Robin Wong posted the full review and writes:
The amout of fine detail this lens is able to resolve is amazing, with plenty of micro-contrast. The sharpness is also uniform from edge to edge of the frame, showing no corner softness. The quality of the M.Zuiko 40-150mm Pro lens’ bokeh does not disappoint, creating creamy, buttery smooth blurred out of focus area. The subjects in focus was easily “popped” out of the bokeh background, and looking three-dimensional.
On his site you can download the full size image samples (direct link here).
Bestmirrorlesscamerareviews writes:
I think that the image samples speak for themselves. The 40-150mm PRO zoom lens can deliver impressive results in terms of sharpness and bokeh and proves to be a very versatile lens especially with the MC-14 teleconverter. There are many usages I can think of.
And our reader Bobby noticed that there is a new set of mind-blowing samples from Frank Rückert at Pen3.de.
UPDATE: Jamie MacDonald has another video answering questions submitted to him about the new 40 to 150mm lens: http://youtu.be/Pb_iFlJt_rU?list=UURsTTR_hQfeYryM6_2Wx3zQ
Olympus preorders:
Silver E-M1 body at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus. In Europe at Wex UK.
40-150mm f/2.8 PRO lens at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus. In Europe at Wex UK, Technikdirekt and Amazon.
LH-76 lens hood at Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus.
MC-14 1.4x teleconverter at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus.
PRF-ZD62 Z protection filter at Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus.
PRF-ZD72 Z protection filter at Adorama, Bhphoto, GetOlympus.
General links to all new Olympus stuff at Adorama.
ALL new stuff announced at Photokina at Amazon.
Panasonic preorders:
LX100 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto. Europe at WexUK.
GM5 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto. Europe at WexUK.
GM5 in red at Adorama.
35-100mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
88 Responses
Robin gives again a good impression about the usefulness of a lens in practical use to me, while Frank does emphasize on the sharpness in a good way.
The more i see and read about this lens, the more i want it. Simply amazing.
I’m underwhelmed by Robin’s and the other guys pics, but Frank’s pics are awesome. Is this a lens that takes a certain skill level to produce “the goods”?
i guess every lens needs skills to show it in a good way. I think you prefer to focus on the detail rendering.
Yeah indeed, photography is for me, creating a sharper visual imaging than what I see with my own eyes.
Robin’s shots with the 75 have something really magic. I just don’t see that in his shots in the 40-150 review. Give him more time and better light conditions I fairly sure he’ll churn out the same stuff he’s done with the 75 in the past.
I’m looking at these review, and wondering if I should sell my 75 in order to help pay for the 40-150. Frank’s shots make me think “of course”, Robin’s shots make me thnk I have to keep the 75. First world problems…
Frank does much macro and focus stacking so that’s why the close up’s are more “capturing”, because this is his specialism.
I am, though, very pleased by Robin’s examples and it proves this lens is as good as Olympus advertises it. I will have it in a month or so, but now I know for sure it’s a keeper as well
Robin has a certain style to his photography that I appreciate. His use of back-lighting is a nice change.
I know for sure that this lens is sharper than the 45mm f1.8, even without doing any side by side comparison. However, I would be very intrigued to find out if it performs better than the highly regarded 75mm F1.8 lens, perhaps in another blog extension of this review which I do intend to do.
,.
well , we might see the extended review about this Zoom lens compared to Prime lenses Oly MZD’s especially the F1.8/75mm .
the 40-150 was designed to be better then the SHG line, so you are not the only one who is sure about its performance. And you also know the 45 is rather low priced but excellent performer. for smaller (indoor) locations its a better choice then this excellent zoom anyway imo
yup,.i hope Robin statement is true,
it just so difficult , believe that this lens is better than SHG line also the MZD F1.8/75mm.because is a rare case that a Zoom lens better than the Prime.
I guess i’ll have to find out my self at the end of this month, when my 40-150 is arrive.
One of my friend in Indonesia had Lucky enough to test the lens during this week.
You can trust Robin. Everything he says about Oly is true. He is very objective.
At least as you are, dear Shenkie… and probably way more 🙂
i heard/read about the zd 75, and saw online photos. The SHG’s are already excellent. I dont believe that these days a prime is necesarilly better then a zoom, except that its possible to come up with a wider aperture version, for better lowlight performance and/or different moods in rendering. I think the 40-150 has not advantages vs the 75mm. For my needs, I would go for the 75 (though that 40-150 samples are reallly awesome)
Well, the 75mm prime will always have those stops advantage compared to the f2.8 pro zoom. It’s not something to forget. I would prefer the 75mm “stopped” at f2 during a concert and keep ISOs low.
