Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm f/4-5.6 II

[MJ224]

I have never heard of this lens before...

Has anyone owned or used it?

About £300 from MPB

[peak4]

Not used it, but I have the Mk1; the later version looks like a worthwhile improvement, particularly with the weather sealing.
Robin Wong did a decent review of the later lens
I sometimes take the 14-150mm Mk1 + 9-18mm as a light compact combination if I'm going to a different city for the day and expect good weather, maybe adding a 20mm F1.7 for something brighter in the evening.
I've just picked up one of the refurbished E-M5 Mk3s in the recent offer for exactly this purpose.
When I was using the original E-P1 & 2 for travel, I preferred the 14-140 & 100-300 Panasonic due to the OIS.

[MJ224]

Thanks for the link. Sounds a pretty reasonable lens. With Lightroom, or other software, I am sure any softness could be sorted out. ..

[Ian]

I had the Mark 1 version, which was one of the very original Micro Four Thirds lenses produced by Olympus. It wasn't bad, but I was personally limited by the 14mm wide end, and preferred 12mm. The 12-100 is a far superior lens but also a lot more expensive.

Ian

[MJ224]

Yes, I have the 12-100mm, and the 40-150mm f2,8. Both excellent IQ. But my 40-150mm has the X2 almost permanently attached, thus I was thinking this 14-150mm might fill a gap.....and it is relatively inexpensive..But the camera bag is quite full already...

[Ian]

mc-20 won't fit the 14-150.

[jdal]

I had the Mk1 on my Mk1 E-M5. I took it up a guided wade/struggle up a gorge in Turkey where it got dragged under water for a while, amazingly both were ok. As a lightweight travel lens it was great, not sure why I sold it.

[George Dorn]

Neither was I, lolol

[Phill D]

It's a great little travel lens if as Ian says you can put up with the 14mm. I still have the Panasonic 14-140mm, well I would have if my daughter hadn't pinched it. I use the 12-100 most of the time for travel, yes it's a bit heavy but it's better. I think if it was me and I wanted a separate travel lens on a second body I'd do what Henry does and look for the 12-200. Just that bit more range.

[Joe_T]

I owned it and sold it. I found my 75-300 performed better at 150mm than the 14-150 did. I may have had a soft copy.

[AJW]

I have had one for some time now (I think it came as a kit with the EM5 Mk2) now paired with the EM5 Mk3 principally for days out on the hill due to its versatility, weatherproofness and relatively lightweight. All the OOC jpeg images were taken using this combo.

First three taken in April - this one @ 17mm



Ben Nevis - Carn Mor Dearg - Aonach Mor - 23.5 miles distant @ 120mm

A little later the same day - @15mm


More recently @ 100mm


These do look a little sharper on my monitor.

Andy

[Miketoll]

I have both the 14-150 Mk II and the 12-100 Pro. If out for a walk the 14-150 is fine being light weight and weather sealed while sharp enough. The 12-100 is not surprisingly sharper and I take that one on more specific sight seeing visits where the extra wide angle is very useful. Heavier but better IQ with that extra wide angle.but shorter tele end so horses for courses.

[Melaka]

I had one but it struggled in poor light compared to the more expensive lenses.

[griffljg]

I had one which I bought based on my niece's experience with one which she got as a birthday present. I was impressed with its versatility, especially combined with the fact that it is weather sealed. It looked like it would be the ideal travel lens.

In mid-2016 I went with some military veteran mates on a tour of the WWI battlefields and WWII Invasion Beaches in northern France and Belgium. I took a Canon EOS 6D with the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II lens for use in challenging light conditions, such as inside museums, and an Olympus OM-D E-M1, with Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm f/4-5.6 II attached for most of the outside work. I also took the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO just in case I needed something wider, or better in low light.

It didn't take me long to become disenchanted with the softness at the long end and the need for the extra 2mm at the short end causing me to regularly swap to the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO instead. I found myself rather leaving the 12-40mm fitted to the camera and only swapping to the 14-150mm when I really needed to do so. I had also brought my old 4/3 mount 70-300mm lens with MMF-3 adaptor attached just in case, so I was covered for the long end.

The 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO behaved beautifully. The photos were beautifully crisp and the E-M1 behaved a lot better than I was expecting in challenging light conditions. - These were when there was a lot of contrast and / or low light.

If only the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO had a bit more reach!!

Then Olympus released the 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO...... For me a total game-changer. The 12-100mm focal length range covers over 90% of my photography. Just for good measure, it is just as sharp as the 12-40mm f/2.8 over the focal lengths they have in common and it continues like that right up to 100mm. I can live with the 1-stop drop in aperture and the increase in weight.

The 14-150mm lens was relegated to sitting in a cupboard inside its carrying case. I had no further use for it. Then a member of this forum mentioned that he was looking at getting one of these lenses. So, after telling him exactly why I was no longer using it, I sold it to him. He was happy with it and I was happy to get rid of it. A Win-Win situation!

Let me be clear. - The 14-150 isn't a bad lens. I have just been spoiled by the amazing quality of the Olympus / OM System PRO lenses that, with few exceptions, I find it difficult to tolerate anything less.

[Ian]

griffljg I'd forgotten the Mark II was weather sealed. I'm fairly certain the original version wasn't.

Ian

[griffljg]

Yes the original wasn't weather sealed. Weather sealing was one of the improvements from the original to the Mark II.

[MJ224]

Thanks all for opinions. It is odd that I have realised it existed.

At £300, I won't be buying one. I also note that Joe_T says that the 75-300 works better at 150mm

[RobEW]

It was the first Oly lens I had (apart from film cameras); came as a kit lens with E-M5 ii. . Versatile, compact and generally good image quality. But, as others have said, the 12-100 is far better.