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

Started Jun 10, 2015 | User reviews
Thorfinn
Thorfinn Regular Member • Posts: 143
Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?

I was part of my fathers heritage. He got it as part of e-PL3 kit. I paid nothing. I do not use it.

The pictures are sharp enough, no reasonable pillow, no fugly bouquet. You get a 300mm compared to 35mm film - amazing and it is cheap.

It is just because it is a 5,6 on four thirds sensor. No indoor available light and a large depth of field. That are the reasons why Olympus makes the 40-150 2.8 PRO (with a totally different price tag). For the rest of us:  Save the money, save some more and go for the Olympus 75 1.8.

 Thorfinn's gear list:Thorfinn's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus PEN-F Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake +10 more
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R
Telephoto zoom lens • Micro Four Thirds • V315030SU000
Announced: Jun 30, 2011
Thorfinn's score
2.0
Average community score
4.2
Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Martin Ocando
MOD Martin Ocando Veteran Member • Posts: 6,434
Not very fair
10

I'd think you review is not very fair with the 40-150mm. You can't compare a premium lens like the 75mm with one of the less expensive lenses in Olympus lineup. The 40-150mm delivers very good quality for the price, is slow, no question on that matter, but you can almost buy 8 40-150s and one 75 with the same money. So, you can have a bag with a few lenses, covering a wider range of focal lengths, instead of one single telephoto lens.

I'd say, get your lens collection first, maybe not spending too much in a single focal length, until you decide what is your style, and you preferred photographic subject, and then start investing in specialty lenses, like fisheyes and super fast telephotos.

Unless you are rich, and this conversation have no meaning at all.

Saying that investing on the 40-150 you should save for the 75, is like saying don't get that toyota corolla, instead save for an Aston Martin.

-- hide signature --

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

 Martin Ocando's gear list:Martin Ocando's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +11 more
Ulfric M Douglas Veteran Member • Posts: 4,828
Re: Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?
1

This review is trolling.

Readers : please do not pay any attention to the troll.

[/thread]

-- hide signature --

Cheksa wrote:
You're evil Ulfric.

Ben Herrmann
Ben Herrmann Forum Pro • Posts: 21,079
Please be aware that...
8

English is not his first language.  And when trying to get across all the points (of any conversion) in another language, much can be lost in translation.  His comments here "may" appear as cold and terse towards this lens, but I'm betting that much was lost in translation (up to a point).

All I can say is that as an English speaking person, if I tried to converse in another language - especially trying to write as such, I'd probably screw up quite a bit of conversations.

-- hide signature --

Have a great one....
Bernd (Ben) W. Herrmann
North Carolina, USA
link

 Ben Herrmann's gear list:Ben Herrmann's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm X30 Olympus E-330 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EOS M +15 more
bradevans Contributing Member • Posts: 969
Re: Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?
5

Its an interesting thing here...

The OP paid nothing for the lens and doesn't much care for it.

Others have paid $99, $119, $149 and see great value for their investment.

 bradevans's gear list:bradevans's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm 1:3.5 Macro +13 more
RaymondR
RaymondR Senior Member • Posts: 2,488
How many stars were lost in translation?
8

Ben Herrmann wrote:

English is not his first language. And when trying to get across all the points (of any conversion) in another language, much can be lost in translation. His comments here "may" appear as cold and terse towards this lens, but I'm betting that much was lost in translation (up to a point).

All I can say is that as an English speaking person, if I tried to converse in another language - especially trying to write as such, I'd probably screw up quite a bit of conversations.

So maybe in the translation we lost a star or two from his actual rating of the lens?  This is not a 2 star lens no matter what language you are native in.  I think the community overall rating is much more accurate.  The OP simply has a bias against slow lenses.

-- hide signature --

RaymondR

 RaymondR's gear list:RaymondR's gear list
Sony a7 II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Sony FE 24-105mm F4 +2 more
Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 39,731
Sure sounds like it.

That isn't so much a review as it is a comment on your relationship with zooms, if you ask me.   I'm not complaining, mind you.  

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T4
Hen3ry
Hen3ry Forum Pro • Posts: 18,218
Re: Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?
1

Thorfinn wrote:

I was part of my fathers heritage. He got it as part of e-PL3 kit. I paid nothing. I do not use it.

The pictures are sharp enough, no reasonable pillow, no fugly bouquet. You get a 300mm compared to 35mm film - amazing and it is cheap.

It is just because it is a 5,6 on four thirds sensor. No indoor available light and a large depth of field. That are the reasons why Olympus makes the 40-150 2.8 PRO (with a totally different price tag). For the rest of us: Save the money, save some more and go for the Olympus 75 1.8.

Try using it, Thorfinn, and you might find a place for it. It is an amazing little lens, very sharp, very smooth micro-contrast.

Bear in mind that at shorter focal lengths, it is f4 or thereabouts, only one stop slower than the 5x more expensive f2.8. That is not a lot of difference.

-- hide signature --

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

 Hen3ry's gear list:Hen3ry's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic G85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 45-175mm F4.0-5.6 ASPH OIS +7 more
bgalb
bgalb Senior Member • Posts: 2,179
Re: Please be aware that...
3

+1.  On an international forum (especially) one should never be judgmental about:

1. Spelling

2. Syntax

3. Perceived emotional tone

-- hide signature --

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Clarkes 3rd Law

 bgalb's gear list:bgalb's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 45-175mm F4.0-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +4 more
papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Show me a better value lens....
3

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

-- hide signature --

"In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act".
George Orwell.
http://bit.ly/1BIquIF

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Thorfinn
OP Thorfinn Regular Member • Posts: 143
Re: Not very fair

Martin Ocando wrote:

I'd think you review is not very fair with the 40-150mm. You can't compare a premium lens like the 75mm with one of the less expensive lenses in Olympus lineup.

The stars are not a "performace for money". The price tag is quite known. The performance for money division can be done by everybody.

So the scale is:

*** for something innovative, extraordinary, more than good craftmenship - let us say the e-p1, the Bessa III, or talking lenses: a summicron or a noctilux

**** is for something of a very decent craftsmenship - like a Zuiko 75 1.8; a Zeiss T*, a Voigtländer, The Olympus 40-150 is made out of plastics,

*** is for something worth to spend money on. I own the Oly 40-150 for 1 year now.. I did not spend money on it. I yust made som sample shots and sorted it in category III (Cat 1: bag, Cat 2: living home, Cat 3: storage room)

** is nice to own

* is "passed"

Less is fail - e.g. the Oly body cap lens.

[...] Unless you are rich, and this conversation have no meaning at all.

No I am not rich - I use m4/3 not Leica M. But there is a difference and it would not be fair tagging 4 for this lens and the same for the PRO version. What would be the meaning of spending all the money on a PRO lens?

Saying that investing on the 40-150 you should save for the 75, is like saying don't get that toyota corolla, instead save for an Aston Martin.

The 75 1.8 isn't that expensive here in Europe. As you are in british cars: Go for a Caterham. Simple and without compromises: No ABS, ESP, stereo, aircon, doors- just your right foot. Damn I have 2 girls, so i have to make compromises. No Caterham, nor Leica for Thorfinn

m4/3 is a very very good compromise. The engineers of the Pen were ingenious - look at my stars on the e-p1. But 4/3 is a compromise. Moving up the sensor/film scale, you get more possibilities with 24*36 or a Leica S or Hasselblad, a Phase One - film/sensor size matters!

Have you ever made flash pictures with a leaf shutter lens? After I did, I never liked to make a flash picture with curtain shutter again.

As a boy I was used to Practica and Zeiss Jena Lenses. One day I was allowed to use my friends Yashica with his fathers Zeiss T* Lenses (under daddys careful supervision). It was like looking in another world. 5 years later using the Hasselblad 500 was stepping in another world.

The Olympus 40-150 keeps you in the world of a kit lens. It just makes more zoom. one last time back to cars: The Oly 40-150 is no car, it is just a the other horse.

 Thorfinn's gear list:Thorfinn's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P1 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus PEN-F Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake +10 more
Olymore
Olymore Senior Member • Posts: 1,808
Re: Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?

Perhaps it's because you're a lens snob.

Good lenses don't have to be fast, especially with the high iso capability of modern cameras.

And good lenses don't have to be big, heavy or expensive.

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people.
Those that understand binary and those that don't.

 Olymore's gear list:Olymore's gear list
Olympus E-M1
Wu Jiaqiu
Wu Jiaqiu Forum Pro • Posts: 26,835
Re: Show me a better value lens....

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

 Wu Jiaqiu's gear list:Wu Jiaqiu's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D2Xs Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 J3 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +3 more
zappa74 Forum Member • Posts: 50
Indoor available light

Could be better? Sure, always can. For US$99 (B&H with EM10), couldn´t ask for more....

Martin Ocando
MOD Martin Ocando Veteran Member • Posts: 6,434
Re: Not very fair
1

Thorfinn wrote:

The stars are not a "performace for money". The price tag is quite known. The performance for money division can be done by everybody.

So the scale is:

*** for something innovative, extraordinary, more than good craftmenship - let us say the e-p1, the Bessa III, or talking lenses: a summicron or a noctilux

**** is for something of a very decent craftsmenship - like a Zuiko 75 1.8; a Zeiss T*, a Voigtländer, The Olympus 40-150 is made out of plastics,

*** is for something worth to spend money on. I own the Oly 40-150 for 1 year now.. I did not spend money on it. I yust made som sample shots and sorted it in category III (Cat 1: bag, Cat 2: living home, Cat 3: storage room)

** is nice to own

* is "passed"

Less is fail - e.g. the Oly body cap lens.

Well, in this case, I believe you should compare pears to pears. Just the same as DPreview compares DSLRs with DSLRs, Mirrorless with Mirrorless, and P&S to P&S, and not between them, in the case of lenses, you should be comparing premium lenses with their alike's, so I'd compare the Oly 40-150 vs the Panny 45-150, which are in a similar price range, performance, and build quality. That way you can make an informed decision on which one to invest on. In the case of the 75, I'd compare it with the ones you just mentioned, a Vogtländer or a Zeiss, but not with a poor plastic zoom. Is just not fair.

