40-150 vs 45-150 revisited

ristar · Mar 7, 2015

Unfortunately, the Oly 45mm is the only lens I have that I can compare with my Panny 45-150mm. So I took a couple of quick shots under these settings:

1. Shot from my E-M10

2. 0-sec anti-shock, with 2 sec timer

3. Shot on table top tripod

4. No stabilization

5. f4, ISO-200, aperture priority

6. I switched lenses without moving the tripod. As you can see, the field of view is slightly different.

Under these conditions, can one tell if I have a good or bad copy of the Panny 45-150mm?

Panny 45-150mm

Oly 45mm

Martin Ocando · Mar 7, 2015

I'm beginning to think is not a bad copy, but a less performing lens overall, compared to the Oly. It might be good if sharpened properly, but apparently the Oly outperforms it greatly.

open it at 100%

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

ristar · Mar 7, 2015

Martin Ocando said:
I'm beginning to think is not a bad copy, but a less performing lens overall, compared to the Oly. It might be good if sharpened properly, but apparently the Oly outperforms it greatly.

open it at 100%

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Sorry if I was not clear. I can obviously see my Oly 45mm is much sharper even without opening it to 100%. My question is, given I don't have another Panny 45-150mm or Oly 40-150mm, can anyone tell, from comparison to my Oly 45mm f1.8, whether my copy of the Panny 45-150mm is performing as expected.

I do realize it might not be possible to tell from such a comparison. I do note though, that every once in awhile you'll see a claim that the MFT kit lenses are so good that they are comparable to primes/pro zooms at the same apertures...

I am just unable to tell whether my expectations are too high for the Panny 45-150mm/Oly 40-150mm or if I just have a bad copy of the lens.

Martin Ocando · Mar 7, 2015

ristar said:
Martin Ocando said:

I'm beginning to think is not a bad copy, but a less performing lens overall, compared to the Oly. It might be good if sharpened properly, but apparently the Oly outperforms it greatly.

open it at 100%

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Click to expand...

Sorry if I was not clear. I can obviously see my Oly 45mm is much sharper even without opening it to 100%. My question is, given I don't have another Panny 45-150mm or Oly 40-150mm, can anyone tell, from comparison to my Oly 45mm f1.8, whether my copy of the Panny 45-150mm is performing as expected.

Oh oh, my bad. I thought you were comparing it to an Oly 40-150mm, now I realize you compared it with the Oly 45 1.8. Sorry.

Well, let's hope we see more comparisons, so we can determine if is really a bad copy thing, or a performance or design issue.

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

brentbrent · Mar 7, 2015

Martin Ocando said:
Aperture was as wide as the lens can provide at that focal length. I know those lenses can benefit by stopping down a bit, but realistically we use, or at least I use, the lenses wide open more often than not. So, how they behave wide open, is a concern for me.

It also looks to me like a bit darker exposure on some of the Panasonic shots. Perhaps that lens stops down quicker than the Oly? I think you should compare manual exposures and make sure that the aperture and shutter speed are the same for both lenses, even if that means that one of them is not wide open, if you really want to compare contrast.

I had the Oly and thought it was quite good, particularly for the price. Then I got the Pany as part of a two lens kit, and I thought it was a bit sharper. I also preferred its build, zoom and focus ring feel, metal mount, and IS for my Pany bodies, so I sold the Oly. I think the IQ of my Pany was very good both in terms of sharpness and contrast. I sold it when I got the 14-140 v.II.

Hen3ry · Mar 7, 2015

Martin Ocando said:
ristar said:

Martin Ocando said:

I'm beginning to think is not a bad copy, but a less performing lens overall, compared to the Oly. It might be good if sharpened properly, but apparently the Oly outperforms it greatly.

open it at 100%

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Click to expand...

Sorry if I was not clear. I can obviously see my Oly 45mm is much sharper even without opening it to 100%. My question is, given I don't have another Panny 45-150mm or Oly 40-150mm, can anyone tell, from comparison to my Oly 45mm f1.8, whether my copy of the Panny 45-150mm is performing as expected.

Click to expand...

Oh oh, my bad. I thought you were comparing it to an Oly 40-150mm, now I realize you compared it with the Oly 45 1.8. Sorry.

Well, let's hope we see more comparisons, so we can determine if is really a bad copy thing, or a performance or design issue.

…if the f1.8 45mm (which I also own) did not have a bit of an edge over it, I would be very disappointed in the 45!

--
Geoffrey Heard
Down and out in Rabaul in the South Pacific
http://rabaulpng.com/we-are-all-traveling-throug/i-waited-51-years-for-tavur.html

Martin Ocando · Mar 7, 2015

brentbrent said:
Martin Ocando said:

Aperture was as wide as the lens can provide at that focal length. I know those lenses can benefit by stopping down a bit, but realistically we use, or at least I use, the lenses wide open more often than not. So, how they behave wide open, is a concern for me.

