[ElJamoquio]

I wish I had the pics I took with the 40-150, but it was borrowed and I only took a few snaps out of curiosity. I eventually ditched my m43 kit, just didn't grab me.

There's actually precious little difference between the 16MP m43 sensors and the current 16MP APS-C sensors - that is, much less than the size differential would indicate.*

If you have the money to pay for the top M4/3 lenses, I'd say there's almost no difference. If you never print, there's really no difference (again, other than the higher cost).

Going from consumer 4/3rds to consumer APS-C, though, I disagree. There's a lot of difference in IQ, there's a stop of difference in total light gathered, and there's 50% more reach on 300/APS-C compared to 150/M43.

[luftfluss]

If you have the money to pay for the top M4/3 lenses, I'd say there's almost no difference. If you never print, there's really no difference (again, other than the higher cost).

Going from consumer 4/3rds to consumer APS-C, though, I disagree. There's a lot of difference in IQ, there's a stop of difference in total light gathered, and there's 50% more reach on 300/APS-C compared to 150/M43.

You quoted me talking about sensors, but you're talking about lenses... so, I think I'm going to drop out of this.

[ElJamoquio]

You quoted me talking about sensors, but you're talking about lenses... so, I think I'm going to drop out of this.

Do what you'd like, but you talked about both lenses and sensors in that post.

The pictures, as you know, are a product of both.

If you have the money for the top lenses (that can resolve good enough for a small sensor, and are fast enough for a small sensor) there's almost no difference between the two sensor sizes.

Currently there's several Voigtlander, etc lenses that, when paired with a M4/3 camera, can make pictures like an APS-C camera.


In my experience, if you're comparing, say, sub-$500 lenses, you're going to see a big difference between APS-C and M4/3.

[northcoastgreg]

My wife uses the Oly 40-150 on a OMD-EM5, and I have the 55-300. We've gotten good results from both. Can't really say one's better than the other.

I've shot with the Oly 40-150 on an EM-5, and have seen many images taken with the DA 55-300, and I would not expect there to be any significant difference between the two lenses in terms of sharpness. Both lenses appear to lose resolution as you get to the far end of the zoom. Both perform very well for consumer grade zooms, especially at wider focal lengths -- but they are consumer grade zooms! Don't expect limited or DA* (or pro or HG or SHG) performance out of these lenses.

One area where the DA 55-300 has a definite advantage (other than the greater range) is in coating technology. Even with a hood, the Oly 40-150 is a bit prone to veiling (and/or sensor) flare. And from the look of images I have seen from the DA 55-300, the pentax lens would seem to be capable of achieving greater microcontrast and better color rendition than the Oly lens.