11-28-2011, 10:11 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1322469787' post='13296']Actually some users have already reported that even the X 45-175 is actually also NOT sharper than the 45-200.[/quote]
Yep, lots of conflicting observations these days. I haven´t used the 45-200 nor the X 45-175, as yet I prefer the simplicity of M.Zuiko 40-150, which is optically pretty good although there is no image stabilization with Pana cams. The compact built of the X 45-175 is great but I´m not too keen on the powerzoom feature for shooting stills and the OIS is said to yield inconsistent results. Talking about OIS, last time I used my 100-300 at 300mm I had clearly better results at 1/320 secs with OIS off than with OIS on at 1/800 secs.
Yep, lots of conflicting observations these days. I haven´t used the 45-200 nor the X 45-175, as yet I prefer the simplicity of M.Zuiko 40-150, which is optically pretty good although there is no image stabilization with Pana cams. The compact built of the X 45-175 is great but I´m not too keen on the powerzoom feature for shooting stills and the OIS is said to yield inconsistent results. Talking about OIS, last time I used my 100-300 at 300mm I had clearly better results at 1/320 secs with OIS off than with OIS on at 1/800 secs.