PDA

View Full Version : ZD7-14 vs Pany micro 7-14 on E-M1


benvendetta
25th November 2013, 01:54 PM
Now that I have two m43rds bodies (E-M1 and EPL-5) and my E-3 will be leaving me soon, I have started to think about the 43rds glass that I already own and its usability on my micro bodies, in particularly the E-M1.
Hopefully I will be getting my free grip and MMF3 by Christmas although I have the cheap version of the latter.
I was always going to use my 43rds glass with my E-M1 rather than move completely to micro glass but I have been wondering of late if any of the focal lengths that I have could be reproduced in the micro format and what the implications would be (size would be a BIG advantage).
There is only one direct equivalent as I see it and that is for my 7-14 ZD. There were discussions about the ZD and micro Panny versions back in the Spring. Although I love my ZD, the Panny version would be better suited size wise to the E-M1.
Would I be mad to change or should I stick with using the big old ZD plus MMF3 on my E-M1?

Wee man
25th November 2013, 02:51 PM
Dave in the same boat would like to know if the m4/3 matches the quality of my 4/3 7-14? Answers please.

photo_owl
25th November 2013, 03:38 PM
Ian commented (favorably) on the m43 version when it came out, relative the the 43 version. That was on lower resolution sensors though. He should be able to provide a more in depth comparison now - and he has got an E-M1 again!

It is difficult to believe that it's an absolute match,; but the real question has to be whether it's good enough.

Graham_of_Rainham
25th November 2013, 03:55 PM
Seems as though there are many of us in the same boat. I have the ZD7-14 but also have the brilliant Zuiko 9-18 MFT.

Frequently I find myself taking a set of shots with the 9-18 that will then be stitched into the "Ultra Wide" image that the 7mm end of the ZD would have provided.

The size/weight advantage is really significant and the resultant stitched image is often of a much higher resolution. There is also the extra interest and enjoyment of producing the Ultra Wide image over that of simply capturing it with the 7-14.

It would be interesting to see a good comparison done between the two 7-14 lenses. Hopefully someone has the two and will do it for us.

*chr

StephenL
25th November 2013, 04:05 PM
I have had both lenses, but not at the same time, and haven't used the Zuiko on m4/3 cameras. They are both good, but I got the impression that the Zuiko was better. But of course it's much heavier. I think it all depends on how often you're going to take it out. Grahams solution is certainly an interesting one.

Graham_of_Rainham
25th November 2013, 04:15 PM
Grahams solution is certainly an interesting one.

This was done with the 17mm f/1.8 that Ian let me have use of at Greenwich. It's 3 shots, put together in PS.
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/Image00024.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/67959)

StephenL
25th November 2013, 04:18 PM
That's a good stitch. What did you use? I've always had problems stitching from lenses wider than 25mm in m4/3 terms.

Graham_of_Rainham
25th November 2013, 04:58 PM
That's a good stitch. What did you use? I've always had problems stitching from lenses wider than 25mm in m4/3 terms.

That was "photomerge" in PS CS4 However I've had a lot of success with Microsoft ICE It's FREE and well worth a try.

I use at least a third overlap and often as much as a half. The biggest I have done is 12 in a 270 sweep and my most successful was 5 in 90, but that had very distinct parts of the image that made it easy to join them.

Actually having to think about the way you are going to produce the end result and getting good consistent exposure is a lot like "Old School" photography and is fun :cool:

StephenL
25th November 2013, 05:59 PM
I have used ICE with good effect. However, I doubt they do a version for Mac, now that I've moved over to the Dark Side! I used to use Autopano Pro, but I think my licence may have expired. I shall experiment with Photoshop CC.

jamespetts
25th November 2013, 10:31 PM
This is an interesting discussion. Firstly, the original poster should bear in mind the rumours circulating that Olympus is working on a "Pro" series Micro Four Thirds 7-14mm f/2.8 lens which might well prove to be the ideal solution. The Panasonic 7-14mm is, as I understand it, known to have generally good image quality (and is much, much smaller than the 7-14 ZD), but it has issues with very poor flare characteristics in some use cases, which is significantly more of a problem on Sony sensor fitted Olympus cameras than on cameras with a Panasonic sensor (opinion is divided about how important that those are, but anyone considering buying this lens for an Olympus body should at least consider the flare issues).

Having myself recently bought an E-M1 (not having previously used any Four Thirds equipment; the E-M1 was a replacement for an E-P3 and other equipment stolen in a burglary last month), I wondered for a time about getting a secondhand 7-14mm ZD (I already have a secondhand 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 on order), but decided against it for the time being partly because I wanted to spend more time using the equipment that I have to see whether I might really get a use out of such an ultra-wide lens that would justify the cost, or whether I might better spend the money elsewhere, but also partly because the thing seemed enormous and the thought of carrying about lots of very heavy equipment whenever I want to take photographs is not a happy one (which is part of why I use Micro Four Thirds in the first place).

If I was in the OP's position of already having the 7-14 ZD, I should be strongly inclined to use it for a while and see what it is like on the E-M1, and wait to see whether the "wide angle zoom" on the Olympus lens road map does indeed turn out to be the rumoured 7-14mm f/2.8 (or at least f/4.0; maximum aperture values in rumours are often off) and at that stage compare that, the Panasonic 7-14 and your existing Olympus.

Incidentally, I should be very interested to see any photographs of the 7-14 ZD mounted on the E-M1 and see any photographs taken with this combination, as well as read reports of what it is like to use in practice.

PeterBirder
25th November 2013, 11:01 PM
Incidentally, I should be very interested to see any photographs of the 7-14 ZD mounted on the E-M1.....

The Four Thirds Organisation website has a very useful matching simulation which will show you how any combination of 4/3 and m4/3 cameras and lenses looks.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/special/matching.html

Regards.*chr

jamespetts
25th November 2013, 11:07 PM
Ahh, yes, I have seen the matching simulation: I ought to have mentioned that. It would still be useful to see it in real life, however.

benvendetta
25th November 2013, 11:49 PM
This is an interesting discussion. Firstly, the original poster should bear in mind the rumours circulating that Olympus is working on a "Pro" series Micro Four Thirds 7-14mm f/2.8 lens which might well prove to be the ideal solution. The Panasonic 7-14mm is, as I understand it, known to have generally good image quality (and is much, much smaller than the 7-14 ZD), but it has issues with very poor flare characteristics in some use cases, which is significantly more of a problem on Son6y sensor fitted Olympus cameras than on cameras with a Panasonic sensor (opinion is divided about how important that those are, but anyone considering buying this lens for an Olympus body should at least consider the flare issues).

Having myself recently bought an E-M1 (not having previously used any Four Thirds equipment; the E-M1 was a replacement for an E-P3 and other equipment stolen in a burglary last month), I wondered for a time about getting a secondhand 7-14mm ZD (I already have a secondhand 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 on order), but decided against it for the time being partly because I wanted to spend more time using the equipment that I have to see whether I might really get a use out of such an ultra-wide lens that would justify the cost, or whether I might better spend the money elsewhere, but also partly because the thing seemed enormous and the thought of carrying about lots of very heavy equipment whenever I want to take photographs is not a happy one (which is part of why I use Micro Four Thirds in the first place).

If I was in the OP's position of already having the 7-14 ZD, I should be strongly inclined to use it for a while and see what it is like on the E-M1, and wait to see whether the "wide angle zoom" on the Olympus lens road map does indeed turn out to be the rumoured 7-14mm f/2.8 (or at least f/4.0; maximum aperture values in rumours are often off) and at that stage compare that, the Panasonic 7-14 and your existing Olympus.

Incidentally, I should be very interested to see any photographs of the 7-14 ZD mounted on the E-M1 and see any photographs taken with this combination, as well as read reports of what it is like to use in practice.

It looks well mean. I will try and post a piccie.

Graham_of_Rainham
26th November 2013, 12:02 AM
A 7-14 f/2.8 would be very big and the rear element may even be too big to work on a MFT body. The design of any zoom is always a compromise, and super wide angle even more so. However with sensors getting ever better, who's to say what they will develop next.

photo_owl
26th November 2013, 07:49 AM
A 7-14 f/2.8 would be very big and the rear element may even be too big to work on a MFT body. The design of any zoom is always a compromise, and super wide angle even more so. However with sensors getting ever better, who's to say what they will develop next.

but then again the existing 43 version is really an F2 :D

benvendetta
26th November 2013, 12:58 PM
As promised, here is my 7-14 ZD mounted on my E-M1 via el cheapo MMF clone. I am thinking that it doesn't seem too bad. It is a resourceful looking package!

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/E-M1_7-14ZD.jpg

andym
26th November 2013, 01:00 PM
The combination(and all other 4/3 lenses)feels even better when you get the grip. I won't be parting with mine.

benvendetta
26th November 2013, 01:20 PM
Ah yes, the grip. That will be the acid test (when mine turns up).

Wee man
26th November 2013, 03:28 PM
I think you will be impressed I think mine will stay on.

benvendetta
26th November 2013, 04:29 PM
I need the mmf3 to get the most out of the 7-14 as the clone that I have distorts the edge image badly at the wider focal lengths.

Chevvyf1
27th November 2013, 10:26 AM
I posted this on Derek W thread about m4/3 Vs 4/3 glass

Personally, I wanted the ONE for all photography inc. Bif and my main lens for Bif was the 50-200. (often with the Ex on)

When I read the ONE manual - before the camera arrived I frequently read the manual to get to know this camera :) and realised the difference between the 50-200 and 75-300 was 1/3rd greater reach and that the 50-200 would be "slower and not max reach on the ONE" I succumbed to selling my 50-200 lenses ! most reluctantly and even thought of backing out of sales because I may be making a BIG expensive mistake ! :( gulp ...

* to find the functions which depend on m4.3 glass download the pdf. and search for Cautions and read carefully ! eg face detect p.53 does not work on 4/3 glass ; focus points are 37 not 81 - so if I am using the 11.22 for Landscapes I need to crop the "middle 37 focus points" p.52 which will be sharp - but the corners & edges will not be as sharp :( not a deal breaker for me :)

It is a VERY GOOD MANUAL and well worthy of a read, BEFORE YOU INVEST !

BUT had I not a burr up my derriere' for Bif of Red Kites and Golden Eagles and the Peregrine Falcons ... I would still be MOST EXCEEDINGLY HAPPY WITH MY E-5 and 4/3rd glass !

and have more funds for shopping :) ...