A different lent.
This 40-150mm looks amazing.. :/
75mm has 1 and a third stop advantage, not 2, if i’m not mistaken. 😉
You’re correct, it’s more than a stop and that’s why I used the plural (perhaps in a wrong way). Anyway, I think people got the idea 🙂
“the 40-150 was designed to be better then the SHG line”
That’s not true. Oly ZD never made the claim that this zoom bested the top 4:3 lens in sharpness–=The 300/2.8.
well that claim was posted as a quote here…but not specically the 300mm as you maybe know,that one is in another price league.
Olympus themselves pointed out that the µ4:3 40-150/2.8 bested the 4:3 150/2 and 35-100/2 with respect to MTF curve flatness. However, the 150/2 was SECOND to the 300/2.8 in that regard—not FIRST.
Nevertheless, if a modern µ4:3 zoom can best the 150/2, then a modern super telephoto prime surely can as well. Zooms have an inherent weakness with respect to primes. They incorporate more elements. Beyond a critical point, the more elements one adds to a lens design, the less contrast one ends up with. The less contrast, the less overall lens sharpness. I am well aware of modern lens coatings and how they severely retard flare. Nevertheless, no matter how well those coatings reduce flare, they NEVER reduce them to ZERO. So, a modern prime built to the same exacting standards as a similar zoom will always be sharper.
that claim was posted here as a quote in the headlines a while ago, but it was specificaly focusing on the shg zooms like the formidable 35-100. Ofcourse not the 300mm as this is in a total different price league. I re-replied on your post since my 1st one didnt show up sofar.
already 2 replies i made and both not show up here
see my reply above Jono
It is better. It is best lens Olympus has ever made.
Don’t be fanatic .
The most likely outcome If the lens compare with 75mm F1.8 is equal to 75mm F1.8 standard or the 75mm edge it .
Compare with 45mm F1.8 , it might beat it in sharpness & resolution but still the 45mm is my pick for 90mm shooting because of that fast aperture .
No chance this lens is practical in studio portrait works , except for outdoor wildlife shooting .
I’m not fanatic, i was just quoting ,Robin statement,you should read all his review.
Robin’s statement as my lens guideline ?
I know this guy & not feel comfortable with his current remark on this zoom lens , “best m4/3 lens ever” . Maybe I need to come to invite him to come out from Oly world to check stuffs around .
I even doubt if he know what is Nocticron & Summilux in m4/3 arsenal .
Well, he did do a side by side review of the Oly 25 and the Panny 25. As an owner of the Panny 25, I agree with his overall assessment: if you own neither, the Oly 25 is better workhorse lens.
This 40-150/2.8 zoom bested both the 4:3 150/2.0 prime and 35-100/2.0 zoom with respect to MTF flatness. Is that impressive enough for you?
Generally speaking, it is easier for lens manufacturers to optimize for sharpness with longer telephoto lenses than shorter ones. For instance, 4:3 MTF flatness king was the 300/2.8, with the 150/2 running second. If Oly ZD can produce a zoom to eclipse the 4:3 150/2, they can definitely do the same with a modern µ4:3 prime super tele.
As sharp as the 75/1.8 may be, it’s still not ready for prime time. It needs to be upgraded to PRO status first. I am not used to having to concern myself with whether a lens can moisture or a little dust. The 75/1.8 design needs to be tweaked to be splash-, dust-, & freeze-proof. The incredible 60/2.8 macro as well can stand a tweaking to freeze-proof status to be fully PRO-worthy.
Static subject, 1/1600 sec and iso 500 is nearly as funny as nano four thirds and “pro”.
Can you teach us why this is funny, so that we can improve our poor shooting skills?
Thank you!
Are you kidding? Just check any basic photo manual and look for “freezing motion” or “ISO noise”.
Oh, what a pity. I was hoping Mr. Pro would have been so kind. Now I need to wait all this time until I am ready for anything basic.
You get paid for this I presume? Your life can’t be so sad that you’d be here because you’ve got nothing better to do?
You mean it isn’t so funny on 35mm as 1/6000, f/5.6 and ISO 1600?
Not as funny as u who claims to be Pro with nothing to show. If your nearly as good as a photographer you would have been acknowledged as a representative of the camera u are using. Clearly you’re not.
In all fairness, the first part of Pro’s remark is not entirely unjustified; Even handheld it seems Robin used a fast shutter speed for no evident reason which led to upping the ISO, which is detrimental to the IQ of the final image, to someone understanding photography it just seems weird and maybe funny coming from someone who is a professional.
