Oly 9-18 vs. Panny 7-14: do you have these?

I am considering buying one of these two UWA zooms, but I'm having trouble deciding.

I'd really like the wider 7mm, but is it worth almost double the price???

Other elements of the lens aside (so, ignoring CA, distortion, IS etc.), has anyone used both these lenses? Did you find missing the extra 2mm wide?

Or, if you use the Oly, do you wish it was a bit wider? If you use the Panny, do you think it's worth twice what the Oly costs?

I realize the need/use of two more mm is pretty subjective, so I'm asking for subject input. Anyone have any subject, real world use cases on the difference between 7mm and 9mm?

--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

I have the 9-18mm, and it's plenty wide for me. It's great that I can zoom to an equivalent of 36mm for a more normal perspective. So I use it often as a walkaround lens when I go on vacation. It's fast and silent when autofocusing. It's more compact, and you can use filters on it, too, unlike the 7-14.

You can't really go wrong either way. Both are great lenses. But for my needs and budget, I'm really glad I went with the 9-18.

WT21 said:

I am considering buying one of these two UWA zooms, but I'm having trouble deciding.

I'd really like the wider 7mm, but is it worth almost double the price???

Other elements of the lens aside (so, ignoring CA, distortion, IS etc.), has anyone used both these lenses? Did you find missing the extra 2mm wide?

Or, if you use the Oly, do you wish it was a bit wider? If you use the Panny, do you think it's worth twice what the Oly costs?

I realize the need/use of two more mm is pretty subjective, so I'm asking for subject input. Anyone have any subject, real world use cases on the difference between 7mm and 9mm?

--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

Click to expand...

I have the 7-14mm, and the difference between 7-9mm is pretty noticeable. That said, I'm debating stepping down to the 9-18mm for the smaller size, filters, longer range, and price.

I find it difficult to use the Panasonic at the widest end... either ending up with very distorted-looking people or creating too much empty space in the frame. I'm a wide-angle "noob", and I just feel it is a bit unnecessary. If you've never owned an ultra-wide like me, you might feel the same way.

--------------------------------------------
Panasonic GF1
http://www.flickr.com/photos/grahamgibson/

I think I understand what you mean by distorted perspective. Using even a 35mm lens on a film SLR I consistently had problems. At that time I thought it was natural to use the widen FOV to capture more, like in a landscape. Sometimes it worked but often it did not.

Then I learned to think about the greater FOV differently. I made use of the distortion by placing the subject matter close to the lens, filling the frame with the subject while letting the background fill in. And just like that it turned about for me! The subject distortion seemed to vanish and the background added just the right context to frame the subject.

So, I no longer think of wide angle lenses as landscape lenses, if you will, but more akin to macro lenses. And the landscape comes along for the ride!



http://bit.ly/c3D04z
Olympus E-420 1/160s f/5.0 at 14.0mm iso800

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron

These are great responses. Thank you!

I did shoot a 17-40 on a Canon 5D for a while, so I have some experience with UWA. I liked that lens a lot, and given that it's FL is more like the 9-18, and given the price and
ability to take filters, maybe I should lean towards that one.

If the 7-14 was a comparable price, I think I'd go with the extra wide, but it's good points about it being a) more walk around, and b) filters. I am thinking this is more an outdoor lens for me, and one thing I've noticed (for whatever reason), my m43 seems to need more contrast boost than when I used the 5D, so a CP for outdoors might be a big help there.

--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

WT21 said:

I'd really like the wider 7mm, but is it worth almost double the price???

Click to expand...

I thought so, not wanting to wait for the 9-18. It's a lovely lens. When I turned back to scenics, though, it was disappointing for the reflections that often accompanied rectangular filter use. Disappointed, but not overly. I'd still be using it today if I didn't lose it (don't ask).

I decided to go the cheaper route to replace the loss, and I'm using it with satisfaction - there's no pinning for the loss of the 7-14. The loss of the 2mm on the wide end is obvious, but nothing that can't be compensated for IMO.

OTOH, there were some studies I've done where the extra 2mm and all that goes with that were useful traits to exploit. If you're not sure, I don't think at this point it's a significant factor in your determination, or your current objectives. Just another spec to hold you back from deciding. Excuse me if that's presumptuous - it's only meant to give you a nudge one way or another.

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

http://www.bobtullis.com

Heh, I almost think that "if you have to ask, then you don't need the extra 2mm".

--
--------------------------------------------
Panasonic GF1
http://www.flickr.com/photos/grahamgibson/

siminona said:

I have the 9-18mm, and it's plenty wide for me. It's great that I can zoom to an equivalent of 36mm for a more normal perspective. So I use it often as a walkaround lens when I go on vacation. It's fast and silent when autofocusing. It's more compact, and you can use filters on it, too, unlike the 7-14.

