Oly 9-18 vs Pany 7-14

[thedaniel]

I have been also looking for a Ultra Wide Zoom for sometime.
The current Olympus 9-18mm is smaller and lighter and also can fit filters.
The Panasonic 7-14mm sharper than the 9-18mm and has a wider view.
Currently rumor points to a Panasonic 7-28mm that will announce before the Photokina in Mid Sept.

So I will wait for now.

 

[wonglp]

I would think it really depends on the TS usage. If it's purely for landscape tool, 7-14 is a different animal then 9-18mm.

Few strengths about 7-14:

1. The 2mm extra is 14 degrees of diff in angle of view. I do stitching these days quite a bit as well, but it's just different, sometimes 1 shot instead of 2 stitched with 9-18. 14 degrees can be a few buildings on the far end.

2. Sharpness better than 9-18mm.

Weakness

1. Length (83mm vs 49.5mm), more of an issue for me coz my bags inserts are not so big/deep.

2. Weight (300g vs 155g) - not really a big issue

3. CA - not corrected on Oly body (TS is using EM5) , can be corrected post process.

4. Flare a bit more than 9-18, but hey, it's a lot wider too

5. Not as suitable for portrait or streets due to focal length (wideness), group shot still ok but gotta make sure lens is parallel to ground otherwise perspective distortion comes into place. This doesn't mean this lens has barrel distortion, no it's an excellent lens with well controlled barrel distortion.

6. Perhaps the biggest issue I have is no filters at the moment, though there are 2 good solutions here:

From Mr HyperFocal, a great solution albeit pricey, hence my procrastination, i'm a cheapo haha!
From mu-43.com, found recently via a friend, works great and cheaper, I should probably try it.

I tried another one, peanut butter cup, but it vignettes badly and can only use at 9mm, so not much point I feel. The above solutions has no vignetting, unless you stack filters but that happens on 9-18 as well.

To TS, so which type of shooter are you? If you not plan fully into landscapes, I suggest go with 9-18, it slightly more versatile than 7-14, in terms of filters, portability and slightly more tele. I started 9-18 for almost 2 years, before deciding 7-14, frankly, i regretted for a bit due to filter, but then the wideness and sharpness wins me over.

Here's a filckr thread on 9-18 and one for 7-14.

This lens debate will go on for a while. And frankly, I don't know if I will stay with 7-14 for that long, once I get my DIY adapter, I think I would be a much happy shooter. Hope that helps!

 

[motionstills]

I saw Oly 9-18mm and I saw Pany 7-14mm, I saw that Pany doesn't accept filter to guard against my dirty fingers and I saw its high price tag, I went straight for Oly 9-18mm, most importantly it's a tiny great lens capable of very decent results and I didn't feel penalized by its narrower angle of view when shooting wide because in most situations, I was able to move around and achieve the composition I need In fact, at times I really didn't want it to go so wide.

 

[hyperFocal]

Oh, interesting find! Collapsible lens hood. Can just find a slightly oversized one and trim to fit! Nice idea!

From mu-43.com, found recently via a friend, works great and cheaper, I should probably try it.

 

[Oly5050]

If you cannot live without a filter, then forget abt the 7-14. In any case, not everyone needs a 7 mm.

For me, I sold my 9-18 and kept the 7-14 bec i absolutely hate the collapsible design in the 9-18. Slows down my shooting and i have to two-hand it.

The only reason why i bought 9-18 and 7-14 was to go wide. When i got the 7-14, the 9-18 just had to go. Also i found that the 9-18 wasnt really sharp. And i liked that the 7-14 was constant f4.

Thats me but if your deal breaker is the filter, u shd juz go for 9-18.

 

[flamenco]

If you cannot live without a filter, then forget abt the 7-14. In any case, not everyone needs a 7 mm.

For me, I sold my 9-18 and kept the 7-14 bec i absolutely hate the collapsible design in the 9-18. Slows down my shooting and i have to two-hand it.

The only reason why i bought 9-18 and 7-14 was to go wide. When i got the 7-14, the 9-18 just had to go. Also i found that the 9-18 wasnt really sharp. And i liked that the 7-14 was constant f4.

Thats me but if your deal breaker is the filter, u shd juz go for 9-18.

A sore point indeed ! My experience with the 14-42 tells me I dislike the collapsiable design. Look like I am leaning towards the 9-18.

For now, I will wait till after Photokina (less than a month away now) b4 I take the plunge. Need to exercise some discipline and patience

 

[Benares]

I don't own the m43 UWAs mentioned in this thread but have used both the 43 versions. What I really like (yes, like) about the (43) 7-14 was the distortion - which can bring in a differing perspective (some fresh air) when you compose your pictures through the viewfinder.

IMO, the 7-14 is a fun lens but not the most practical, as many users have pointed out the difficulty/lack of ability to mount filters on it. Not to mention, in the event if your front lens element just under the 'flower hood' gets some stubborn stain, you'll be b**ching about how difficult it is to clean it off - (just a personal thing that I stick to lenspen cleaning for front lens element).

In the end, I chose to buy the (43) 9-18 because it's much more practical and less costly (I'm another cheapo), plus 9-18 though less bright, is better for events coverage (which sometimes help me generate some pocket money).

Just sharing how one's quirks/personalities can affect the lens to buy/use. If I had the money to spare, I'd have bought/owned both; 7-14 mainly for landscapes/leisure-shoot and 9-18 for practicality.

 

[flamenco]

On a separate but related note, and out of major curiosty ! May I ask if one can use the 8mm fisheye as a UWA and de-fish to obtain the desired ?

Just a crazy thought. Can someone pls enlighten ?

 

[microcosm]

On a separate but related note, and out of major curiosty ! May I ask if one can use the 8mm fisheye as a UWA and de-fish to obtain the desired ?

Just a crazy thought. Can someone pls enlighten ?

The image quality degrades quite dramatically when you defish. And the perspective will never really be 100% rectilinear.

 

[flamenco]

The image quality degrades quite dramatically when you defish. And the perspective will never really be 100% rectilinear.

Forgot to mention, I asked cos I saw this article.

Micro 4/3rds Photography: Lumix G 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye

Is there a software to perform the de-fish ? Sorry for the numerous noob questions !

 

[microcosm]

Forgot to mention, I asked cos I saw this article.

Micro 4/3rds Photography: Lumix G 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye

Is there a software to perform the de-fish ? Sorry for the numerous noob questions !

I "program" the de-fish process into an Action File in Photoshop. I think there are many software out there that does this. My workflow are all CS6 based. So you might not want to spend all that money if you are not shooting for assignments.

 

[wonglp]

The image quality degrades quite dramatically when you defish. And the perspective will never really be 100% rectilinear.

2nd that, both are important lens for me for different purposes, one for more serious straight shots, the other is for fun curves

Composing with each is also very different, i usually slant the camera a lot for very dramatic angles to get the best curves on FE, whereas I keep the UWA parallel (no tilt) to the ground for least distortions. That's for me at least.

 

[microcosm]

When applied creatively, FE gives you a lot of very interesting perspectives... but also very susceptible to CA and severe perspective distortions... but again, that challenges your creativity. See some of my sample images below...

 

[trelch]

I have the 9-18mm, and the focal length is more flexible when you come into interesting situations.
I was taking a wide angle shot of this landscape, when suddenly, i needed to zoom into something

If you are using the 7-14mm, you would have missed such shots completely, as the 18mm is a very useful focal length.

 

[flamenco]

Thanks Trelch , makes perfect sense ! SO did he JUMP ?:bsmilie:

 

[trelch]

No, he didn't. But a helicopter crash there hours later.

 

[motionstills]

The other reasons i went with the 9-18mm is also because of the ability to use polarizer and ND/GND filters when needed

 

[Oly5050]

The images that trelch posted are quite typical of what you would get with the 9-18. It does have a very nice focal length I must say. 9 is pretty wide and 18 is about 35 mm FOV which is also real nice.

 

[flamenco]

Thank you all who have weighed in. I finally got the lens. Here are some photos. All taken today, after I got my hands on it.

Have been nothing but impressed at both extreme ends of the focal length.

The issues that are well documented exists, but not enough to discredit the merits of this lens.

Thank you again

 

[As7eroidS]

Thank you all who have weighed in. I finally got the lens. Here are some photos. All taken today, after I got my hands on it.

Have been nothing but impressed at both extreme ends of the focal length.

The issues that are well documented exists, but not enough to discredit the merits of this lens.

Thank you again

Looks like u got the 9-18mm grats on ur new hoot enjoy