The Superzoom which actually DOES it

Again, without testing I think the Olympus is the best of the bunch. Also, the E-M5 CDAF just nails the focus better most of the time than the DSLRs I used with the other superzooms (Canon 30D and 60D, Sony A700).

The EM5 does do a lot better than those cameras in my experience too ..

I didn`t consider the Olympus 14-150 because it got poor reports compared to the Original Panasonic F4-5.8 especially for across the frame performance at full zoom (I compress landscapes a lot) but the reports here on the new Panasonic F3.5-5.6 got me interested,

It comfortably beats my Press lens across the range -- the hidden Gem Sigma 18-200 DC-OS_II (Launched 2012) which is better than all the previous Sigmas and the Tamron 18-270 variants let alone the canons and Nikons . the new panny kills it, I guess its easier to make a 10X zoom for a far smaller sensor than an 11 to 16X zoom for APS-C (the Sigmas and tamrons are built down to a price too)

By the way, what happened to your GX7? Did you have to send it in for repair?

Yes, it has dust on the actual sensor under the SSWF like the GM1 I had did - I figured that it`d be better to get it cleaned out instead of playing postal tennis with multiple GX7s

After you have a chance to use the lens with OIS please let us know how that goes.

I will

One thing I hated about the Tamron 18-270mm VC was that the VC mechanism would go to sleep after a short time so it would have to wake up (not talking about the camera here, talking about the lens VC)

I hated that too but the VC was very good at slow shutter speeds though and the optics on the NON-PZD one weren`t bad at 270mm wideopen (the PZD version lost that) .. the Panny 14-140-II is in a different league though

lenses suffer from this problem. I don't know if the latest VC lenses are fixed. The VC was very effective once it was up and running though. I wonder if the Panasonic OIS has this problem?

the only Panny OIS I had an issue with was the 45-200 - it was pretty ineffective at 200mm mosty of the time because it jittered - thankfully the lens had a switch to knock it off ! . I found the 100-300 was infinately better . the 45-200 is an old lens though , the optics weren`t up to much either . I expect the 14-140 to be at least as good for OIS as the 45-150 which is pretty good considering the 45-150 is using the old "Mega" system , the "POWER OIS" in the 14-140 ought to be pretty damn good .

It does Pee me off that OIS is running all the time in the lens when mounted on the EM5 but I guess it has to keep the stabilizer element centered