40-150 or 55-200 ?

[stevewestern]

[StephenL]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

You can carry the 40-150 anywhere, it is so small and light. The optical quality is very good. The 50-200 is a bulky beast, reserve it for dedicated shooting.

[stevewestern]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

I agree that the 50-200 is bulky, but compared to my old Canon 70-200 f2.8 is seems small....
I guess I may end up keeping both or at least opening up the box when it comes !

[Bikie John]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

I second Stephen's advice. The 50-200 is great quality but pretty chunky, the 40-150 is good and very small and light. I haven't tried the 40-150 for action stuff so I don't know how it compares with the 50-200 for speed of response, but for general happy snapping it's fine.

The 50-200 keeps the rain out, the 40-150 doesn't. Which may or may not be important to you.

Ciao ... John

[IainMacD]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

The 40-150 is almost exactly the same size as the 12-50 and as the guys have already said, a take everywhere lens. It is incredibly sharp for a 'kit' lens and has virtually silent, very fast focussing (I think it is as fast and quieter than the 50-200 SWD on my E-5).
This site is useful for checking how the various camera/lens combinations look

[Peter_Hartland]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

I have both & prefer the 50-200 the quality of the images is outstanding

[Tordan58]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

I have both and the 50-200 outperforms the 40-150 (that was bundled as a kit lens). Ths said, the 40-150 is not bad at all, but I don't use mine any longer.

To answer you question - what kind of photography will you do? Is weight/size an issue?

[stevewestern]

Re: 40-150 or 55-200 ?

I do mainly children in classrooms, so speed is an issue, as it size - weight is not so much of a problem.
Having now got both in my hands I think I will have to keep both as Stephen suggested, at least for now..
I can see me selling the 40-150 and maybe the 50-200 when the new Olympus 40-150 comes along if I can afford it though !