I understand it’s probably not really Robin’s choice as it seems the kind of weird setting some cameras would adopt in A mode, but still, that’s why some of us go manual or severely limit max ISO under such conditions.
Maybe he did so just to have more dark areas on the pic while shooting wide open. It may not be the only way to achieve this, but it looks great IMO.
Good point, however he still had latitude to increase shutter speed and keep ISO lower and get the same effect with less noise, especially on an E-M1 (or E-P5 for that matter) with a 1/8000s max shutter speed.
But hey, it’s still a nice picture from what appears to be a fine lens, that was the whole point and what really should matter in the end anyway.
Robin Wong could shot that pic 1/8000 of a sec but what’s really important is the output. The shot photo he took looks great. Sometimes it’s not about the numbers nor the settings but the end result what counts and his pics to me looks excellent.
+1 It’s never about numbers. A lot of gearheads waste time pixel peeping and talking about numbers instead of looking at the whole picture.
It’s like saying “those leaves look ugly” while looking at a beautiful tree.
Lonely trolls focus just on numbers, the best way is to ignore them as usually. 🙂
(And just to be honest, I also talk about numbers sometimes, but with friends and some mojitos 🙂 )
I think sharing tips on how to better use the gear isn’t reprehensible. For example my suggestion that people force the shutter speed lower in challenging conditions is something I’ve found extremely useful. I just wanted to share that.
In a lot of ways, photography has a split personality…you have to care a little about the gear and how you’re using it, not wasting light unnecessarily. You also can’t focus too heavily on it or you’ll miss the beauty of the shots. The recent obsession with noise is ridiculous. Robin’s photos are all very nice. People should get over it. But it doesn’t mean you can’t learn a thing or two about the exposure triangle while you’re at it.
Please feel free to share more tips 😉
By the way, the troll is the one going around complaining about other people’s observations (complaints) and insulting them. Get over yourself. 🙂 Enjoy the photos and the commentary. Don’t assume other people are any more or less sad than you are; it makes no difference.
I disagree. We have good examples of trolls here: they simply bash the system without adding a reason. It’s like going to someone else home and act impolitely, without having been invited. Disagreeing, and complaining, is not trolling, when done politely and explaining the personal point of view.
On the other hand, you are clearly showing yourself to be good troll fodder when you demonstrate that even constructive criticism is dealt with as some sort of attack on the system.
Constructively discussing how one aspect of a thing could have been improved is not the same as denigrating the whole (and while Pro was indeed a troll, it doesn’t mean that all his points are necessarily without merits, it would be intellectually dishonest to think so).
I’m sorry but I don’t know the rules of the perfect troll 😉
And to be clear, I have never written that Pro is a troll.
I was referring to the “famous” ones (or one?). I usually don’t reply to them..
Which part of Pro’s criticism was constructive?
They’re absolutely without merit because of the larger intrinsic context in which they were leveled; that is to say to push an agenda of inflammatory negativity for its own sake.
To think anything other than THAT is what is intellectually dishonest.
“Sometimes it’s not about the numbers nor the settings…”
Sometimes? It’s NEVER about the numbers or the settings … it’s about the image.
The biggest mistake a lot of MFT shooters make it trusting auto exposure. AE doesn’t take advantage of the in camera IS. It’s why I switch to shutter priority mode or manual as soon as I enter a dark environment and set shutter speed according to the movement of my subject. With a standard zoom (12-40) I’ll go as low as 1/15 for static subjects and 1/30 for static people. (Posing for a photo) The E-M1’s IS does fine down to 1/5 with the 12-40, but 1/15 gives enough margin of safety. 1/60 is safe for most events if you take multiple shots, unless people are running or falling over drunk. 😉
Even for sports, 1/1000 is more than enough. I’d rather stop down a little and reduce the chances of missing focus on a fast moving subject than shoot wide open and get a slightly more blurred background or risk using a higher ISO.
But not half as funny as Harrydicktom calling himself ‘Pro’.
Weird how ‘Detail’ posted at the same time.
LOL
Wong: that is not fine detail, it’s noise…
Just like u…. Just making a lot of noise with nothing to show.
LOL
I think the 75mm to be far more useful for portraits. If you want less of the distracting background (bokeh seems a bit harsh due to large DOF) you need to go to 150mm for my personal taste (see Robin Wongs pics). But then you need to stand very far away for half-body shots, for example, which is not always possible (I prefer my 85 FOV on FF due to this, compared to the 70-200/2.8).