Click to expand...

It also looks to me like a bit darker exposure on some of the Panasonic shots. Perhaps that lens stops down quicker than the Oly? I think you should compare manual exposures and make sure that the aperture and shutter speed are the same for both lenses, even if that means that one of them is not wide open, if you really want to compare contrast.

I had the Oly and thought it was quite good, particularly for the price. Then I got the Pany as part of a two lens kit, and I thought it was a bit sharper. I also preferred its build, zoom and focus ring feel, metal mount, and IS for my Pany bodies, so I sold the Oly. I think the IQ of my Pany was very good both in terms of sharpness and contrast. I sold it when I got the 14-140 v.II.

Exposure is exactly the same. I'm using M mode and the apertures were exactly the same for both lenses. What you see as being a bit darker is indeed lack of contrast on the Panny. I'm as disappointed as it can be, and I did spent the 250$ for it. Good thing I could make the switch at 0 cost. Well, actually the cost of having spent for a 250$ lens, and ending up with a 120$ worth of a lens. But since outperforms in such a way the more expensive one, I'm happy as a clam

I'm pretty sure is a bad copy, as demonstrated by your experience, which is different than mine. Is sad that I can't return the products that I purchase, since is a considerable cost that makes the return not worth it. I hope I could have someone in the states test them before sending them down to Panama.

But that shouldn't be my task. I blame the Panasonic QC, since they shouldn't allow a lens so flawed to go out to the stores.

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Voldenuit · Mar 7, 2015

JohnLock said:
I consider my 40-150 to be good in that it's about like your samples here. I don't have the Pan 45-150 to compare, but I do have the Pan 45-175 and consider that lens to be slightly, but distinctly-- particularly the contrast, better than ny Oly 40-150. I know not a direct comparison but relavant to me-- and they are competitors. I really like the 45-175 as it has internal zoom.

JL

Love my 45-175.

addlightness · Mar 7, 2015

I have the Oly's (R edition) but not the Pany's.

When I bought my 45mm f1.8 prime, I wanted to compare the 45mm prime IQ against 'something' and the closest 'something' was my Oly 40-150mm.

Shot both at f4.0 and I was pleasantly surprised at how good the pic from the zoom lens was. Slightly softer but more contrasty.

Bobby Rue Goldberg · Mar 7, 2015

Anders W said:
Bobby Rue Goldberg said:

ristar said:

Bobby Rue Goldberg said:

Martin Ocando said:

Bobby Rue Goldberg said:

Martin Ocando said:

All shots were tripod mounted. I didn't disabled the stabilizer, and I do have IBIS priority, so conditions were the same for both lenses.

ISO was fixed at ISO 400, Shutter speed 1/160th, 0 sec shutter shock on the E-M10. I used a PC sync cord connected to a hotshoe adapter, hooked to a studio strobe, attached with a softbox pointed to the subject.

Aperture was as wide as the lens can provide at that focal length. I know those lenses can benefit by stopping down a bit, but realistically we use, or at least I use, the lenses wide open more often than not. So, how they behave wide open, is a concern for me.

I can redo the test with IBIS off, just to rule that out.

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Click to expand...

For good measure, I would repeat these tests at 1/320s (or preferably even faster) to rule out shutter shock. If you get the same results, I'd say you have a quite poor copy.

Click to expand...

Since I'm using studio flash, I can't go above 1/200th. Besides, all thing being equal, if it were SS, it would have affected the Olympus as well.

Click to expand...

Probably but not necessarily. Different lenses, different bodies, and different body/lens combos can experience this issue worse at different shutter speeds, I believe.

And 1/160s is right in the danger zone for SS.

If you can't go above 1/200s, perhaps going slower to 1/30s or 1/40s would be a good idea, if you believe you can pull it off without significant risk of motion blur.

Anyway, I think you're right that SS is not likely the culprit. I think there's something wrong with the lens.

Anders W said:

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Martin is using the 0-sec anti-shock feature, so shutter shock shouldn't be the cause. What about not using flash and just using a long exposure time? You are testing on a tripod so that shouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

Again, probably, but not necessarily. I've seen reports of shutter shock with this feature. I believe the only thing that truly eliminates it is e-shutter.

Click to expand...

But the fact that he is shooting with flash definitely rules out the shutter-shock hypothesis. The duration of the flash is much shorter than the total exposure time.

OrdinarilyInordinate · Mar 7, 2015

Sorry to go off topic, but this seems like a good time to ask: just how much difference in resolution and contrast is there between Oly 14-150mm and Oly 40-150mm, if anyone's tried both. I've been considering swapping my lens to a different telephoto option, and budget options are welcome.

jalywol · Mar 7, 2015

I got the 40-150mm with my first M43 camera, an EPL1, and was always impressed with it.
A couple of years later, I picked up the 45-150mm shortly after it was released, when I bought a G5 together with it on special. In direct comparison, I didn't think the 45-150mm was even close to as good as the 40-150mm. I figured it was just the way the lens was, and ended up selling it when I sold the G5 a few months later (I kept the Oly lens, though).

