Very preliminary thoughts on the 40-150 F2.8

Just received it yesterday. Took a few of the dog (I'll spare everyone) and my son practicing soccer. Thoughts:

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.

2. It is very sharp.

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.

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.

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.

4. It is a damn pretty lens.

5. Built like a tank.

6. I need to rethink my camera bags and straps.

7. I need to try out my tripods and heads to make sure they are up to the task.

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.

rsmithgi wrote:

Just received it yesterday. Took a few of the dog (I'll spare everyone) and my son practicing soccer. Thoughts:

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.

Agree but also 1 reason I sold it and re-bought the Lumix 35-100mm 2.8 for more portability

2. It is very sharp.

Agree

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.

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.

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.

Always a challenge with a long tele; try the 100-400mm

4. It is a damn pretty lens.

Yes; love that hood design; wish they do the same on the 100-400mm

5. Built like a tank.

Yes, same as the 12-40mm and 300mm f4

6. I need to rethink my camera bags and straps.

I had to buy another backpack just because of this

7. I need to try out my tripods and heads to make sure they are up to the task.

Most ball heads should be able to ; mine was bought for DSLR use so ...

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.

Maybe...the EM1 II should do  even better?

1 negative for me: I don't like the bokeh so much , it's kind of nervous; another reason for me to let it go

I now have the Lumix 35-100mm 2.8 and Leica 100-400mm to cover that range and more but need to carry 2 lenses

rsmithgi wrote:

Just received it yesterday. Took a few of the dog (I'll spare everyone) and my son practicing soccer. Thoughts:

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.

2. It is very sharp.

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.

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.

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.

4. It is a damn pretty lens.

5. Built like a tank.

6. I need to rethink my camera bags and straps.

7. I need to try out my tripods and heads to make sure they are up to the task.

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.

Interesting comments.   Any pics worth posting?

So, how does the lens handle with your GX1?    Handling and balance on the GX1?

The  reason I ask is that I use both GX7 and Pen F,  and I'm debating over getting the  Oly 40-150f/2.8 or Panny 35-100 f/2.8.   To be used on both cameras.   For general photography, and travel.

Thanks for your input.

Lena

Interesting comments. Any pics worth posting?

So, how does the lens handle with your GX1? Handling and balance on the GX1?

The reason I ask is that I use both GX7 and Pen F, and I'm debating over getting the Oly 40-150f/2.8 or Panny 35-100 f/2.8. To be used on both cameras. For general photography, and travel.

Thanks for your input.

Lena

I'll check out the GX1 handling tonight.

One snap of y dog and a crop of the near eye.

rsmithgi wrote:

Interesting comments. Any pics worth posting?

So, how does the lens handle with your GX1? Handling and balance on the GX1?

The reason I ask is that I use both GX7 and Pen F, and I'm debating over getting the Oly 40-150f/2.8 or Panny 35-100 f/2.8. To be used on both cameras. For general photography, and travel.

Thanks for your input.

Lena

I'll check out the GX1 handling tonight.

One snap of y dog and a crop of the near eye.

Wow.  That lens is darn sharp!  

I look forward to your assessment how the lens handles, balance, and focus on your GX1.

Lena

Colin K. Work wrote:

I think you're worrying a bit too much. I find the size an weight is actually an asset for handheld shooting - the extra mass provides inertia which dampens motion. I find slow shutter work more difficult with tiny light weight lenses. Similarly, tracking is more stable.

The weight will take a little getting used to, but once done, I think you'll find things easier.

Thanks. I think you are correct.

Lew wrote:

My thoughts in response, no particular order....

1 - If you're going to use this to shoot kids playing soccer, invest in a decent monopod. Your shoulders will thank you. (I really like my Sirui P326 with Benro IH0 ball head)

2 - Learn what the different IBIS modes are and why you'd choose one over the other.

3 - When not using a monopod, cradle the lens in your left hand and just use your right hand to control the camera body. Much easier this way.

4 - Start saving for the MC14. Trust me.

5 - If you think this is big, go try a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM.

6 - The tripod mount ring is removeable. I've never done so though.

7 - Check out the ThinkTank Digital Holster 10 V2.0, it fits my E-M5.2 with ECG2 clone and the 40-150 with MC14.

Thanks for the feedback. Great, now it is an E-M1, and MC14.....

