[Klaus]

The Sony lens is worse than the Panasonic. They shouldn't have gone down to 16mm.

[Guest]

My guess is one is the 45-175; though I wonder if it is as good (or better) than the olympus 40-150. The other - hum. Not sure maybe the 17f1.8 but that was  already posted. Perhaps the 35-100f2.8 but that is hardly cheap.

[Klaus]

Well, I am talking about the Pana 14-42 II and 45-150. The results aren't stellar but I expected much less.

[thxbb12]

Is the 14-42II better than the Pana 14-45 and the 45-150 better than the Oly 40-150?

I have the Oly 40-150 that I bought used (like new) for 100 euros and I'm quite impressed.

 

I think part of the reason I'm impressed with the sharpness I get from MFT lenses is that the focus is always spot on. With a DSLR even if the lens is potentially sharper, a very slight AF inaccuracy makes it looks softer.

[goran h]

 

Well, I am talking about the Pana 14-42 II and 45-150. The results aren't stellar but I expected much less.

 


Heard some good reports from the 45-150, so I was not so surprised.

If also the 14-42 is in the same class as the old 14-45 this could be a good combo for a travelling kit.

I suppose both lenses have metal mount.

But now....just to wait for the review.


Göran

[vodanh1982]

Look like the II has some improvement at tele end.