Olympus 14-42 IIR vs 14-42 EZ ?
gut licht wrote:
The EZ is nice built but has strong vignetting and is much less sharp in the corners. AT 42 mm you can focus closer. My EZ copy is in service the second time now: When I bought it it had focus issues, after pepair it was decentered. I think it is in service for more than 2 month. If you get a good copy you have a really small kit lens with good macro cabability, but the II R is sharper in general.
thanks. it looks like the II R is a safer choice (especially given the 100 EUR price difference) even though closer macro capability is tempting. more sharpness would also help.
when you say your lens was decentered after repair - how do you check for that? is it very obvious?
P.S. just checked friend's E-M5 + some lenses. Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 looked very good. would be interesting how the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens (which he did not have) performs but I've heard there are banding problems at high ISOs with some cameras.
|Umbrellas by pleytime|
from An A to Z of Subjects- Week 21, U
|Glass ball on a perforated metal plate _2 by harubux|