It is when I see language like this that I become worried.
QUOTE:
The M Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mmm F4-5.6, perhaps unsurprisingly, has broadly
similar optical characteristics to its Four Thirds cousin, which is no bad
thing. However there is some penalty for the compact design: the extreme
corners are a little soft, especially at the wide end, and chromatic aberration
is noticeably increased.
Compared to the highly-regarded Panasonic Lumix-G 7-14mm F4, the Olympus also
holds up pretty well; in general it's at least as sharp in the center of the
frame, but softer in the corners, and at 14mm it's sharper right across the
frame. On Panasonic (but not Olympus) cameras the 7-14mm benefits from
correction of lateral chromatic aberration; however when tested on the E-P2, it
exhibits less objectionable fringing than the 9-18mm anyway.
QUOTE END
Knowing that sites like dpreview hardly ever directly say that a piece of
equipment is bad (they do not want to bite the hand that feeds them, after
all), for me this is codespeak for the lens being a dog.
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
On May 9, 2010, at 10:49 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
> I've just had a quick look at the dpreview test (http://bit.ly/b3g6IN)
> and it doesn't look that bad, to my relatively uncritical eye. But since the
> Panny 7-14 looks only slightly larger I should be tempted by that, especially
> if money were no object.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On 9 May 2010, at 20:08, zuiko wrote:
>
>> since you have a Panasonic body, I'ld go for the 7-14. The only
>> disadvantage is that it does not use filters.
>> It is faster and only a bit bigger (the 9-18 uncollapsed is probably
>> about the same size), and apparently well corrected on Panasonic. I'm
>> underwhelmed by the optical quality of the M.Zuiko's to say the least
>> (from what I see in the tests).
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Iwert
>>
>> 2010/5/9 Nathan Wajsman
>>> During my trip to US later this month, I plan to take advantage of exchange
>>> rates and relative prices and get a wide angle zoom for my Panasonic GF-1.
>>> When the new 9-18mm from Olympus was announced, I got pretty excited about
>>> it, as its focal range is exactly what I need, and the light weight and
>>> compactness are very much in keeping with the whole Micro 4/3 credo.
>>>
>>> However, reading the review of the lens on dpreview, I get a distinct
>>> impression that the 9-18 is dog's breakfast: unsharp in corners (improves
>>> when stopping down, but so does every lens), high chromatic aberration,
>>> flare--in other words, a high price to pay for small size. The Panasonic
>>> 7-14mm seems more solid and better performing.
>>>
>>> So now I am leaning towards the 7-14. But before placing the order, I would
>>> like to hear any personal experiences with these 2 lenses, in Micro 4/3
>>> mount (the 9-18 is available in regular 4/3 where it is apparently a lot
>>> better optically). The $300 price difference is of no consequence.
>>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|