You can't really go wrong either way. Both are great lenses. But for my needs and budget, I'm really glad I went with the 9-18.

Click to expand...

Siminona - are you referring to the M. Zuiko 9-18 or the ED Zuiko? I own the E-620 and E-PL1. I'd like to get the Micro for the size and (less) weight, but the price is better on the ED Zuiko.

Maria

Have you seen the DPR review on the mZD 9-18, which includes a size comparison of the two 9-18 and the Panny 7-14:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_m_9-18_4-5p6_o20/page2.asp

Marla said:

siminona said:

I have the 9-18mm, and it's plenty wide for me. It's great that I can zoom to an equivalent of 36mm for a more normal perspective. So I use it often as a walkaround lens when I go on vacation. It's fast and silent when autofocusing. It's more compact, and you can use filters on it, too, unlike the 7-14.

You can't really go wrong either way. Both are great lenses. But for my needs and budget, I'm really glad I went with the 9-18.

Click to expand...

Siminona - are you referring to the M. Zuiko 9-18 or the ED Zuiko? I own the E-620 and E-PL1. I'd like to get the Micro for the size and (less) weight, but the price is better on the ED Zuiko.

Maria

Click to expand...

--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

Hi Maria! How are ya?

I was actually referring to the M.Zuiko 9-18. I had the larger 4/3 9-18, and it worked great on my Pen. But I ended up selling it for the smaller 9-18 for the size and the faster/silent AF. It was a tough decision because I had no complaints about the image quality from the larger lens, and there is a price difference, as you mentioned. In the end, though, I decided that the cost was worth it. The downside is that I no longer have an ultra wide lens for a 4/3 DSLR. Since you have the E-620, you might want the 4/3 version instead so it can do double duty.

By the way I ended up buying the M.Zuiko 9-18 used (pretty much new) on eBay. Plus I had Bing cashback, so the cost was just under $600. If you wanna take advantage of Bing, do it before the end of the month because the program ends on the 30th.

Marla said:

siminona said:

I have the 9-18mm, and it's plenty wide for me. It's great that I can zoom to an equivalent of 36mm for a more normal perspective. So I use it often as a walkaround lens when I go on vacation. It's fast and silent when autofocusing. It's more compact, and you can use filters on it, too, unlike the 7-14.

You can't really go wrong either way. Both are great lenses. But for my needs and budget, I'm really glad I went with the 9-18.

Click to expand...

Siminona - are you referring to the M. Zuiko 9-18 or the ED Zuiko? I own the E-620 and E-PL1. I'd like to get the Micro for the size and (less) weight, but the price is better on the ED Zuiko.

Maria

Click to expand...

Yes, I did. The problem is me! I would like the ED Zuiko version for the price, but it's almost twice the weight.

Thanks.

Maria
--

siminona said:

I was actually referring to the M.Zuiko 9-18. I had the larger 4/3 9-18, and it worked great on my Pen. But I ended up selling it for the smaller 9-18 for the size and the faster/silent AF. It was a tough decision because I had no complaints about the image quality from the larger lens, and there is a price difference, as you mentioned. In the end, though, I decided that the cost was worth it. The downside is that I no longer have an ultra wide lens for a 4/3 DSLR. Since you have the E-620, you might want the 4/3 version instead so it can do double duty.

By the way I ended up buying the M.Zuiko 9-18 used (pretty much new) on eBay. Plus I had Bing cashback, so the cost was just under $600. If you wanna take advantage of Bing, do it before the end of the month because the program ends on the 30th.

Marla said:

siminona said:

I have the 9-18mm, and it's plenty wide for me. It's great that I can zoom to an equivalent of 36mm for a more normal perspective. So I use it often as a walkaround lens when I go on vacation. It's fast and silent when autofocusing. It's more compact, and you can use filters on it, too, unlike the 7-14.

You can't really go wrong either way. Both are great lenses. But for my needs and budget, I'm really glad I went with the 9-18.

Click to expand...

Siminona - are you referring to the M. Zuiko 9-18 or the ED Zuiko? I own the E-620 and E-PL1. I'd like to get the Micro for the size and (less) weight, but the price is better on the ED Zuiko.

Maria

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thanks! Good input here. I've been waiting to see if the price will go down (probably dreaming) - or by some miracle, I find the M.Zuiko used. I sold my Canon equipment due to the weight. The ED is pushing it - it's almost twice the weight as the M.Zuiko.

Thanks for the info.

Maria

siminona said:

If you wanna take advantage of Bing, do it before the end of the month because the program ends on the 30th.

Click to expand...

Clarification, that's July 30th: "As of July 30th, 2010 9:00 p.m. PT, we will no longer be offering the cashback program."

