According to Dpreview the “Panasonic 7-14mm offers more consistent sharpness across the frame at 9mm”
Anyway, the Olympus 9-18mmOlympus 9-18mmOlympus 9-18mmOlympus 9-18mm
Read the review: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/panasonic_7-14_4_o20/
Direct links to the lens:
Amazon
6 Responses
I think most people who get the 7-14 (and UWA zooms in general) tend to use them at the widest part nearly all the time (make a good case for fast UWA primes). In that case, the sharpness at the wider end of the lens matter a whole lot, and explains the effort Panasonic put into creating this lens (and also the price). If I could afford it I’d buy it in an instant.
What I wonder is why the micro four-thirds lenses is much more expensive than the four-thirds lens?
Aren’t they supposed to be easier to create with shorter flange distance? Don’t they use less glass?
Why do they cost more?
I assume the Panasonic lens have OIS which of course will make it more expensive than the Olympus one.
More expensive?
Less glass…? it will not be – but smaller and lighter they are.
and cheaper too: 7-14 mFT = 1000€ vs. FT=1700 €
@Johan: what lenses are you comparing? I don’t see an equivalent 4/3 lens to the 7-14mm lens offered for m4/3 by Panasonic. The pricing of products isn’t simply a matter of manufacturing costs, but also development costs and market demand. How else can you explain the price of a Leica M9, for example?
I’ve been using the 7-14mm on my Gf1 for a few months now and think it’s definitely a keeper. Not very usefull between 7-9mm unless you’re trying to get as much info as possible into the shot. Too much barrel distortion at 7mm in my opinion. Very evident when shooting people at this focal length. Great shots at 9mm and above. Highly recommended.
I think the 9-18mm Olympus offers better “bang for your $”.