Darren MIles reviewed the new Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO lens. Just watch the video to see what he thinks about the lens!
And a new great set of image samples has been posted by Edmond Terakopian on Flickr.
Olympus Preorders:
7-14mm f/2.8 PRO lens: Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, GetOlympus, WexUK, AmazonUK, AmazonDE,
8mm f/1.8 PRO lens: Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, GetOlympus, WexUK, AmazonUK, AmazonDE,
Titanium E-M5II: Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, GetOlympus, WexUK.
Accessories:
7-14mm Olympus LC-79 Lens Cap at BHphoto.
Olympus PPO-EP02 Dome Port for 8mm at BHphoto.
Olympus PPZR-EP05 Focus Gear for 8mm at BHphoto.
Olympus POSR-EP10 UW Anti-Reflecting Ring for 8mm at BHphoto.
73 Responses
i like the whirling sound on each segment~
I like the tripod
I never got the chance to get myself a nice tripod… sigh…
And his hair is cute
Where’s the side-by-side comparison or actual competitive testing? How do we know the IQ is really any better than the Panny 7-14mm or – for nearly twice the price – the Oly 9-18mm f4? How’s the performance on a Panny body?
I’d like to see the performance of the 9-18 at 7.
I’d like to see the performance of the 7-14 at 18….
I’d like to see the performance of the 9-18 at 6 pm…
I’d like to see the 9 to 18 v2, for those on a budget. OR THAT SLOW 9mm prime.
Good job Darren. I like your video reviews.
Never mind all that. Just get the 7-14mm 2.8.
Well, I own the Panasonic and I can’t wait to buy the MZuiko 7-14. I know how the Panasonic does on Olympus cameras, and until now there was no alternative. From the samples linked here I can see that many “flaws” are less of an issue.
Add the fact that it’s weather sealed, f2.8 (not that important, since I usually use the Pana sibling from f5.6 and narrower), and has a closer minimum focus distance, and to me it’s great upgrade.
I reviewed the pany last year, the major issues for me were weird flare patterns and noticeable ca’s. Build isn’t even close, the oly simply crushes the pany.
Ps – glad you like my hair
On Pana bodies there is CA correction.
I used it with a GH4 and still saw more than my fair share of CA’s – might be my copy – found it to be excessive – the bigger issue was the flare performance (ugly purple and green blotches that posed some real issues in photoshop) – for the record, this isn’t to say the Pany is a bad lens, far from it, but side by side, I’m taking the Oly for the kind of work I do – it works better for me…
Lol……14-28 F5.6. Could somebody tell me whats so pro about that.
Exposure 2.8 with DoF 5.6 is a huge win for architecture, did you view the video? He said he shoots up to F11 to get everything sharp.
Lol……F11 to get sharpness in combination with a M43 sensor equals a lot of noise without the perfect conditions. Whats pro about that?
I was referring to shooting real estate, architecture, landscapes in general – not necessarily referring to the 7-14. I’ve found that for real estate shooting with this lens and an m43 body that f/5.6 to f/6.3 are more than adequate for DOF purposes..
Would be way into diffraction on m43.
Weather sealing, rugged construction, high optical quality…
Enough for you?
Don’t think so. He’s simply too thick to understand this 😉
what are stupid calculating ,are you?
It does not make sense. The weight of the OM-D EM-1 with this 7-14/2.8 is hardly any different to the full frame Sony A7II with 16-35 Zeiss Sony lens. Similar in weight, and the lenses costing around the same price range. But the Sony gives a FF sensor whereas the Olympus gives a m43 sensor. Why would anyone choose the OM ahead of the Sony?
I wonder how the Zeiss does at 14mm.
Or at f2.8.
Or shooting macro.
Or under the rain.
Poor Sony.
All right, but apart from the speed, the close focusing distance, the weather sealing and the wider angle of view, what has Olympus ever done for us?
Nothing bad, PRO line is proof of that!
The aqueducts?
Same as the Olympus above 14mm (eq. 28)…..
Yep only fools would go for the noise M43 offers.
Maybe they’re already invested in m43 bodies and glass and making the switch would be prohibitively expensive. I agree with you, if they were just starting out there certainly is a case to be made about going for Sony.
Even if the bodies are similarly sized, the Sony lenses are bigger – so if you travel, there’s a Lot of appeal for m43….
*sigh*
This lens gives same field of view as 14-28mm for FF and same light density as f/2.8.