If it weren't for my interest in photographing soccer (where the extra reach comes in handy), I would have seriously considered the 35-100. If money were no object, both would be nice. In the end, I decided to deal with the size.

My mention of the size was meant as an observation, especially for other who may never have used one of the DSLR 80-200 F2.8 zooms. If your experience is only F4-5.6 zooms, this is different. I understood before purchasing but until you pick it up...

It is also not going to change my mind....

Skeeterbytes wrote:

The 40-150 and E-M1 are a top-notcb soccer combo for sideline to mid-distance work. C-AF response is good to excellent, depending on light available, and works at 9fps. I handhold mine as part of a two-camera setup, both attached at the tripod socket. I wouldn't find a monopod helpful for sports, that's more for the guys with their big Canikon bazookas. Enjoy you new lens!

Cheers,

Rick

Nice images.

The E-M1 is on the list. I'm sure the E-M1 Mk II will be more than I want to spend. Next sale on reconditioned gear I'll be able to pick one up for around $575.

I have owned the 40-150 F2.8 and it is my most used lens.  Anyhow, it works great on the E-M1 for C-AF type of stuff.

Enjoy your new lens and post some photos.

Dave

Use the 300 f/4 for a couple of months and you will appreciate how small the 40-150 f/2.8 really is. My 40-150 + MC-14 was my most used lens until the 300 arrived.

rsmithgi wrote:

Just received it yesterday. Took a few of the dog (I'll spare everyone) and my son practicing soccer. Thoughts:

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.

2. It is very sharp.

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.

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.

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.

4. It is a damn pretty lens.

5. Built like a tank.

6. I need to rethink my camera bags and straps.

7. I need to try out my tripods and heads to make sure they are up to the task.

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.

So, now you can use F2.8 instead of F5.6 at FL=150.

Does it worth the pain of having all this hassle with bags, tripods, and other problems you have so vividly described?

I considered the 40-150 but seeing how big it is, I am getting the Panny 35-100 & do want something up to 400 for wildlife & birds. I have the inexpensive Panny 100-300 that sometimes is good sometimes not so great but I want longer greater reach, so looking to upgrade to a better lens without breaking the bank. (I am petite with neck & back issues so the large lens and weight not welcome.)

The new Oly has gotten some very favorable reviews.
Thought some might enjoy this YouTube video showing use of the new Oly lens & the Panny 35-100
"Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 vs. Panasonic 35-100mm F2.8 Shootout"
(tried to embed the video but it failed so do a search on the above title)

Happy Pets Go with the Flo
Walnut Creek, CA

Len_Gee wrote:

Wow. That lens is darn sharp!

I look forward to your assessment how the lens handles, balance, and focus on your GX1.

Lena

-- hide signature --

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

Handling on the GX1 is iffy. You clearing are mounting the camera on the lens and primarily holding the lens. This is probably pretty standard to varying degrees from the E-M1 with grip to E-M5 with grip to E-M10 with grip, etc. I will primarily be using the E-M10 with grip with this lens.

The bigger issue is that it is awkward without an EVF. I would probably not want to use it without a viewfinder. I imagine the GX-7 with its more substantial heft and EVF should be pretty decent. The Pen F perhaps a bit less so.

s_grins wrote:

So, now you can use F2.8 instead of F5.6 at FL=150.

Does it worth the pain of having all this hassle with bags, tripods, and other problems you have so vividly described?

Think of it less being able to use F2.8 instead of F5.6 and more being able to use ISO200 instead of ISO800 or 1/1000 sec instead of 1/250 sec.

1/1000 sec produces sharp action shots while 1/250 may produce a blurry mess.

Is it worth it? Only each individual can answer that for themselves and I don't have enough experience yet to answer it for myself.

I have worked out a good strap solution. I already own a Joby Pro Sling Strap from when I owned a Nikon D5000. That strap connected to the trip collar balances quite nicely. As an added bonus, I can leave the lens on the strap when I switch to a smaller lens. I have a hand strap on the right lug. Should be a workable solution.

I also own a Think Tank Citywalker 10 bag from my DSLR days. Seems perfect for the 40-150, a few other lenses, flash, and E-M10.

I'm glad I hung onto the strap and bag.

I have the Joby Convertible Neck Strap and Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 30i for when I am not using the 40-150.