A bit more time.
--
Sailin' Steve

I got the 7-14mm recently and I almost got the 9-18mm. It would've been nice to be able to use filters and pay much less but I figured that if I got the Olympus, I'll constantly be thinking about those extra 2mm on the wide end because I love to shoot wide. I'd rather spend a little more than get something cheaper but always be thinking "what if" which I don't do with the 7-14mm because I can live with the compromises. I didn't care too much about the difference between the 14mm compared to the 18mm on the long end because my 20mm pancake is so easy to bring with me. The size difference doesn't bother me (its still a pretty small lens) and I would've been annoyed with what some have called the 'parking feature' of the Olympus lens.

For me, I think its worth the price since there's very little that I can't fit in the picture and its important for me to be to be able to go as wide as I possibly can. Its really an amazing lens but whether or not its good value for you is totally up to you.

Oh, that's good to know! In that case I might just get the 14-150mm from eBay. If it comes out by then, that is.

sderdiarian said:

sderdiarian said:

If you wanna take advantage of Bing, do it before the end of the month because the program ends on the 30th.

Click to expand...

Clarification, that's July 30th: "As of July 30th, 2010 9:00 p.m. PT, we will no longer be offering the cashback program."

A bit more time.
--
Sailin' Steve

Click to expand...

I just bought the oly 9-18 and so far I love it. It focuses fast, silent, is light as a feather, only slightly bigger than the kit 14-42 that came with my ep1, and I've been experimenting with using ND filters, and I have a polarizer arriving today or tomorrow. Cant imagine a lens without being able to use filters with it. As already said, It's less expensive, lighter, and takes filters, to me it was a no brainer between the oly and the panny. That extra 2 mm (actually equal to 4 on a FF) is noticeable but nonetheless, the other pluses outweighed the small difference in mm. When I shoot something interesting I'll post some examples.

I wish I lived where I could test both. I did get a chance to test the 7-14 in Japan last year on my GF1 and liked it. Wide/close is one of my favorite types of shooting and I'm hoping to get the 7-14 soon. I've been holding out thinking the 9-18 might bring the price down but not so far.
--
It's easier to ask for forgiveness then to ask for permission.

The Olympus has good coverage at 100 degrees but the limits of... hmmm... how to say it... the point where coverage becomes so huge the photo becomes much more an excersice in distorted perspective control and 'art' rather than simple 'extra coverage' is around 115 degrees... about the maximum wide view of the Panasonic. But you pay a huge price for it, whereas the Oly lens is decent value for what it is compared to the APS-C world the Panasonic lens is waaay more expensive... and the equivalent Oly 4/3 lens is more than 2x the cost of similar APS-C product.

WT21 said:

I am considering buying one of these two UWA zooms, but I'm having trouble deciding.

I'd really like the wider 7mm, but is it worth almost double the price???

Other elements of the lens aside (so, ignoring CA, distortion, IS etc.), has anyone used both these lenses? Did you find missing the extra 2mm wide?

Or, if you use the Oly, do you wish it was a bit wider? If you use the Panny, do you think it's worth twice what the Oly costs?

I realize the need/use of two more mm is pretty subjective, so I'm asking for subject input. Anyone have any subject, real world use cases on the difference between 7mm and 9mm?

--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

Click to expand...

I do think the panasonic 7-14 is worth it's cost.

Disclosure, I've held and played with these lenses on display here in stores in Japan. I haven't puchased either yet - as next on the list is a nikkor 180 2.8

That being said -

The optics on the 7-14 are very nice. Ignoring CA (as that can be dealt with elsewhere) I like the build quality of the 7-14 alot.

The more and more I think about the lenses - and making my decision, the more and more the following factors have become important.

The Oly 9-18 (micro) Is half the weight, and much smaller when collapsed.
The Oly takes filters without issue.
The Oly extends a bit longer - giving me that 35mm range.

The Panny is wider, and that 2mm is quite a bit wider.
The Panny is heavier and larger without filters.
The Panny is twice the cost - and constant f4.

Both are very competent, and will have quite a bit of depth of field regardless. The real question may very well come down to - do you care alot about the cost difference? Do you care about the weight / size. IS slightly longer, or slightly wider, more important to you?

I really wanted to get the 7-14, but I am pretty much convinced that the system weight, size and longer zoom range may be more important to me. My primary system is a DSLR with quite a few lenses. Getting a very small competent system is my goal - and the oly has a strong weight advantage.

I Doubt you'll go wrong with either lens. I would probably buy a pancake 10mm (or possibly even 12mm) in a heartbeat over either of these lenses - but it doesn't exist.)
--
A poor photographer blames his tools.

I only have the Panasonic's 7-14 lens, and it serves as my primary lens on my trip to Asia last month. I think the key is about squaring up with your object when you are shooting at UW. Here are a few photos taken with the lens.

























btw, I am totally in love with this lens~! It's definitely one of the best lenses I've ever had~!!