Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

with this range in any format, I'd love to see it.

the Nikon 55-200 VR for DX bodies is a very good lens, very sharp and can be had cheaper than the Olympus lens

Not as sharp through the range as the 40-150mm according to the SLRgear widgets, definitely weaker at the longer end, 335g vs the Olympus 190g, so not far off being twice as heavy. Yes it does have VR but all the Olympus bodies have IBIS anyway. In summary, the Nikon is larger, heavier and doesn't perform as well, the price difference is negligible, £10-£15 difference when I checked on ebay. The 40-150mm is also very reliable, I've had four (2 in 4/3's versions), never had any issues with any of them, not sure about the Nikon but it couldn't be any better in that regard.

i didn't realise size and weight were an issue, 335g is really nothing,

That is the whole point of m4/3's, smaller lighter lenses mean the ability to carry a better selection and still save on size and weight.

i found the copy i had sharp as a tack at the long end so i am not sure what SLRgear are saying,

They did the tests not me.

it was very reliable and it produced images as good as anything i've seen from the Olympus lens, it's a great lens for next to nothing

I'm not sure how you quantify that? The 40-150mm consistently gets praised for it's performance against price, so copy variation doesn't appear to be too much of an issue, maybe there is more copy variation with the Nikon.