Other people really like this lens though, so maybe there is just a fair bit of sample to sample variation. My results, however, were in line with yours.

-J

Paadus · Mar 7, 2015

Olympus täytyy olla todella hyvä, koska olen testannut Pana 45-150 vs Zuiko 50-200. / 100mm

Panasonic on terävämpi ja parempi kontrasti f7,1 And the corners much better

- http://www.fluidr.com/photos/jorma_hevonkoski/interesting

Bobby Rue Goldberg · Mar 7, 2015

jalywol said:
I got the 40-150mm with my first M43 camera, an EPL1, and was always impressed with it.
A couple of years later, I picked up the 45-150mm shortly after it was released, when I bought a G5 together with it on special. In direct comparison, I didn't think the 45-150mm was even close to as good as the 40-150mm. I figured it was just the way the lens was, and ended up selling it when I sold the G5 a few months later (I kept the Oly lens, though).

Other people really like this lens though, so maybe there is just a fair bit of sample to sample variation. My results, however, were in line with yours.

-J

I looked at three review sites for these two lenses, and I would say that the results on photozone.de and dxomark.com are about the same for both lenses. photozone.de did seem to favor the 45-150 on optical quality, but I'm not sure what on the results led them to favor it. They tested the edges as better on the 45-150 but the center was slightly sharper on the 40-150. ephotozine.com test results seems to clearly favor the 40-150.

I wonder if it's sample variation on these lenses or the review sites are testing the lenses in different ways than they're being used, because it seems all over the map. I've generally found DxO to be accurate on lenses for the way I use them. For all of my lenses, I think they've pretty much nailed the performance at different focal lengths and F-numbers.

I wish I had these lenses to compare.

Martin Ocando · Mar 8, 2015

Paadus said:
Olympus täytyy olla todella hyvä, koska olen testannut Pana 45-150 vs Zuiko 50-200. / 100mm

Panasonic on terävämpi ja parempi kontrasti f7,1 And the corners much better

- http://www.fluidr.com/photos/jorma_hevonkoski/interesting

Voldenuit · Mar 8, 2015

I thought I'd add to the noise by looking at the output of the 45-175X. Since I don't have the 40-150 or the 45-150 to compare, I compared it with two primes I had within the zoom range, the Pl45/2.8 macro and the Sigma DN 60/2.8.

Shot on tripod w GX7, E-shutter, IS off, 2s shutter delay, ISO 400. Combination of manual focus and AF, I took multiple shots and compared the sharpest samples between the lenses. Point of focus on Lincoln's eye.

Here's the comparison at 45mm (center crop):

LEFT: 45-175X @ 45/4.0; RIGHT: PL45/2.8 @ 45/4.0

And then at 60mm (center crop):

LEFT: 45-175X @ 60/4.5; RIGHT: DN60/2.8 @ 60/4.5

Unsurprisingly, the two primes are noticeably sharper and capture more detail. But then these are two of the sharpest primes in the m43 lineup (along with the Oly 60/2.8 and 75/1.8).

The same pattern holds at f/5.6 (not shown). The 45-175X sharpens up but so do the two primes; a similar delta remains.

EDIT: It's worth pointing out that this test was conducted at close focusing distances. The lenses may perform differently at different focusing distances. Also, because the test was not performed on a copy box, there may have been some misalignment between the plane of the bill and the sensor; I tried to eyeball it the best I could but noticed some focus plane differences (for one thing, the PL45.28 has a curved focal plane, but I also noticed the image was sharper towards the bottom on the 45/2.8 and towards the top on the 45-175X).

ristar · Mar 9, 2015

Thanks. Nice joke!

Summitron · Oct 13, 2020

I always want to sell this lens because it is so cheesy. So I tested it thoroughly, including against my Olly 75mm prime.
After I tested it, I bought a second one, now I have two cheesy lenses. I hated to buy it, but unfortunately the IQ is very good.

OLY23 · Oct 14, 2020

I purchased my “ plastic fantastic” years ago as a lark, and to have a “disposable” lens for less than desirable situations. It came to be one of my go-to lenses for so many subjects. I also own the 35-100 f4-5.6. I would rate them pretty close for IQ, but if I had to get rid of one of them, it probably wouldn’t be the Olympus.

40-150 vs 45-150 revisited

Forum Enthusiast

Community Leader

Forum Enthusiast

Community Leader

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Community Leader

Senior Member

Attachments

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Paadus

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Community Leader

Senior Member

Attachments

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts