Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Started May 3, 2016 | Discussions
RSSrsvp Veteran Member • Posts: 3,251
Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

 RSSrsvp's gear list:RSSrsvp's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +1 more
Harvey Melvin Richards Regular Member • Posts: 295
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

I have both, and I don't consider the 4.0 to 5.6 to be a waste of $, even though I no longer use it. It can be a really great lens, and it's significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper than the PRO.

 Harvey Melvin Richards's gear list:Harvey Melvin Richards's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +9 more
clengman
clengman Senior Member • Posts: 1,976
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

It's quite good, worth every penny.

 clengman's gear list:clengman's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 +6 more
princecody
princecody Senior Member • Posts: 2,082
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?
3

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

The Olympus 40-150mm Pro is my Favorite lens Period in any system πŸ˜€πŸ‘πŸ»πŸ‘πŸ» You can see here for yourself here https://www.flickr.com/photos/princecody/albums/72157647525749104

 princecody's gear list:princecody's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro Leica Nocticron 42.5mm Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro +3 more
daddyo Forum Pro • Posts: 12,670
A waste of money? I don't think so...
16

For the price is almost dumb not to own it -- even if kept as a backup.

It's a sharp, lightweight lens.

-- hide signature --

God Bless,
Greg
www.imagismphotos.com
www.mccroskery.zenfolio.com
www.pbase.com/daddyo

 daddyo's gear list:daddyo's gear list
Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro
RaymondR
RaymondR Senior Member • Posts: 2,489
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?
3

much more than "half decent," it is one of the better value propositions in m4/3 in my opinion.  I got it as part of a two lens kit when I purchased my first m4/3 camera five years ago and I still have it and have no plans of ever getting rid of it, though it has seen some reduced usage since I got the Panny PRO 35-100.  My sample softens just a bit when fully racked out to 150mm but up to about 135mm - 144mm it is sharp and with good color rendering.  It is small and light and when the light is good it is a joy to use.

-- 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
SkiHound Veteran Member • Posts: 3,855
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

It's remarkably good for what it is. It's small, light, and is optically very solid. Build quality is kind of meh but it probably offers the best performance/price ratio any native m43 lens. I certainly can't think of a better value. Except for focal length, it's not fair to compare to the 40-150 pro. But the pro is much bigger, much heavier, and much more expensive.

Astrotripper Veteran Member • Posts: 8,338
No it's not

It's a good lens. Once you get it in your hands, it becomes patently obvious why it's so cheap. But I found it to be perfectly fine in terms of image quality it produces. It won't blow you away, but there's nothing much wrong with it. I stand by what I wrote in my review of it some time ago.

Obviously, as with every lens, you need to test your copy for defects, as there's always a chance to get a stinker.

 Astrotripper's gear list:Astrotripper's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Olympus PEN E-PL1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +14 more
OP RSSrsvp Veteran Member • Posts: 3,251
Re: No it's not

I realize it is a cheaply made plastic body which accounts for the light weight. However based on the comments above I think I will give it a shot as the price is right.

Can anyone tell me if there is any difference in the build quality or the quality of the pictures that are taken between the black and silver versions?

 RSSrsvp's gear list:RSSrsvp's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +1 more
Len_Gee
Len_Gee Veteran Member • Posts: 9,880
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?
2

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

Depends on what you shoot, how critical are you about IQ, and your budget. Be honest with your self-assessment, not just dreaming.   Post a couple of pics you typically take.

So, is price of no concern for you? If not, then get the 40-150 f/2.8 Pro. πŸ‘πŸ‘

Good luck and report back your purchase decision.

Lena

-- hide signature --

Like others here, I suffer from chronic GAS.
Gear Acquisition Syndrome.
a few hundred nautical miles SW : 17º 52S, 149º 56W

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Olympus OM-D E-M10 IV Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 Fisheye Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +4 more
richj20 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,217
It's a wonderful lens.

I had the original 40-150mm and used it until Panasonic released its 45-150mm which has Image Stabilization.

I found the Olympus lens a pleasure to use in many different photographic situations. I posted some photographs several years ago.

Olympus 40-150mm

- Richard

-- hide signature --
 richj20's gear list:richj20's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Sony a7R II
richj20 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,217
Re: No it's not

Rssrsvp wrote:

Can anyone tell me if there is any difference in the build quality or the quality of the pictures that are taken between the black and silver versions?

I had the black original, and my brother had the silver version. We photographed together several times on trips and didn't find any difference between them.

- Richard

-- hide signature --
 richj20's gear list:richj20's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Sony a7R II
Len_Gee
Len_Gee Veteran Member • Posts: 9,880
Re: Silver.
5

Rssrsvp wrote:

I realize it is a cheaply made plastic body which accounts for the light weight. However based on the comments above I think I will give it a shot as the price is right.

Can anyone tell me if there is any difference in the build quality or the quality of the pictures that are taken between the black and silver versions?

The silver version weighs more due to the silver used. And the silver reflects more light.

Good luck on your lens journey.

Lena

-- hide signature --

Like others here, I suffer from chronic GAS.
Gear Acquisition Syndrome.
a few hundred nautical miles SW : 17º 52S, 149º 56W

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Olympus OM-D E-M10 IV Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 Fisheye Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +4 more
D Knisely Senior Member • Posts: 2,053
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

For $99, I had zero expectations. But, was I ever wrong. At least my copy is quite adequately sharp @ 16 Pixel sensor levels. Sure, the microcontrast is not as good as the better primes or the pro zooms (my other lenses are all excellent Olympus primes, plus the awesome PanaLeica 15/1.7). However, the images process well with a little extra structure and loving care. CA and distortion are automatically addressed. With its wide zoom range, size, and weight, it is always in my pocket or on the camera for daytime urban work. I'm surprised how many shareable images have resulted from this lens!

https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=25338714%40N00&view_all=1&text=40150R

A few here:

62mm; f/8

150mm; f/5.6.  I will shoot this lens wide open all day long.

40mm; f/5.6.

Doug

 D Knisely's gear list:D Knisely's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro +3 more
addlightness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,236
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Don't underestimate the 40-150mm R - though I rarely need that focal range but when I do, I'd not hesitate to use it.  For that money, you'll get every penny worth.

 addlightness's gear list:addlightness's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +10 more
mring1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,423
Check the sales...
2

Any dollars that you spend over about $120 is a waste.  It's frequently on sale for $120 and even less New In Box.

Is the 40-150/2.8 better?  Yes and by all accounts, it's amazing.  There's a lot of folks out there who have and use both.  And there's folks like me who can't swing the cost.  So, I stop down 1/2 stop and use the little one.  It's the lens I have.  It's arguably the best value in the entire line.  Almost the only lens which made the transition from 4/3s to m4/3s effortlessly and with no compromise in quality.

I pair my little 40-150 with my Oly 12-40/2.8.  Yeah...seriously.   Understand the limits of the little kit lens, work to its strengths, work around its limitations.  It really works.

 mring1's gear list:mring1's gear list
Fujifilm X100T Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M5 III Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS +3 more
Lichtspiel
Lichtspiel Senior Member • Posts: 2,420
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Len_Gee wrote:

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

Depends on what you shoot, how critical are you about IQ, and your budget. Be honest with your self-assessment, not just dreaming. Post a couple of pics you typically take.

So, is price of no concern for you? If not, then get the 40-150 f/2.8 Pro. πŸ‘πŸ‘

Good luck and report back your purchase decision.

Lena

But... it is not only the cost that speaks for the cheaper lens. How about weight, and size? I mainly went MFT for the lower weight and size, and considering how sharp, light, and small the non-Pro is, I never even considered the Pro.

Matter of fact, when my lens gave out, I never hesitated to re-buy exactly the same one (refurb for $100, whatta deal).

Now if I could get a (theoretical) 70-200 for a similar low price, weight, and small size, I'd be thrilled. But there isn't anything near that. I had the 75-300 for a short while, but the softness at full tele, and the slowness of the lens (aperture-wise) made me return it quickly. It was also pretty heavy - compared to the 40-150R.

But yes... if you want THE BEST, your funds are not limited, and the weight and size don't put you off... the 40-150 Pro is pro-bably a fine choice.

 Lichtspiel's gear list:Lichtspiel's gear list
Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus 8mm F1.8 Fisheye Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +3 more
OP RSSrsvp Veteran Member • Posts: 3,251
Re: Check the sales...

mring1 wrote:

Any dollars that you spend over about $120 is a waste. It's frequently on sale for $120 and even less New In Box.

The only place I can find it for less than the current $149.99 sales price is on eBay and would like to purchase it now.

 RSSrsvp's gear list:RSSrsvp's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +1 more
pierpail Regular Member • Posts: 100
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

I bough it, then the PRO version... and I stop to use the non-Pro version even if my comparative tests have shown that they are nearly equivalent in sharpness in the middle of the frame, but obviously less good on the edges of the frame. My behaviour (using the PRO version) is quite paradoxal if you consider the over-weight to carry versus the improvment of sharpness : I think this choice becomes nevertheless necessary if you forecast to take pictures of moving subjets in poor light conditions.

Now, the real question for me, would be more about 'non-Pro version 40-140 versus the 14-150 ' ! Indeed, according to my tests, the 14-150 II is as good as the 40-150 non-PRO version on the 40-150 range, and you reduce A LOT your switchings of lenses...

I hope having carried a lot of confusion/questioning in your mind !!!

-- hide signature --

pierpail

RoelHendrickx
RoelHendrickx Forum Pro • Posts: 27,137
Re: Is buying the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R a waste of money?

Rssrsvp wrote:

Currently Olympus has the M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 R on sale for only $149. Is this lens half decent?

I know this is not an apples to apples comparison but should I wait and and really fill up the piggy bank for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO which sells for about $1400?

I own both.

The F2.8 is the better lens.

But the F4-F5.6 is the better value for money.

The F2.8 is better but not 10x as good (while it is 10x as expensive).

The F4-F5.6  really is a very very good lens in a small package at a low price.

If the weather is fine and I want to go light, I do not hesitate taking it instead of the F2.8.

-- hide signature --

Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: http://www.roelh.zenfolio.com

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads