Advice on possible zoom lens purchase

"What about a 14-150 II? Is that an improvement on the 14-42 and as good as the 40-150 in their respective ranges?"

Yes, it is an improvement on the 14-42 in the overlapping ranges.

Yes and no for he 40-150. Yes at the shorter range. But at 150 the 18-150 II gets a little bit soft. Not terrible though. It keeps its sharpness at full zoom a lot better than the superzoom Tamron 18-270 I use on my DSLR.

On the vacation I just came back from I used my 14-150II a lot.   I left my Olympus 12-100 in the hotel room most days because it was just a bit too heavy.  The 14-150II is really nice, compact and light by comparison.    A small camera like my EPL7 just handles a lot better with a smaller lens.

If money was not a showstopper 12-40 Pro is a great zoom to go for.

However 14-150ii is a nice compromise.

You'll lack the 24mm equivalent FOV and to me this is the biggest disadvantage.

If you're not a pixel peeper and do not need shooting in light critical conditions that you may appreciate the extra reach.

So, yes: 14-150ii is a nice gift

Steven Wandy wrote:

Two other options - if your wife doesn't mind swapping lenses for the long end - are the two Panasonic 12-60 lenses. I had the EM10 and felt that the Olympus 12-40, while a wonderful lens, was a bit too large and heavy on that body.

I originally had the cheaper Panasonic 12-60/3.5-5.6 and was pretty satisfied with the results - definitely better than any of the Olympus 14-42 lenses I have had (and still have the 14-42EZ lens). When they released the "pro" version of the 12-60/2.8-4, I jumped on it. Smaller and lighter than the Olympus 12-40/2.8 (so it felt better on the Pen-F that I now have) and the image quality (to my eyes) was great. Perhaps not quite the 12-40, but it is cheaper and as I said, smaller and noticeably lighter. And the zoom range is great also.

I read past your post first time around, but I am glad I came back to it since you raised the question of the 12-40's weight/size relative to an E-M10. I had that issue in the back of my mind; it's controversial, I know, because some people argue that lens weight is often irrelevant because they support the camera by placing their left hand under the lens - but I have never been completely convinced, leaving this as a question mark, especially since my wife is not accustomed to heavier lenses. Have to think about that. I can check it out at the local camera shop.

Ok, the 12-60/2.8-4 panasonic: will check it out.

traveler_101 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

Two other options - if your wife doesn't mind swapping lenses for the long end - are the two Panasonic 12-60 lenses. I had the EM10 and felt that the Olympus 12-40, while a wonderful lens, was a bit too large and heavy on that body.

I originally had the cheaper Panasonic 12-60/3.5-5.6 and was pretty satisfied with the results - definitely better than any of the Olympus 14-42 lenses I have had (and still have the 14-42EZ lens). When they released the "pro" version of the 12-60/2.8-4, I jumped on it. Smaller and lighter than the Olympus 12-40/2.8 (so it felt better on the Pen-F that I now have) and the image quality (to my eyes) was great. Perhaps not quite the 12-40, but it is cheaper and as I said, smaller and noticeably lighter. And the zoom range is great also.

I read past your post first time around, but I am glad I came back to it since you raised the question of the 12-40's weight/size relative to an E-M10. I had that issue in the back of my mind; it's controversial, I know, because some people argue that lens weight is often irrelevant because they support the camera by placing their left hand under the lens - but I have never been completely convinced, leaving this as a question mark, especially since my wife is not accustomed to heavier lenses. Have to think about that. I can check it out at the local camera shop.

Ok, the 12-60/2.8-4 panasonic: will check it out.

I'm definitely a lens holder and not a body gripper.  Never used the free grip with my EM1 once.  The bigger the lens the easier it is to hold, until you are not strong enough to support the weight.  No body is going to help you hold a very large lens, say a couple of kg.

However you do need to keep control of the body and the grip for your right hand and button positioning are important.

I can easily use a Canon 300mm f/4 or a Bigma on an EM1.  Tried the Canon on my GM1.  It can be made to work but it's challenging.

I think you are right to be cautious about the 12-40 on a small body because ergonomics are personal.  It would work for me.

Andrew

traveler_101 wrote:

I am looking for a lens for wife's birthday. I don't use zoom lenses with my E-P5 and am not that familiar with the options. She has a E-M10 and started with the kit zoom (14-42 R) which is no longer acceptable to her critical eye. She has been using the 40-150/4.0-5.6 which she likes, but it leaves her without a normal range lens.

I suppose the best solution would be the 12-40 PRO but it's a little too costly. I am in Norway right now so I have to deal with prices here. Anything mail ordered from abroad will be taxed at 25% in addition to other fees.

What about a 14-150 II? Is that an improvement on the 14-42 and as good as the 40-150 in their respective ranges?

If you can think of another solution please let me know.

I don't think the 14-150 is going to improve anything over what she already has. The 12-40 would.

I see that you have several primes in your gear list. Have you considered letting her try those?

Ulric wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

I am looking for a lens for wife's birthday. I don't use zoom lenses with my E-P5 and am not that familiar with the options. She has a E-M10 and started with the kit zoom (14-42 R) which is no longer acceptable to her critical eye. She has been using the 40-150/4.0-5.6 which she likes, but it leaves her without a normal range lens.

I suppose the best solution would be the 12-40 PRO but it's a little too costly. I am in Norway right now so I have to deal with prices here. Anything mail ordered from abroad will be taxed at 25% in addition to other fees.

What about a 14-150 II? Is that an improvement on the 14-42 and as good as the 40-150 in their respective ranges?

If you can think of another solution please let me know.

I don't think the 14-150 is going to improve anything over what she already has. The 12-40 would.

Thanks. I have been gravitating toward this position myself.

I see that you have several primes in your gear list. Have you considered letting her try those?

It's a good suggestion, but so far she has been resistant. I can try again, of course. The problem lies in her own long-standing preferences. Her introduction to photography came during the film era with Nikon fully automatic cameras with built-in zoom lenses. She still has one sitting in a closet somewhere. Even though I think primes are better for a number of reasons, I just want her to be happy. I will probably pick up a 12-40 when I am stateside in November and then she will have a nice Christmas present.

I purchased the Oly 12-40 Pro to use with my E M10 and find it to be a really great lens.  Yes, you notice the weight but I always support the camera with my left hand as my right hand needs to be free to make adjustments such as f/ stop, exposure, etc.  And, having a constant 2.8 capability really comes in handy.  I picked up mine used, and the prices on used 12-40 lenses make it a bargain in terms of getting a "pro" lens.  I just wish the prices would come down on the Oly 40-150 pro lens!

ahaslett wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

Two other options - if your wife doesn't mind swapping lenses for the long end - are the two Panasonic 12-60 lenses. I had the EM10 and felt that the Olympus 12-40, while a wonderful lens, was a bit too large and heavy on that body.

I originally had the cheaper Panasonic 12-60/3.5-5.6 and was pretty satisfied with the results - definitely better than any of the Olympus 14-42 lenses I have had (and still have the 14-42EZ lens). When they released the "pro" version of the 12-60/2.8-4, I jumped on it. Smaller and lighter than the Olympus 12-40/2.8 (so it felt better on the Pen-F that I now have) and the image quality (to my eyes) was great. Perhaps not quite the 12-40, but it is cheaper and as I said, smaller and noticeably lighter. And the zoom range is great also.

I read past your post first time around, but I am glad I came back to it since you raised the question of the 12-40's weight/size relative to an E-M10. I had that issue in the back of my mind; it's controversial, I know, because some people argue that lens weight is often irrelevant because they support the camera by placing their left hand under the lens - but I have never been completely convinced, leaving this as a question mark, especially since my wife is not accustomed to heavier lenses. Have to think about that. I can check it out at the local camera shop.

Ok, the 12-60/2.8-4 panasonic: will check it out.

I'm definitely a lens holder and not a body gripper. Never used the free grip with my EM1 once. The bigger the lens the easier it is to hold, until you are not strong enough to support the weight. No body is going to help you hold a very large lens, say a couple of kg.

However you do need to keep control of the body and the grip for your right hand and button positioning are important.

I can easily use a Canon 300mm f/4 or a Bigma on an EM1. Tried the Canon on my GM1. It can be made to work but it's challenging.

I think you are right to be cautious about the 12-40 on a small body because ergonomics are personal. It would work for me.

