how foolish am I ; Oly em10 + oly 40-150 2.8

rienm wrote:

I used to make pictures with a Nikon D80 + 18-200 VR for several years; because I felt that the combination was to heavy and bulky the last years I hardly used it, instead I used a Panasonic DMC-TZ7.......

I wanted more and better,last year I bought the OMD-EM10+ 14-42 EZ, like the EM10 but not the 14-42EZ, too soft and don't like the electric zooming...

So... I bought the Oly 25 1.8, Oly 45 1.8 and Pana 14 2.5 . Much nicer pictures. I missed a zoom,wanted the " best" and bought the Oly 12-40 2.8.

Most of the time I use the 12-40, if I want to go light or in darker situations most of the time the 50 1.8. I am very satisfied with all those lenses,but.....miss tele..

How often will I use the tele, I am just a enthusiastic photographer not a professional!

So the 14-145 4.0-5.6 ? Cheap but I am afraid I won't like the quality of the taken pictures, spoiled as I am with the 12-40 and primes.

The 40-150 2.8 ? I can afford it, but.... still pricy, heavy.... What was the reason I left Nikon.. too bulky and heavy.... ?

And the combination with the EM10 ( with grip) Anyone experiences with the combination?

So what a fool am I when I buy the 40-150 2.8?

Thanks,

Rien

I spent six months just using my E-M10 with the EGC-1 grip, 12-40mm f/2.8, and the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8. I looked at the 40-150mm f/2.8 but anything that comes with its own tripod mount is too big and heavy for me. The 35-100mm f/2.8 is a great lens, is slightly longer but lighter than the 12-40mm, and the image quality is excellent.