Hi everyone,I've got the 12-45 f4 but am after a lens  with more reach. Currently om systems have cashback on the f4 pro in the UK, but its still a lot of money. Or I can get the cheaper f4-5.6 r for about £100 used in excellent condition.For those that have used both, other than weathersealing, build and the fixed aperture how much difference is there to warrant the price difference?  Reviews say there is big step up in sharpness and iq, but I thought I remembered a thread on here where someone couldn't see much of a difference, but I can't find it now.So, go big and get the f4 or be sensible and try the plastic fantastic but miss the cashback and take the risk that I'll get the f4 later and end up spending more?Used as a hobby, photos recording life, family, days out, travel....Cheers,Dom

Domdooley wrote:Hi everyone,I've got the 12-45 f4 but am after a lens with more reach. Currently om systems have cashback on the f4 pro in the UK, but its still a lot of money. Or I can get the cheaper f4-5.6 r for about £100 used in excellent condition.For those that have used both, other than weathersealing, build and the fixed aperture how much difference is there to warrant the price difference? Reviews say there is big step up in sharpness and iq, but I thought I remembered a thread on here where someone couldn't see much of a difference, but I can't find it now.So, go big and get the f4 or be sensible and try the plastic fantastic but miss the cashback and take the risk that I'll get the f4 later and end up spending more?Used as a hobby, photos recording life, family, days out, travel....Cheers,DomGet both, return the one that you don't like?  Not sure if you can do that in the UK though.My one complaint about the plastic fantastic is that it has purple fringing around dark branches against light skies at full telephoto focal length.Other than that, it's really quite a bargain.And, I took one of the best photos I have ever taken with one....I don't use it much now, though, as I prefer to shoot longer, so the 100-400mm is my long lens for my purposes.   But the 40-150mm  kit lens really punches well above its weight....-JSome other shots from it:

I don't have the f/4 but the huge f/2.8 pro as well as the plastic fantastic.I would say for your use case the latter will do the job and given its low price you won't be breaking your wallet.In addition to that you can still re-sell it and get most of your money back in case you don't like it.Also consider Panasonic gx45-175 it is heavily better built and has a likeable internal focusing.

I have the f4 40-150, but use it in my 1.3, rather than my 5.3.  I don’t have the cheaper 40-150 now, but have had it in the past, i didn’t like it much and switched it for the Panasonic equivalent, which I remember as being smaller, better built, with better IQ.  In hindsight I suspect the difference was marginal.The f4 40-150 is in a different league.  It is hard to define, but the images it produces are noticeably better - probably a mixture of sharpness and contrast.  It isn’t a large lens and is very neat in the closed up off position.  It pairs very nicely with the f4 12-45.Cashbacks will come and go.  If you can do it, I suggest handling the different lenses.  Consider how committed you are to micro 4/3, and how committed you are to the longer focal lengths.  If in doubt try a cheaper lens first, you can always resell or trade it.

With the 12-45 you are used to be able to set it to one aperture and get similar shutter speed under the same conditions, independent of zooming in and out. That is more valuable than you can imagine. With the 40-150 f/4 you can do the same. WIth the f/3.5-5.6 you may find yourself struggling to get enough light (and thus acceptable shutter speed) at the long end.I don't have any of these lenses. I have the 7-14, 12-40 and 40-150 all in f/2.8. Before that I did have the 75-300 and always struggled to get enough light for an acceptable shot at the long end.I think I could have lived with the 12-45 and 40-150 f/4 had they existed when I bought my gear, but anything slower than f/4... definitely a no-go for me.

I have the f2.8 Pro and R lenses. I understand the f4 is similar to the f2.8 in terms of IQ, but you should look at reviews.The R unsurprisingly has lower contrast and resolution than the f2.8. You often see close up images taken with the R that look good because contrast and resolution matter less when the subject is close. The f2.8 still looks a bit better.The f2.8 is an exceptional lens in my opinion, absolutely worth the discounted £924 it cost me and a pleasure to handle.My copy of the R lens is also amazing for the £90 it cost me and its tiny weight.The two Panasonic tele zooms also look like reasonable options. I’d buy any of these used and try the specific copies before purchase. Fortunately my local camera shop had a used R one day and I was happy with it.Here is a direct comparison of the Pro and R .The sceneCrop from ProCrop from R with same processing from RAW in C1Crop from R with more aggressive processingIn your position, I’d buy one of the three kit zooms used and sell it at a small loss if you upgrade to a Pro zoom. You might even keep it as an easy to carry backup lens.Andrew

Thanks for the examples, they are really helpful. When I first looked at the crop I thought there was quite a difference between the  two but then the processing made a difference again making it even more diffult to pick!

Domdooley wrote:Thanks for the examples, they are really helpful. When I first looked at the crop I thought there was quite a difference between the two but then the processing made a difference again making it even more diffult to pick!I can't answer your original question for you. It all depends on what you shoot, how you view images, and your budget.  II think the current UK price for the 40-150/4 is a good one compared to used prices.I bought an OM1 at full price of £1,999 and could have walked out the shop the day I bought the 40-150 R with one for £1,724. I don't regret it, because I feel that gear is going to see inflation and I had the money available.Where the R lens falls down for me is distant skyline detail, like radio masts, wind turbines etc. I only have the R for situations where I'm not going to carry the Pro lens, so the R means I get a shot.You are going to need to work harder with processing shots from the R. Since I only shoot RAW, that means an extra 2 minutes per shot for me. If you shoot only jpeg, it means switching to jpeg + RAW and using say OM Workspace (which is free).TL:DR - if a 40-150 is a strategic purchase, may as well get the best lens you can within your budget. If you are not sure, then buying a used R is a pretty low risk option.Janet (jalywol) and I are both pretty picky about lenses. She has a better eye than me. We have both found the R lens adequate for when we want a lightweight kit. In my case, it's also when I don't want to carry a kit that would cost too much to replace - that would be a Laowa 10/2, used PL25/1.4 mk i, 40-150 R and a very used EM1.1.Andrew

The small and light 40-150r is a steal. I can argue that everyone should own one due to price, weight and IQ, just to have a long lens in your small bag for when needed, even if one always has one of the larger Pro zooms. I would start with that, then decide if you still want or need a Pro lens. There will always be sales

jalywol wrote:-JSome other shots from it:I really like this image.  Well done.

The Olympus f4-5.6 R is very compelling for the price and capable of good images, but I can see a clear difference between it and my Olympus 40-150 f2.8 (I assume the f4 pro has similar image quality). as other have mentioned, it's the color fringing on the R lens.

I'd get the Pro. Excellent option and pleasingly compact. IQ difference is significant, especially zoomed long.Cheers,Rick

The plastic fantastic as its reffered to is probably your best option at this point, its a handy lens and cheap to have and the image quality is ok, not as good as the pro versions but not far off either.Wether the difference is important enough for you , only you can decide.

Domdooley wrote:Hi everyone,I've got the 12-45 f4 but am after a lens with more reach. Currently om systems have cashback on the f4 pro in the UK, but its still a lot of money. Or I can get the cheaper f4-5.6 r for about £100 used in excellent condition.For those that have used both, other than weathersealing, build and the fixed aperture how much difference is there to warrant the price difference? Reviews say there is big step up in sharpness and iq, but I thought I remembered a thread on here where someone couldn't see much of a difference, but I can't find it now.So, go big and get the f4 or be sensible and try the plastic fantastic but miss the cashback and take the risk that I'll get the f4 later and end up spending more?Get the 40-150mm f4.It's a much better lens on every level. Constant f4 (fixed aperture) gives you more flexibility setting exposure and zooming. It will give you a bit more flexibility in lower light. It's a better match for your 12-45mm f4, too!The few times I bought cheap lenses, simply because they were cheap, I regretted it. When I finally sold them, I got a fraction of what I paid new.

Domdooley wrote:Hi everyone,I've got the 12-45 f4 but am after a lens with more reach. Currently om systems have cashback on the f4 pro in the UK, but its still a lot of money. Or I can get the cheaper f4-5.6 r for about £100 used in excellent condition.For a 40-150, I use the 14-150.  Tested better against the cheap 40-150, and not spending a bunch for the pro which has not come down in price used or the semi-pro which is too new to come down in price.  In fact, this lens compares well to the 12-40 F/2.8 at 40mm.

Thanks to those who gave advice, I can't justify the price difference so have ordered the f4-5.6r version. Ive no doubt the f4 is better, but as someone pointed out sales come and go and I can always upgrade later if needed.I'm looking forward to playing with the longer focal lengths in a cost effective way and I won't feel like I've wasted much if it doesn't get used often...Cheers

Domdooley wrote:Thanks to those who gave advice, I can't justify the price difference so have ordered the f4-5.6r version. Ive no doubt the f4 is better, but as someone pointed out sales come and go and I can always upgrade later if needed.Oh well, the Panasonic 45-150mm is a better lens.but you’ll end up with the 40-150mm f4 eventually. 😀I'm looking forward to playing with the longer focal lengths in a cost effective way and I won't feel like I've wasted much if it doesn't get used often...Telephoto lenses are fun!

I would make sure you have the r version, as the price is low, it is a good optic.If you need f4 then you have to get a f4 lens, im sure there are forum posts on the f4 and f2.8 m43 versions.