Photographers often forget that there are a plethora of other techniques for isolating subjects aside from blurring out the background. Since I’ve moved to MFT, I’ve started using techniques like backlighting or darkening the background. During post production I often exaggerate the illumination differences between the subject and background just to add more isolation and bring more focus to the subject. Selecting lower contrast backgrounds is also often an option, and also finding backgrounds that actually compliment your subject and working with them. It’s easy to forget that bokeh isn’t the only tool you have to control the isolation of your subject. 😉
Of course I also blur out the background sometimes too, but a combination of techniques is certainly preferable, regardless of your camera and lenses. Adding variety to your photography is never a bad idea.
Of course, but often in uncontrolled situation there is no possibility to do just that. I don’t want to spend hours in post for many pictures, too. And finally, I don’t want photography to become a software issue: have one lens and do everything else in post with PS (like smartphones do to create a sense of shallow DOF). But you are of course right, that it is possible to use different techniques to create the desired effect.
1. It’s still fairly easy to get shallow DOF on MFT. You know the math, use it. Know what your camera can do and use it to do what you want. The same is true no matter what sensor size you’re using or what your lens is.
2. No matter what system you use, you’re a poor photographer if shallow DOF is the only tool at your disposal to create subject isolation. Every photographer needs to use a combination of composition, subject positioning, lighting effects and selective focus.
3. Nobody said you have to do anything in post. The assertion was that you use a variety of techniques and not rely so heavily on selective focus. I don’t care what you do in post, if all you’re doing is blurring out the background, your photography isn’t going to be all that diverse. Instead of just blowing it away, why not use it once in a while? 😉
Agree with all your points. Didn’t say it is all I wanna do and the only thing I do. However, my wife’s clients like portraits with shallow DOF and we like it, too, so we use it quite often. Bokeh is important to us, I don’t like it to be harsh. When photographing wildlife using the TC I often would like to have the subject nicely separated from the background if possible, the same with a bride at a wedding. Others don’t care, that’s o.k. Many pics I saw of birds (Pekka P.) showed the opposite for me with this lens. Again, other may disagree, that’s fine. You can put it as you want: it’s not always possible to compose your shot as one wishes. And here FF gives me more freedom to fulfil that. But I have an OMD, too, and I like it. I like it better even than the XT1 despite the larger DOF and will keep it. This lens for me will be great as a close up lens with TC for butterflies and similar animals, due to the larger MFD compared to the 60mm. It looks very sharp, too.
I always say that there’s no reason you can’t have it all. Buy a larger sensor camera if it works for you. Heck, buy both. It’s not expensive to own an A7R with a fast prime for portraits + an E-M1 for other shots. I just think if you’re going to shoot with a particular camera, you should know going in that there are differences and you should learn to appreciate them and work with them.
I’m really looking forward to getting this lens because I do love telephoto work. The longer working distance I find gives me a lot more control over how I compose a shot, what’s in the background, etc… That’s why I love telephotos. They remove a lot of the need for shallow DOF just because of the basic geometry. On the other hand, I love a good wide lens or fisheye too. There’s nothing like having insane amounts of detail in a shot and really making a person feel like they’re right there. In that case, you want all the DOF you can get. If the 40-150 is half as good as the 12-40, I’ll be happy, but I’m pretty excited by the news that it may, in fact, be much better.
Indeed, it is my goal to have two systems complementing each other. The FF is used for all the shallow DOF work (although the 75mm is a great lens with great quality, too), focus tracking and larger print sizes. The Oly is easily transportable (nice thing I learned again when going to Wyoming two weeks ago. Hand-baggage regulations made it ideal for travel), still providing excellent quality. Shot a lot of comparisons against the XT1 using the Voigtländer 25mm/0.95 against the Sigma 35/1.4 Art mounted on the Fuji. I was hardly able to tell them apart (Oly was slightly sharper and the files where just half the size). So no reason to keep both. Interestingly, my impression was that DR was a bit better, especially in the highlights with the OMD. But my preferred use of the OMD is handheld macro. the 60mm is just great and it is a breeze to use focus peaking with backbutton focus during AF-S mode (EVF is clear and more accurate with peaking in my opinion, too). The new 40-150 is a lens I need to convince my wife to buy. But first, the Sigma 50 Art is on my list.
I found the same thing with the DR on the E-M1. I find that feature really useful for wide naturally lit indoor shots and landscapes where highlight recovery is outstanding. In fact the DR is so good, it really pushes the limits of the glass in terms of color fringing. I’m especially curious to see how the new lens does in this area.
Pretty cool of you to post reviews written by Olympus employees
While true, the photos he took are with the new lens and are a good representation of they type of quality one can expect from it. Doesn’t matter if they were shot by the CEO of Olympus, as long as they were shot on an m43’s cam with that lens, they are useful.