Andrew

I agree with Andy - it is a VERY personal decision. I loved the 12-40, but just felt it was not a comfortable fit for me with the EM10II - so I would assume it would be even less so with the Pen-F. But there are many posts talking about people even using the smaller/older Pen cameras with the 12-40 and the are very comfortable. I agree with the adage about holding the camera by the lens - I even do that with the Olympus 14-42EZ and the Olympus 17mm/1.8.

Steven Wandy wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

Two other options - if your wife doesn't mind swapping lenses for the long end - are the two Panasonic 12-60 lenses. I had the EM10 and felt that the Olympus 12-40, while a wonderful lens, was a bit too large and heavy on that body.

I originally had the cheaper Panasonic 12-60/3.5-5.6 and was pretty satisfied with the results - definitely better than any of the Olympus 14-42 lenses I have had (and still have the 14-42EZ lens). When they released the "pro" version of the 12-60/2.8-4, I jumped on it. Smaller and lighter than the Olympus 12-40/2.8 (so it felt better on the Pen-F that I now have) and the image quality (to my eyes) was great. Perhaps not quite the 12-40, but it is cheaper and as I said, smaller and noticeably lighter. And the zoom range is great also.

I read past your post first time around, but I am glad I came back to it since you raised the question of the 12-40's weight/size relative to an E-M10. I had that issue in the back of my mind; it's controversial, I know, because some people argue that lens weight is often irrelevant because they support the camera by placing their left hand under the lens - but I have never been completely convinced, leaving this as a question mark, especially since my wife is not accustomed to heavier lenses. Have to think about that. I can check it out at the local camera shop.

Ok, the 12-60/2.8-4 panasonic: will check it out.

I'm definitely a lens holder and not a body gripper. Never used the free grip with my EM1 once. The bigger the lens the easier it is to hold, until you are not strong enough to support the weight. No body is going to help you hold a very large lens, say a couple of kg.

However you do need to keep control of the body and the grip for your right hand and button positioning are important.

I can easily use a Canon 300mm f/4 or a Bigma on an EM1. Tried the Canon on my GM1. It can be made to work but it's challenging.

I think you are right to be cautious about the 12-40 on a small body because ergonomics are personal. It would work for me.

Andrew

I agree with Andy - it is a VERY personal decision. I loved the 12-40, but just felt it was not a comfortable fit for me with the EM10II - so I would assume it would be even less so with the Pen-F. But there are many posts talking about people even using the smaller/older Pen cameras with the 12-40 and the are very comfortable. I agree with the adage about holding the camera by the lens - I even do that with the Olympus 14-42EZ and the Olympus 17mm/1.8.

Thanks. Just to clarify - I am not planning to use the 12-40, should I ultimately purchase it, on my E-P5. It is intended for my wife to use on her E-M10. Still you are right to point out that the weight issue is cause for some concern.

jwilliams wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

I am looking for a lens for wife's birthday. I don't use zoom lenses with my E-P5 and am not that familiar with the options. She has a E-M10 and started with the kit zoom (14-42 R) which is no longer acceptable to her critical eye. She has been using the 40-150/4.0-5.6 which she likes, but it leaves her without a normal range lens.

I suppose the best solution would be the 12-40 PRO but it's a little too costly. I am in Norway right now so I have to deal with prices here. Anything mail ordered from abroad will be taxed at 25% in addition to other fees.

What about a 14-150 II? Is that an improvement on the 14-42 and as good as the 40-150 in their respective ranges?

If you can think of another solution please let me know.

than the one she has. Look for either the Panny 14-45, or second version or their 14-42. Both are better than the Oly. The 12-40/2.8 is a great lens, but a bit big for an EM10. The Oly or Panny 14-140 zooms are probably a bit better in the overlapping range. Don't expect huge differences though.

You have one of the weaker kit lenses for m43 so ther is some improvement to be had without going to large expensive lenses. If you do go for the 12-40 look at the Oly refurb sire for a good deal on one.

Yes I remembered that the 14-45 from the earlier days of m43 had a good reputation for resolution. I wonder about focus speed though.

I should have included in my comments regarding the 14-42 that I always have the optional gripped attached to my E M10. The grip helps in handling and balancing the weight of the 12-40 Pro lens.

traveler_101 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

Two other options - if your wife doesn't mind swapping lenses for the long end - are the two Panasonic 12-60 lenses. I had the EM10 and felt that the Olympus 12-40, while a wonderful lens, was a bit too large and heavy on that body.

