The new 40-150 f4 pro lens

[ronidog]

I have not seen much about this new lens. Has anybody had their hands on one yet. I think it would pair nicely with my 12-40 pro ( old version). The size is good and I don’t need f 2.8

[MJ224]

After the OM-1 release, the new pair of lens have been side lined a bit. The 40-150mm f2.8 is such a brilliant lens, bit kinda large I suppose. A loss of one stop is not going to be a huge factor I think...

[MJ224]

Actually quite petite. Smaller than the 12-100mm

[Miketoll]

Peter Forsgard has a little review of it and apart from size differences reckons it is if anything a bit sharper than the f2.8.
It does not accept a teleconverter which is a bit of a shame.

[drmarkf]

I had a brief 10’ play with one at Campkins in Cambridge when David Smith was demonstrating the OM-1. My main interest was to see how good it was as an infra-red lens on my full-spectrum E-M10ii (it seems excellent, and very sharp, although I can’t exclude a very slight hotspot from f5.6).
Handling is excellent - it feels solid and ‘Pro’, although very significantly smaller and lighter than the f2.8. The collapsible design works well and securely, and it doesn’t telescope on focusing or zooming once extended. The filter size is 62mm, which is a bit annoyingly different from the 12-45 (58mm).

[IainMacD]

"The filter size is 62mm, which is a bit annoyingly different from the 12-45 (58mm)." But the same as the 12-40

[drmarkf]

Well, I guess some were always going to be happy and others a bit irritated, depending what you were going to pair it with. First World issue, though.

[Dave in Wales]

It'll have to be good to outshine the 'plastic-fantastic' 40-150 'R' @ £149

[drmarkf]

For sure, although the weather sealing is a big advantage for me for uses like hiking landscape and travel to certain places (rain, waterfalls, sand, dust etc).
The Panny 35-100 f2.8 will be a competitor, but I’ve found myself doing more landscape shooting above 200mm equivalent FL.

[snag2000]

I picked a used one of those last year for less than £80 - and am pretty impressed with it. Would be interested to see how the new lens compares - all the comparisons so far talk about the f2.8.

[davcoll]

It is slightly annoying it will not except the extenders, I was hoping to increase my range on the 'cheap'. I still only have the 12,40. I am still very new to Olympus.

Dave

[Ian]

It is slightly annoying it will not except the extenders, I was hoping to increase my range on the 'cheap'. I still only have the 12,40. I am still very new to Olympus.

Dave

I would think the aim was to deliver Pro image quality and functional features in as small as possible a package. It also doesn't have the manual focus clutch ring. But it is a bit cheaper than the 2.8 version (at least list-price).

Ian

[MJ224]

Touched it today. Lively little lens, works well, and the size for a travel lens is just right. But unable to add a MC is the only drawback as far as I can see....:-()

[Snibbo]

Received my 40~150 f4 Pro today. It feels like a nice, solid well made lens. Smaller than I expected, it’s not much longer then 12-40 f2.8. The photo shows it flanked by the 12-40 and the 40-150 “plastic fantastic”.

The lens is shown in the locked position. In use it extends by around 25mm. This extension doesn’t change with the focus or focal length. If you turn the camera on with the lens locked you get a reminder on the screen that you have to unlock the lens before you can use it.

I’ll try to get some test shots posted over the next few days.

[ronidog]

MIne arrived today. Its such a great size and should pair nicely with my current 12-40 pro