.

The aperture of the 40-150 might not get you a decent shutterspeed in a dim gym but it focuses quickly on the current generation of m4/3rds bodies.

The lens (and the AF-C ) you're really looking for does not yet exist. :|

If you want more reach than the 40-150, your best bet is the (4/3) 70-300. You still need the 4/3 adapter, but it is CDAF enabled, giving you reasonably fast AF. My non SWD 50-200 takes forever to focus on my E-P3.

Jeff.

peevee1 said:

I know the 50-200 is a much better lens optically, but it is also bigger....

Click to expand...

WAY bigger. Here's an image of the 40-150 and 75-300 Micro Zuikos next to the 50-200 SWD..



I would not do it. Besides the size, the AF on the SWD lens on the Pen is a little wacky. Of all my four-thirds Zuikos, the 50-200 was the least accurate. It is now gone.

peevee1 said:

So the question is, which one will autofocus faster on a m43 body in large not so well lit gyms? Especially for AF-C and video. Does anybody have a first-hand experience to compare them?

Click to expand...

Continuous AF? Neither is great, but the 50-200 SWD is a complete and utter no-go.

--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

Ulfric M Douglas said:

peevee1 said:

So the question is, which one will autofocus faster on a m43 body in large not so well lit gyms? Especially for AF-C and video. Does anybody have a first-hand experience to compare them?

Click to expand...

The 50-200 will focus especially slowly on m4/3rds bodies.

Click to expand...

Do you have a personal experience with SWD lenses on m43 bodies? Oly only mentions that SWD is twice as fast as the previous 50-200, and that is "compatible" with m43 through adapter, nothing about AF speed... Then after 100mm it could be f/3.5 on SWD vs f/5-f/5.6 on 40-150, so the sensor could have more light... Wouldn't it help with AF (a little wishful thinking on my part here)?

Ulfric M Douglas said:

The aperture of the 40-150 might not get you a decent shutterspeed in a dim gym but it focuses quickly on the current generation of m4/3rds bodies.

The lens (and the AF-C ) you're really looking for does not yet exist. :|

Click to expand...

Gotta work with what we have. The biggest problem/omission of all mirrorless systems is lack of fast zooms. Panasonic 35-100/2.8 could not come fast enough, although 100mm is probably not enough reach for me.

Thanks a lot, guys! Looks like you saved me a grand and a lot of hurt.

Fast action in bad light is where m43 still lags behind other systems. The 20 and oly 45 primes are a good choice, presumably 12 and 25 too, the 75 and 35-100 coming out soon should be good, forget anything else.

peevee1 said:

Ulfric M Douglas said:

The 50-200 will focus especially slowly on m4/3rds bodies.

Click to expand...

Do you have a personal experience with SWD lenses on m43 bodies? Oly only mentions that SWD is twice as fast as the previous 50-200, and that is "compatible" with m43 through adapter, nothing about AF speed...

Click to expand...

Yes, my experience is that although SWD speeds up DSLR Phase-detect AF it has the opposite effect (heavier glass elements have a huge slowing effect too) on contrast-detect AF with micro bodies.

Edit: the NEW e-M5 (and to a lesser extent the Lumix G3 & GX1 ) has such improved high-ISO that it will improve the low-light fast action hit rates simply by bumping ISO one or two whole stops for a similar image result ... even using the mediocre apertures in this here m4/3rds 40-150 which is otherwise rather good.