I originally had the cheaper Panasonic 12-60/3.5-5.6 and was pretty satisfied with the results - definitely better than any of the Olympus 14-42 lenses I have had (and still have the 14-42EZ lens). When they released the "pro" version of the 12-60/2.8-4, I jumped on it. Smaller and lighter than the Olympus 12-40/2.8 (so it felt better on the Pen-F that I now have) and the image quality (to my eyes) was great. Perhaps not quite the 12-40, but it is cheaper and as I said, smaller and noticeably lighter. And the zoom range is great also.

I read past your post first time around, but I am glad I came back to it since you raised the question of the 12-40's weight/size relative to an E-M10. I had that issue in the back of my mind; it's controversial, I know, because some people argue that lens weight is often irrelevant because they support the camera by placing their left hand under the lens - but I have never been completely convinced, leaving this as a question mark, especially since my wife is not accustomed to heavier lenses. Have to think about that. I can check it out at the local camera shop.

Ok, the 12-60/2.8-4 panasonic: will check it out.

I'm definitely a lens holder and not a body gripper. Never used the free grip with my EM1 once. The bigger the lens the easier it is to hold, until you are not strong enough to support the weight. No body is going to help you hold a very large lens, say a couple of kg.

However you do need to keep control of the body and the grip for your right hand and button positioning are important.

I can easily use a Canon 300mm f/4 or a Bigma on an EM1. Tried the Canon on my GM1. It can be made to work but it's challenging.

I think you are right to be cautious about the 12-40 on a small body because ergonomics are personal. It would work for me.

Andrew

I agree with Andy - it is a VERY personal decision. I loved the 12-40, but just felt it was not a comfortable fit for me with the EM10II - so I would assume it would be even less so with the Pen-F. But there are many posts talking about people even using the smaller/older Pen cameras with the 12-40 and the are very comfortable. I agree with the adage about holding the camera by the lens - I even do that with the Olympus 14-42EZ and the Olympus 17mm/1.8.

Thanks. Just to clarify - I am not planning to use the 12-40, should I ultimately purchase it, on my E-P5. It is intended for my wife to use on her E-M10. Still you are right to point out that the weight issue is cause for some concern.

I understood it was for your wife - hence my point that I felt it was uncomfortable when I used it on the EM10v2. I did not have it when I had the EP5 or the Pen-F.

traveler_101 wrote:

I am looking for a lens for wife's birthday. I don't use zoom lenses with my E-P5 and am not that familiar with the options. She has a E-M10 and started with the kit zoom (14-42 R) which is no longer acceptable to her critical eye. She has been using the 40-150/4.0-5.6 which she likes, but it leaves her without a normal range lens.

I suppose the best solution would be the 12-40 PRO but it's a little too costly. I am in Norway right now so I have to deal with prices here. Anything mail ordered from abroad will be taxed at 25% in addition to other fees.

What about a 14-150 II? Is that an improvement on the 14-42 and as good as the 40-150 in their respective ranges?

If you can think of another solution please let me know.

Summing up this thread. When back in the U.S. last month, I bought a new in the box Panasonic 14-45/3.5-5.6. My wife will be getting it for Christmas. If she likes it, it will supplement the Olympus 40-150/4-5.6 she already uses on her E-M10. I also sold the unused Olympus 14-42R II. I got $47 on E-Bay. It sold easily.

I thought long and hard about which lens to get. Here is what seems to me to be a fair representation of the collective wisdom from this thread:

1) An all in one zoom is convenient and pretty good, but probably would not improve picture quality as compared to the 14-42. So I x-ed that option.

2) The Olympus 12-40 was very tempting. I would have happily paid for it, but opinions were mixed about the size and especially weight of that lens on an E-M10. My wife is slight woman with small hands and wrists. Would she lug a heavy lens around on our holiday trips? It just seemed like too big a risk. Tough decision to make though . . .

3) I looked into the Panasonic 12-32, but was just not convinced of the quality of its output. In addition it has a very limited range. My wife is not a wide shooter and 32mm at the upper end is inadequate.

4) The 14-45 has been around for a long time. It has earned very good reviews. I searched threads and found that there were many testimonials to its quality, confirming what I remember about its reputation. I remember one post by Ben Hermann that I found convincing. Plus it seems to fit well on the camera as shown on the matching simulation site.

Now . . . to see if she is satisfied! Thanks again to all.