I'm thinking about getting an Olympus 40-150 f2.8 pro, any advice?

I'm going to try to reply to everyone in one message.

First thanks to everyone for giving me the info I was looking for.

Perhaps I'm a lens snob, and maybe it's in my head, but I'm pretty fussy about my lenses. There's more to a lens than sharpness. The 35-100f2.8 is a fine lens, but there's no magic there, nothing special.

There are M43 lenses that  just sparkle. I have the 15mm f.17, 50mm f1.4 and 42.5 f1.2 all Pan-Leica, all bring something more to an image than sharpness. The Olympus 45mm f1.8 and 75mm f1.8 both have it as well (although I don't own those anymore.)  The new Laowa 7.5mm f2 has the same quality. I get it from a few of my Canon lenses, the 70-200 f2.8L IS II, the 15mm FE and the Tamron 45mm f1.8VC are all special lenses.

I have the Panasonic 40-150 f4-5.6, so I don't need a cheap, small alternative. It works for those shots you need to get, but it doesn't make any magic.

I'm looking at the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8  to use it at f2.8. (I don't think I've ever used my Canon 70-200 at more than f4.)

It's good to know that the teleconverter works, but I have never been satisfied with the results from any teleconverter, even the expensive matched ones. I also wouldn't want to give up the speed, so I don't expect I'll get one.

I think I'm going to watch the used one for a week or so and see if I can grab a deal, and If I can't I'll probably pick one up on the grey market.

If it's all the you are reporting I think I'll have a Canon lens for sale in a month or so.

Tom

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I'm going to try to reply to everyone in one message.

First thanks to everyone for giving me the info I was looking for.

Perhaps I'm a lens snob, and maybe it's in my head, but I'm pretty fussy about my lenses. There's more to a lens than sharpness. The 35-100f2.8 is a fine lens, but there's no magic there, nothing special.

There are M43 lenses that just sparkle. I have the 15mm f.17, 50mm f1.4 and 42.5 f1.2 all Pan-Leica, all bring something more to an image than sharpness. The Olympus 45mm f1.8 and 75mm f1.8 both have it as well (although I don't own those anymore.) The new Laowa 7.5mm f2 has the same quality. I get it from a few of my Canon lenses, the 70-200 f2.8L IS II, the 15mm FE and the Tamron 45mm f1.8VC are all special lenses.

I have the Panasonic 40-150 f4-5.6, so I don't need a cheap, small alternative. It works for those shots you need to get, but it doesn't make any magic.

I'm looking at the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 to use it at f2.8. (I don't think I've ever used my Canon 70-200 at more than f4.)

It's good to know that the teleconverter works, but I have never been satisfied with the results from any teleconverter, even the expensive matched ones. I also wouldn't want to give up the speed, so I don't expect I'll get one.

I think I'm going to watch the used one for a week or so and see if I can grab a deal, and If I can't I'll probably pick one up on the grey market.

If it's all the you are reporting I think I'll have a Canon lens for sale in a month or so.

Tom

The Olympus ZD 35-100mm f2.0 has it also, more so then the 40-150 Pro.  Which I don't really like as much as the images from the 50-200 SWD......they just have something a bit more special about them.

My wife and I switched from Canon and Panasonic primarily because of the 40-150 Pro. With the MC-14 it became our most used lens. It is unique, versatile, and pairs well with other Oly Pro lenses. If you decide for it you will likely "grow" into it and be happy. 80-300 @ F2.8 and 112-420 @ F4 (w/MC-14) gives you relatively fast portrait through relatively fast mid-range sports and wildlife.

Sharp, rugged, nice hood, etc.

No worries.

Nothing else to say really.

Doc

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Phocal wrote:

The Olympus ZD 35-100mm f2.0 has it also, more so then the 40-150 Pro. Which I don't really like as much as the images from the 50-200 SWD......they just have something a bit more special about them.

Yeah, the 35-100 SHG has smooth OOF transition unmatched by any m4/3 zoom. I wouldn't have swapped it out for the 40-150 Pro if it focused faster but I really need the Pro's reflexes (and reach). As far as sharpness they seem on par.

35-100/2.0

Cheers,

Rick

I would have kept it for those times that focus speed was not important.

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I am seriously thinking about abandoning my Canon FF set-up, and the only thing I'll miss is my 70-200f2.8 zoom. I have the Panasonic 35-100f2.8 and just don't love it. I'm thinking about the Olympus 40-150 Pro. I have two questions.

1. Any general advice on this lens? If you have it, do you love it?

2. What's the deal with the prices? B&H has it listed at $1,500 on sale for $1,300. They are all over ebay for $900 new, and used they are going for $750-850. I'm not shy about grey market or used, but are there known counterfeits of this lens? Are there repair issues?

Thanks

Tom

The 40-150 f2.8 is my favorite lens. I also have the 1.4xTC. Since I got the 300mm f4 that is getting the most use as I mostly shoot birds. That said I like how versetile the 40-150 is, especially with access to the TC.