Amen!
LETS TAKE THE CHANCE AND GIVE THEIR VIDEOS A THUMBS DOWN!!!
let canon USA KNOW what you think!!!
that will help more then complaining here.
http://youtu.be/5_LFmQ6eH1I
What is it about? I didn’t get it. A new wooden frame for pictures? :)))
I can’t stand corporate commercials these days. They are all the same. Let’s try to pull at some heartstrings…every one deep down inside is an artist and a visionary…you just need to believe in yourself. Makes me want to vomit. Just sell me the dang product and leave it at that- I’ll add the context.
I would not generalize: I like commercials well done, even more if the product is good for real. For example I loved the gm5 video posted not so long ago, it was simple, well made, and most of all it was showing the product.
In this case a lot of people were expecting something new, something real, a product. And they got disappointed.
Nice to see that Canon wants to think/consider those behind the gear, but who cares? Those dreaming of a new L lens, a super megapixel camera, a mirrorless revolutionary product, a small 35mm camera with a small and light lenses line up… I can only imagine their faces.
And no, I’m not happy to see it, I’m not trolling around against Canon: it’s just a pity they try to “sell” some air when a lot of photographers are asking/wishing for something more real and over the top.
I hope at least they didn’t waste too many money and time for this “campaign”. 🙂
A countdown timer for a marketing campaign that advertises nothing but some nostalgia for times that have passed. Meanwhile, Canon’s sensor architecture remains 5 years old and they haven’t introduced anything new or groundbreaking in years >>
http://photorumors.com/2014/10/07/canon-does-not-have-a-new-impossible-product-just-a-new-marketing-campaign/
Yes, I know, mine was sarchasm. 😉 thank you anyway.
I’m not a Canon user, but even though I felt sorry for all those who were waiting and dreaming for something real, tangible.
From the photos, I’m expecting the lens to be best at the long end, 150mm. I ordered mine with the 1.4x converter. Super excited, and it’s hard to wait until next month or possibly later to try it out.
The amount of detail is amazing- for M43. It’s also a well built lens- for any camera system actually. There are some excellent options out there though. I feel this is for those M43 diehards and size and weight might push it over the limit. The picture quality appears to be very promising though. I actually find the increased DOF to seriously be an advantage for longer lenses like this. If you can swallow the price it just might be the new must have for the Oly system.
This is a testimony for having very good glass resulting in better photo’s.
It’s not that big or heavy. I’ve had a chance to handle it already.
The results so far look impressive. My concern is tracking moving subjects at long focal lengths, which is always a challenge. The absence of samples featuring fast moving things is peculiar for such a lens. Hopefully there is nothing to worry about.
Did you read the review?
“… I shall make a note to try out the continuous focusing (with tracking) capability in near future….”
“I acknowledge that there are several important aspects which I have not tested for this lens:
2) Continuous AF with tracking ability – I did not have the right environment to test this (no, I am not going to ask Nicole to run toward me, that is too…. weird).
All of the above, I do intend to do in my coming review extension.”
Thanks.
No, I did not read it. Just had a quick look at the images.
Pekka Potka posted Hands-on preview on prototype/pre-ord version of this lens, it seems to include some photos of flying birds as well, check it out: http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/2014/9/15/mzuiko-40-150mm-f28-pro-zoom
isnt this more depending on the body and skillls of the photographer, maybe the lens way how it moves the elements may add to speed, but tracking is more up to the body’s af system.
These are nice pictures, but I am not at all sure that they are blowing away the results I get with my Olympus 75-300 Mark II at 75-150mm in decent light.
I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m looking forward to slapping some extension tubes on this sucker and seeing how well it’ll do serious macro! If the len’s close up capabilities are as good as it looks they are, we might have ourselves a 150mm macro with just a little help!
Looks like I have to get this and retire my 35-100…
imo the 35-100 renders slightly better at the oof areas plus the extra stop for lowlight is a plus too….ofcourse the difference in size and weight is huge though.
They’re both f2.8, unless you add the 1.4x converter to the 40-150.
i prefer to believe the info on the barrel instead of alternative wisdom
I’m really excited to receive this lens and the TC. The sample images look great in terms of sharpness and rendering of OOF areas. The macro capability is impressive as well. One thing I am a little confused about is the MFD of the lens. Supposedly the MFD is on the longer side of the lens? The main thing I was lacking in my kit was reach in low light and it looks like this 40-150 will get me that range and speed. It’s not that the 75/1.8 wasn’t good, it’s just that I couldn’t get close enough to really get the shot I needed.