Very preliminary thoughts on the 40-150 F2.8

rsmithgi wrote:

1. For me, it's big. I've never owned any F2.8 zoom so it is a big change and will take getting used to but I think it will be worth it.

Definitely.

2. It is very sharp.

The sharpest M43 lens I know, but I never used the O 75 or the PL42,5; sharper than my O 12-40

3. Proper technique will be much more important than when using my Panny 45-150 F4 - 5.6. Several factors:

a. Hand holding is more difficult with a larger heavier lens. Motion blur from camera movement will be an issue.

On the opposite: the weight, i e. inert mass, of this lens works like Im Stab.

b. Depth of field is very shallow at times when wide open. I can see that focusing on the wrong eye will go from no big deal to missed shot.

Yes, lovely shallow DOF, and O bodies can be set to focus on the right eye.

c. Tracking moving soccer players will be harder due to the size and weight. I'm used to a very light setup and this will required some practice.

If you can do it with an other lens, you can do it with this one too (I can't).

4. It is a damn pretty lens.

Agree.

5. Built like a tank.

If tanks have a thin metal shell and are all plastic inside, yes.

8. Makes me want the E-M1 to get the better C-AF since photographing my son playing soccer was a big reason for the lens.

Your main problem will be the slow focus of this lens, probably there is a lot of glass to be moved inside.

Obviously, size and weight don't make it a walk around lens, for hiking I use the small F4-5,6 version.
And it makes you very conspicuous: everyone notices when you point this huge glass eye at him.

Peter