Here are some shots with it, you can find more in my flickr if you're interested.

Hover fly, with the TC

Flower, with the TC

Great tit, without the TC

eques wrote:

James Pilcher wrote:

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I am seriously thinking about abandoning my Canon FF set-up, and the only thing I'll miss is my 70-200f2.8 zoom. I have the Panasonic 35-100f2.8 and just don't love it. I'm thinking about the Olympus 40-150 Pro. I have two questions.

1. Any general advice on this lens? If you have it, do you love it?

The M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro is truly excellent. I have the 75mm f/1.8 also, and they compare very well @f/2.8. I was extremely surprised when I did my testing and saw how good the zoom is. I cannot imagine a better lens in this range.

I agree about IQ and built quality, close focus is is a great plus, too.

I made Sugru grip for the EM5.2 for easier handling.

Size and weight is too much for me for everyday use, but this won't bother you, if you miss the Canon 2,8/70-200. But I use it a lot for assignments

For hiking and general use I prefer the 40-150R and think about getting a 2,8/35-100 .

Peter

I just handled a friend's Pentax K1 with Tamron 2,8/24-70(?) and, wow, what a relief to get back the feather-weight EM5.2 plus 2,8/40-150.

But seriously, I won't carry this combo when hiking or sightseeing.

Peter

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I am seriously thinking about abandoning my Canon FF set-up, and the only thing I'll miss is my 70-200f2.8 zoom. I have the Panasonic 35-100f2.8 and just don't love it. I'm thinking about the Olympus 40-150 Pro. I have two questions.

1. Any general advice on this lens? If you have it, do you love it?

2. What's the deal with the prices? B&H has it listed at $1,500 on sale for $1,300. They are all over ebay for $900 new, and used they are going for $750-850. I'm not shy about grey market or used, but are there known counterfeits of this lens? Are there repair issues?

Thanks

Tom

I have used mine with a E-M5 and an E-M1 - it's balances great with the "1" due to the prominent grip but would recommend an accessory grip if you are using with a "5"  or a PEN style body.

It is a very good lens and with the MC14 tele converter gives  not only more reach but greater magnification for close ups. The lens hood is brilliant piece of practical design.

Lars101x wrote:

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I am seriously thinking about abandoning my Canon FF set-up, and the only thing I'll miss is my 70-200f2.8 zoom. I have the Panasonic 35-100f2.8 and just don't love it. I'm thinking about the Olympus 40-150 Pro. I have two questions.

1. Any general advice on this lens? If you have it, do you love it?

2. What's the deal with the prices? B&H has it listed at $1,500 on sale for $1,300. They are all over ebay for $900 new, and used they are going for $750-850. I'm not shy about grey market or used, but are there known counterfeits of this lens? Are there repair issues?

Thanks

Tom

The 40-150 f2.8 is my favorite lens. I also have the 1.4xTC. Since I got the 300mm f4 that is getting the most use as I mostly shoot birds. That said I like how versetile the 40-150 is, especially with access to the TC.

Here are some shots with it, you can find more in my flickr if you're interested.

Hover fly, with the TC

Flower, with the TC

S
Great tit, without the TC

Excellent work.

The 40-150 f2.8 is one of my favorite lenses. I do think it has that magical quality. Love the images. Bought it for $1100 new and picked up a used TE 1.4x for $200 (which is reported to give ~10% degradation of the images by one person who rigerously tested it).

Use the lens coupled with an EM1 (initially used an EM5). I have used it quite a bit for BIF. I find the AF-C to be mediocre to the point of not being useable (with either camera) but have had some success with AF-S +MF (though my kepper rate with a D750 is much higher). The 40-150 is sharp throughout it's range and great at f2.8. Love the weight, lens hood and front ring click manual focus option. I highly recommend..I like it even more than the 12-40 f2.8 PRO.

Richard

I'm using lumix bodies.

Tom

Thomas Kachadurian wrote:

I am seriously thinking about abandoning my Canon FF set-up, and the only thing I'll miss is my 70-200f2.8 zoom. I have the Panasonic 35-100f2.8 and just don't love it. I'm thinking about the Olympus 40-150 Pro. I have two questions.

1. Any general advice on this lens? If you have it, do you love it?

Yes...get it.  

2. What's the deal with the prices? B&H has it listed at $1,500 on sale for $1,300. They are all over ebay for $900 new, and used they are going for $750-850. I'm not shy about grey market or used, but are there known counterfeits of this lens? Are there repair issues?

I always go with reputable dealers or the manufacturer, especially when considering an expensive lens such as this.

Thanks

Tom

-- hide signature --

www.kachadurian.com
Call me crazy. I happen to like photos of cats.

I can also recommend the companion MC-14 1.4x teleconverter.  That will get you 210mm on the telephoto end, and images suffer no ill effects from using it.