My kit for Japan was pretty set early on. The surprise change for me was dropping the 12-60 kit and taking the 9, 15 and 17 primes instead, but the lens that was never under threat was the 40-150 Olympus kit.
This very cheap feeling, kit-est of kit lens is not underestimated by reviewers, many putting it front and centre for “best buy” and some even placing it higher up in the range.
It’s biggest problem is the forrest of competitors, Olympus alone offering three 40-150 lenses, Panasonic even more in that general class, but as the very cheapest and lightest, it is a travel shooters life saver.
The lens has ideal characteristics for a landscape lens, edge to edge sharpness, fine micro-contrast and decent distortion control. It is also reasonably immune to flare and uncontrolled highlights.
To be honest, I used it too little, most of these images coming from our first day, with me switching to the 45 for the rest of the trip, but that was not the lenses fault, just my funk on the trip meaning anything would basically do.
In Capture 1, I find the de-haze control, which I often apply before Clarity, Contrast or Brightness, is less needed thanks to the inherently strong micro contrast, but Saturation and Clarity do add depth.
I have the other two 40-150 lenses Olympus offers, but see no reason to use these better built and theoretically superior lenses for this type of work. The shallow depth of the f2.8 is a creative option and the f4 lens is possibly the best value over all, but the little kit lens has no reason to feel inferior except in build and that has to be balanced with it’s easy replaceability (about $100 in a kit).
It even adds a little inner glow sometimes, like the 17mm f1.8 or 12-40 f2.8.
AF speed is excellent, smooth and silent enough for video, Bokeh is nice, better than the f2.8 on the whole and balance decent enough on most cameras.
Is it a war-zone lens? Not on its own, but realistically you could take three or four of them and feel safe enough.
Just magic.