Reading mode: Light Dark

They say there's something wrong with the Olympus 9-18?

Go to last post
H

Hiphopapotamus

Senior Member
Messages
1,175
Reaction score
851
I can't see what it is. Now that I've spent some time with this lens, I don't see what there is to be gained by the 7-14. It's not pretty, like my 12mm F/2, nor does it render as pleasingly as my Olympus 45mm F/1.8 but when you just want to pick up your camera with one lens that does wide to normal, it works for what it does well.

Post your shots taken with this lens.



 
Last edited:
I'm quite happy with mine, very small and light - perfect for travel.



0aa7dc2c1fc24c64a0389e1ffa234bb9.jpg



--
Jacques
apple-and-eve.com
 
the only problems I've ever seen with mine were when I didn't get the plane of the camera sensor accurate and got wild parallax errors.

Its a super little lens and great value for money

Come to that, I've never seen any reports suggesting there was anything wrong with it?
 
It's underappreciated for what it does a little so because of its higher than usual price as compared to the 14-42 and 40-150, but as a lens you can just stick on the front of your camera and shoot with it does most things reasonably well, if it isn't as sharp at 36 as it is at 18. However you can use it as a wide normal and as an ultra wide which does the two things I do most frequently with my camera, so I'm not gripping about it. There was some weird review results with it although this might be a decentred lens because I don't see any lack of sharpness in mine.

www.imaging-resource.com

Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital - Imaging Resource

This is the third M.Zuiko series lens we have tested, the first being Olympus’ diminutive 17mm prime. The M.Zuiko lens series is designed specifically for Olympus’ PEN series of digital interchangeable lens bodies. The 9-18mm Æ’/4-5.6 lens uses some revolutionary components, including a new lens...
www.imaging-resource.com www.imaging-resource.com
 
Last edited:
Who is "They"? Do "They" even own it?
 
The 9-18 is not as razor sharp as either of the 7-14 lenses but it is sharp.

The 9-18 has a somewhat unusual lock to store mechanism. Some would say this is a "wrong" element in the design.

Overall for what it costs (nowadays, not years ago) and for the small size it is a wonderful gem. I took many nice wide pictures with it and only sold it because I moved up to the 7-14 f/2.8.
 
You can go slightly wider than the 9mm it indicates at the risk of producing a lens lock error, but it doesn't really produce any different results. If I recall correctly, both the 14-42 and 40-150 also have a collapsible lens lock mechanism, though the 9-18 is built a little sturdier than both these lenses.

It's not as sharp as my 20mm F/1.7 and my 45mm F/1.8 but neither of those lenses do 9 and by the time you capture the equivalent frame your likely to end up with stitching issues anyhow.
 
I suppose most people bought it because mFT lacks a small ultra-wide.

Apart from the fish-eyes, there are no autofocus primes below 12mm available. So most people buy the 7-14 or 9-18 zooms instead.

I think my 9-18 has never seen a zoom position other than 9 mm. Give me an 8 mm f/2 with AF and auto-aperture, and I'm sold (that's why I can't wait for the Venus Laowa 7.5mm f/2 to become available).
 
I'm so tempted to get one, but I struggle with the the Oly 17mm fov, so I keep thinking I won't be able to get on with the wider angle! With the cash back offer I can pick one up for £285 at the moment though!!!
 
I've had three samples of this lens. The 1st one (purchased about 2.5 yrs ago) was an excellent lens. I gave it to my son. About two months ago I decided I wanted another one. I ordered it from B&H and it was the worst lens I've ever tried to use. Totally unacceptable. So I returned it to B&H (who were excellent to work with) and asked for an exchange. They kindly sent me another copy. It was useable, barely. The bottom two corners we pretty soft wide open at 9mm, but useable stopped to f/8. OK on the longer end. Still it irritated me, so I called B&H and they allowed me to return that lens and exchange if for the 7x14 PRO (and of course pay the difference). The 7x14 is an outstanding lens, but not the tiny little travel companion I wanted.

I have to wonder if Oly's quality control hasn't gone to pot. At least on their "consumer" grade lenses.
 
joergzielosko said:
I suppose most people bought it because mFT lacks a small ultra-wide.

Apart from the fish-eyes, there are no autofocus primes below 12mm available. So most people buy the 7-14 or 9-18 zooms instead.

I think my 9-18 has never seen a zoom position other than 9 mm. Give me an 8 mm f/2 with AF and auto-aperture, and I'm sold (that's why I can't wait for the Venus Laowa 7.5mm f/2 to become available).
Click to expand...
I suppose if Olympus, or Panasonic gave us a small prime in roughly the same size that was 8mm or wider I'd be tempted by it also, but this 9-18 is just so useful it's pretty much the first kit lens I wanted, it took me a good year and a half of looking at the price of it though before I settled on one for $500 second hand.
 
Hiphopapotamus said:
I can't see what it is. Now that I've spent some time with this lens, I don't see what there is to be gained by the 7-14. It's not pretty, like my 12mm F/2, nor does it render as pleasingly as my Olympus 45mm F/1.8 but when you just want to pick up your camera with one lens that does wide to normal, it works for what it does well.
Click to expand...
Two things wrong with the 9-18.

It's not wide enough (for some usages)

It's not fast enough (for some usages).

I own the 9-18 and I love it. But I still bought the 7-14 also. I was actually thinking of selling the 9-18, but the 7-14 is so bulky I ended up keeping both. I take the 9-18 when I want a more lightweight setup, and the 7-14 when I'm fine with the heavier setup.

When I do astrophotography - F/4 is not fast enough.

When I do serious landscape work - 9mm is often not wide enough.

Otherwise, the 9-18 is fantastic.

Having said that - I'm kinda waiting for the Panasonic 8-18/2.8-4. seems to offer a good balance between the two.
 
18 is pretty wide, as these shots show, but I'll admit, 14 is wider... I just can't fathom the idea of having to put up with a lens that big, and a lens that also doesn't take filters. F/4 is not any use to me for night time photography, but neither is F/2.8 really that's why I have the 12/2 which is also tiny, and especially pleasing to look at. If Olympus made an 8mm like that I'd have already bought it by now.
 
Last edited:
Hiphopapotamus said:
18 is pretty wide, as these shots show, but I'll admit, 14 is wider... I just can't fathom
Click to expand...
much wider actually. it's a real big diff. keep in mind the 9mm on the Oly has a FoV which is actually like 19mm on FF and not 18mm (cause of diff aspect ratio).

I find anything over 16mm to be unacceptable as my "widest". Then again the 14 (well -closer to 15, but still) is really nice :)
Hiphopapotamus said:
the idea of having to put up with a lens that big, and a lens that also doesn't take
Click to expand...
well - that's the downside. Which is why I'm keeping the 9-18. For casual walking around I use the 9-18. But when I do anyway "serious" landscape stuff, the weight of the 7-14 is not a big deal compared to the tripod ;-P
Hiphopapotamus said:
filters. F/4 is not any use to me for night time photography, but neither is F/2.8 really that's why I have the 12/2.
Click to expand...
It does take filters. But not screw in one. I bought an adapter for it and I use it with ND, POL, and GND
 
Hiphopapotamus said:
I can't see what it is. Now that I've spent some time with this lens, I don't see what there is to be gained by the 7-14. It's not pretty, like my 12mm F/2, nor does it render as pleasingly as my Olympus 45mm F/1.8 but when you just want to pick up your camera with one lens that does wide to normal, it works for what it does well.

Post your shots taken with this lens.
Click to expand...
I had a bit of unexpected prize money and decided to celebrate by getting my first system camera. I studied mirrorless systems for a long time and was persuaded to go olympus because the 9-18 m43 existed, wasn't just on a roadmap and the smaller than aps sensor would make macro a bit more accessible. I ended up with the OMD em5 with the 12-50, 60 macro, 45, and 9-18. All still get used, but my most used lens is the 14-150ii and the second most used is the 9-18. It is so light, the only excuse to not carry it is rain. I have the 7-14 olympus now and it is a great lens that I love, but it doesn't get carried often enough to be used more than the 9-18. From a recent overcast day:



5b12ea9c91344a3ebed3be77003a56dd.jpg



f025ca770cb54fde94b744b257810238.jpg
 
There's something wrong with mine. It freezes when focusing passed the 14mm mark, AF or MF. It's not super sharp in the corners, it has quite a bit of CA and weird flare pattern. Love the tiny size and weight for hiking though.

This thread needs more pictures....

P9153139%20-%2020140915-1-XL.jpg


A phone with sweeping panoramic works just the same...

P8258938%20-%2020140825-1-XL.jpg


The camera was tilted up on a tripod. I leaned backward quite a bit so I wouldn't look like a slanted plank:

P9132356%20-%2020140913-1-XL.jpg


P9299330-1-XL.jpg


p9160932-1-XL.jpg


--
Erick - www.borealphoto.com
 
Bought a used one off of FM from a highly rated user for $350. Now it and the 75-300 are my travel kit. I find my 12-35 is just a little too heavy for my EP5 travel kit, but the 9-18 & 75-300mm make for a perfect Western US kit. Some times I take a Gx8 with the 9-18 & 12-35 when its a city I am visiting. On Mu-43 or FM you can often find good ones for $350. Since it takes filters I travel with 58mm pol/var. ND with a stepup for the 9-18mm.
 
I particularly like your second pic, High -- a very nice snap! Hee, hee! :)

Great composition and the top lighting of the rails is very good work.

I use the 9-18 less for general work than I used to now that I have the 12-32 and 12-35 in my armory, but it is still indispensable for me for my professional work which involves architecture.

In addition, it is so small and light it is a "go everywhere" lens. I very rarely venture out without it in the bag.




@ 18mm


100% from above, in case anyone is wondering about sharpness


Every now and again I think I might like just a little more width, then I consider the distortion and shudder! @ 9mm gives me just the right balance between width and distortion of the image to make it rectilinear.

--
Geoffrey Heard
Down and out in Rabaul in the South Pacific
http://rabaulpng.com/we-are-all-traveling-throug/i-waited-51-years-for-tavur.html
 

Attachments

  • 3543502.jpg
    3543502.jpg
    135.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
blokeyknockers said:
I'm so tempted to get one, but I struggle with the the Oly 17mm fov, so I keep thinking I won't be able to get on with the wider angle! With the cash back offer I can pick one up for £285 at the moment though!!!
Click to expand...
You are a longer focal length guy, obviously. If you got the 9-18 on your camera, though, and started doing a bit of work in the 9mm range, you might find it was better for you than the 17mm, simply because it is so far out of your "normal" zone, you would have to consciously look for pix.

FOREGROUND is the great thing with such a wide lens. Look at the OP's post. His first pic is good, but his second pic with the fence rails is a superb example of UWA photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top