So if you would be comparing Sony 16-35mm f/4 to Nikon 14-28mm f/2.8, tell how many would not call you as idiot?
This is now 7-14mm f/2.8 vs 16-35mm f/4. The Sony is one stop slower, Sony is much narrower (not so wide) and it isn’t even weather sealed but just dust and moisture resistance! (Read Sony warranty and product sheet and you find out that Sony doesn’t mention anything about splash proofing or warranty about water damages from splashes, like the Olympus that gives warranty and guarantee it withstands splashes and even demonstrates what it can take like you can dip camera under waterfall (or shower) kind treatment!)
Why would anyone choose Nikon 14-28mm f/2.8 over Sony 16-35mm f/4? Hmm.. TOUGHT CHOICE! Exactly same choice as who would take Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 instead Sony 16-35mm f/4!
Your only point is the 14mm equivalent focal length, compared to the 16mm and sealing. DOF of the m43 lens is that of a f5.6 lens on FF, so you still have more DOF control (if required). Additionally, you make up the faster aperture by a four times larger sensor area. Therefore increasing ISO on an A7r more than makes up for this difference in apertures.
Your answer is very offensive, especially regarding the fact that you probably ignored equivalence altogether,
Who the H.ll cares about DOF equiv. It can focus plenty close so that compensates a lot too, if you must insist in shallow DOF.
I for one, chose the system (m43) also because it does have more DOF at brighter/faster lens opening.
Stop trolling around, m43 owners that use the gear professionally need not be converted to 35mm, they know exactly what they want and have.
Mostly they came from 35mm allready!
30 years ago a 35mm could exist next to a 6×6 camera, different tools, for different situations, nothing new. In my opinion the m43 is the new 35mm!!!
Aha. I do. If you want a full body portrait and separate it from the background a closer minimum focus distance is not an option. It is fine if it works for you. I don’t have anything against m43, used it quite a lot, too. But only if I point out some argumentative flaws doesn’t make me trolling, unless you only accept pro m43 opinions. Why should I want converting somebody? As you know what you want, my comment is not related to people like you.
“Stop trolling around, m43 owners that use the gear professionally need not be converted to 35mm, they know exactly what they want and have.Mostly they came from 35mm allready!”
Nobody is trying to convert anyone else. These things are just a response to ridiculous comments suggesting that this lens is the same a the Nikkor 14-24 but much smaller. It looks like an excellent lens, but to suggest that it’s the same as the Nikkor is just dishonest.
True the Oly is a 7-14mm! The optics don’t change. Nion doesn’t have a 7-14mm lens.
But I know what you mean, and there is no dishonesty as you suggest.
When you have m43 as your main system, there is no equivalence issue!
You need to, adapt to yhe gear. An isolated full body portrait is certainly possible, but it’ll have to be done with a different lens than you would use on 35mm. That’s what I’m trying to make clear.
There’s only an equivalence in the minds of gearheads and photographers that DO have a 35mm as main system. But even then it’s not a problem for them because they’d take a different system to their job!
I own both Sony A7r and EM-1. To be honest, Oly 7-14mm f2.8 is MUCH more practical than Sony 16-35mm f4. For landscape and architecture shoots, you often need to shoot up to F11 (FF equiv) to get everything in focus. You can achieve this with m4/3 at F5.6, which is 2 f-stops brighter than FF. This balance out any high ISO performance FF has over m3/4. Also, diffraction kicks in much later on m3/4 than on FF. Keep in mind Oly 7-14mm f2.8 has a minimum focus distance of 20cm, this should offer you high DOF control and let you be more creative. There are some really nice lens available for Sony A7s. But 16-35mm f4 simply can’t match with Oly 7-14mm f2.8
That is equivalence. The total amount of light determines your quality. You can raise ISO to get similar S/N ratio. NO advantage to either format when shooting close/beyond diffraction. The DPreview article and others explain this nicely.
Diffraction is not kicking in later with m43. It depends on pixel pitch. For the A7r it kicks in earlier (but this means the resolution will be limited to an effective lower MP count, which is always similar to that of m43). A 24MP sensor is not diffr. limited at f11, a 16MP FF sensor at f16. As to the quality of the Sony vs. the Olympus lens per se, that I cannot comment ( I don’t have the Olympus lens).
Costing the same range? The Sony lens is $1,999 and the Olympus is $1,299. That’s not the same range. At 1.2lbs vs. 1.9lbs, the advantages are cost and weight. I don’t care if a camera performs better than mine, just that mine can get the job done at a professional level. That’s what’s important. That’s what matters.
He’s talking about the FE 16-35 F/4, not the A mount 16-35 2.8.
Man. This guy.
Looks pretty good to me. I have a project coming up that will have me buying this lens.
More and more this is a compelling and versatile system.
im with you all the way mine is in the Amazon queue as we speak and im very excited im an armature non professional but have been on the m43 since its birth and now have the EM1 its is horses for courses but what a horse eh . Do we have the slightest shipping release date?
Lol you need to stop down Sony to f8 to get same sharpness as Oly @f2.8, still Sony corners gonna be soft to useless.
Exactly!
Sony 70-200mm f/4 lose in sharpness to Oly 40-150mm Pro and is one stop darker
Sony 16-35mm f/4 lose in sharpness to Oly 7-14mm Pro and is one stop darker
It is terrible thing to go and buy Sony or FF overall!
Yes, nothing comes close to Olympus in terms of optical quality.
I have 30+ years old Olympus lens 24 f2.0, it beats all my other vintage Konicas, Canons FD and even Zeiss lenses wide open it’s so sharp with great constrast and interesting OOF rendering.
These PRO lenses are the last nails in the CaniKon coffin.
Canikony if I may!
Ca-non
Nik-on
so-Ny
Olympus beats all three in optical quality, weight, build and exposure (1-2 stops benefit)
It is just crazy. 4 years ago I sweared in name of Nikon. 8 years ago I sweared in name of Canon and today I would swear in name of m4/3.
If you want best video for low budget (<$50k) production, then it is Panasonic. If you want best still camera, then it is Olympus. If you need super thing depth of field or ultra large prints (over 2×3 meters) with high quality then it is medium format. If you want super great video, it is blackmagic cameras, Alexa or RED (etc).
If you can't get great video results with Olympus, you can't do it with Panasonic neither. If you can't get it with Panasonic, you can't get it with any more expensive either.
How much is Olympus paying you guys? Hahaha! Wow… So you skip APS-C and Full Frame and go STRAIGHT to Medium Format? HAHAHA! I’m CRYING over here! Hahahaha! What, you wrote that for a free trip?
Hahahaha! Hey everybody, let’s USE APS-C Sony cams there IS the real quality… A7000, I’m coming! Damn yes! Third party lenses are actually great and AFFORDABLE. Thanks for NEX series!
There’s more to an image than overall sharpness. I don’t know why it’s the first thing people need to reference. Color, bokeh rendition.yada yada. I’d prefer the Sony sensor backing up that F4 then the Oly. That’s got to count for something here.
Lol…..this admin and his efforts to conseal the truth……..
yes it’s a conspiracy against you.
Well said Mundstrøm 😉
cheap shot though, I have to wonder what his point is?
His point is very clear.. The question is who pays him for constantly trolling here?
It’s us…
Of course it’s you, who else Viezuvure?
What is your problem, Eno?
You lost the ring Gollum, what a pity. 🙂
you guys have made my day
😉
I see what you did there 🙂
Hey just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re not really after you 😉
Excellent review Darren, thank you! Really looking forward to getting my hands on this lens! No were near as big and heavy as my Nikon 14-24 was!
Thanks Rick!!
This is the must have lens of 2015. Great review.
Thanks Jonsen!
Hey Darren!
I’ve watched lots of your reviews and have found them a useful tool whenever considering a lens for my m43 system!
I recall you reviewing a four thirds lens in the past and am curious if you have had the opportunity to shoot with the: Olympus four thirds 7-14 f4??
Can you comment on how it compares in I.Q to the new pro 7-14?
I actually have the 7-14 f/4 in my possession as we speak. It’s definitely showing it’s age, doesn’t handle CA’s quite as well and the focus motor is buzzy. And, it’s MUCH bigger/heavier… Optics are really good, but the 7-14 PRO is better.
This guy is a total LIAR. He said that he is in beautiful,SUNNY Naples Florida, then halfway through the video it looks like some clouds appeared as the video was noticeably darker in the middle section. And those people on the boat? They just looked cold and miserable!
😛
Nice video in all seriousness. If it’s anywhere near the quality of the 40-150, people who like this FOV should pick this one up. It actually looks smaller than I thought it would be.
Hah!
It’s a pretty sweet lens – and well, this time of year and can get t-stormy in the afternoon.
The quality is nearly identical to the 40-150.
I need one too now…