Comparing a super fast and expensive prime to a very inexpensive zoom is no comparison at all.

So, to the point of the scale, In my specific case which I have both the 40-150 and 45-150, I'd rate the Panny to 3 stars in image quality, and the Oly to 5 stars. On build quality, the other way around, 3 or 3.5 the Oly, and 5 the Panny. But overall, I'd give 3.5 to the Panny and 4.5 to the Oly, because simply, to me, image quality is more important than build quality. Others might have different opinion and rating than me.

No I am not rich - I use m4/3 not Leica M. But there is a difference and it would not be fair tagging 4 for this lens and the same for the PRO version. What would be the meaning of spending all the money on a PRO lens?

Again, because you are not comparing similar lenses, just a pro with an entry level lens.

The 75 1.8 isn't that expensive here in Europe. As you are in british cars: Go for a Caterham. Simple and without compromises: No ABS, ESP, stereo, aircon, doors- just your right foot. Damn I have 2 girls, so i have to make compromises. No Caterham, nor Leica for Thorfinn

m4/3 is a very very good compromise. The engineers of the Pen were ingenious - look at my stars on the e-p1. But 4/3 is a compromise. Moving up the sensor/film scale, you get more possibilities with 24*36 or a Leica S or Hasselblad, a Phase One - film/sensor size matters!

Have you ever made flash pictures with a leaf shutter lens? After I did, I never liked to make a flash picture with curtain shutter again.

As a boy I was used to Practica and Zeiss Jena Lenses. One day I was allowed to use my friends Yashica with his fathers Zeiss T* Lenses (under daddys careful supervision). It was like looking in another world. 5 years later using the Hasselblad 500 was stepping in another world.

The Olympus 40-150 keeps you in the world of a kit lens. It just makes more zoom. one last time back to cars: The Oly 40-150 is no car, it is just a the other horse.

Hehe, no, I'm not into British cars, I just happen to like Aston Martins, just to watch them on the movies, and dream on being James Bond

I know what you mean, in my case I always had a Nikon film camera, and sadly no access to nothing with a * in it. Just a few years ago I purchased a used m42 mount 35mm f:2.4 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon, and I was so excited, My God, my first Carl Zeiss, I though. Sadly, the front element is loose, and I can't seem to find a way to center it correctly, so images are not sharp across the frame. There are no reliable shops here in Panama, maybe next time I travel to the US, I will bring it with me and leave it on a shop for repair. I really like the quality of the lens.

You are right the 40-150 is like a kit zoom lens, and in fact it is, is mostly sold as a 2 lens kit with many cameras. Although, I think it performs admirably for what it costs, and that is why I believe it should get a very high rating, among their similar, and not compared to either the 75mm 1.8 or the Olympus 40-150mm 2.8 Pro.

-- hide signature --

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

 Martin Ocando's gear list:Martin Ocando's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +11 more
Paul De Bra
Paul De Bra Forum Pro • Posts: 12,766
I do not like slow zoom lenses either.

That does not mean they are bad. I had the 75-300 and it was a very good copy. I had ordered the black one and was sent a silver one by mistake. I took a few shots with it and then mailed the shop about the mistake and also that I was keeping the silver one because it was so good.

I still sold it later to get the 40-150 f/2.8 and TC. Almost every time I wanted to use a long lens the small aperture was holding me back. I think that rating a lens low because you don't like slow zoom lenses is wrong. But even when the optical quality is good you still may not like it.

The only slow zoom lens I am actually happy with is my very good copy of the Panasonic 14-42X pancake zoom. I like that because it is so compact (and has good image quality). Generally though I need f/4 or faster too often to continue to use slow lenses.

-- hide signature --

Enjoying the Olympus OM-D E-M5.
Public pictures at http://debra.zenfolio.com/.

 Paul De Bra's gear list:Paul De Bra's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +3 more
Hithertoo Senior Member • Posts: 1,841
Re: Is it because I do not like slow telephoto zoom lenses?
1

Meh.... Taken with the 40-150 at 150mm... see for yourself... Of course there are limitations, but this lens is a razor sharp lens even on the long end. Not sure what your complaints are other than the fact that its not faster on the long end?

Deal with it or cry into your three Martini lunch then go off and buy the more expensive 40-150 F/2.8 otherwise go home and stop complaining.

 Hithertoo's gear list:Hithertoo's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +7 more
papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: Show me a better value lens....

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.

-- hide signature --

"In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act".
George Orwell.
http://bit.ly/1BIquIF

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Wu Jiaqiu
Wu Jiaqiu Forum Pro • Posts: 26,835
Re: Show me a better value lens....

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

 Wu Jiaqiu's gear list:Wu Jiaqiu's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D2Xs Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 J3 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +3 more
papillon_65
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: Show me a better value lens....

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.

-- hide signature --

"In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act".
George Orwell.
http://bit.ly/1BIquIF

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads