PDA

View Full Version : Oly 7-14 PRO, sent back.


Dave in Wales
24th June 2015, 03:18 PM
I have returned the Oly 7-14, very disappointed.

Why you ask, toooooooo heeeeeeeavy, it felt like a house brick.

I feel it's making a bit of a mockery of the M4/3 ethos....smaller lighter cameras.

I've ordered my old favourite the Panny 7-14, always suited me before.

benvendetta
24th June 2015, 05:38 PM
Sure you weren't sent the 43rds version........lol.
Fast lenses will always be larger and heavier than slow ones. It's physics at the end of the day. I havent seen it in the flesh but it looks a nice size to me.

Graham_of_Rainham
24th June 2015, 06:55 PM
Each to their own, and we are very fortunate to be able to choose whatever suits us best. The very large range of lenses available to us provides real advantages for the mft system.

Personally the new 7-14 worked very well for me.

pdk42
24th June 2015, 11:05 PM
That's good feedback Dave. I haven't handled the 7-14 yet, but having seen comparisons against the Panny version - a lens I still consider big by u43 standards - I was concerned about the size/weight. Without a doubt the latest u43 lenses are getting big.

zuiko-holic
25th June 2015, 10:14 AM
I feel it's making a bit of a mockery of the M4/3 ethos....smaller lighter cameras.


That's quite a harsh thing to say!

m4/3 has smaller and lighter cameras and lenses but when things go PRO, some standards have to be met and "function over form" is a priority.

You cannot have a top-quality build without a price to pay.
It's not just the f/2.8, the weather sealing and all-metal construction add a lot of weight and compared to FF lenses of similar quality the m4/3 7-14 PRO lens is significantly smaller and lighter (even compared to 4/3 Zuiko 7-14)

I 've tested the m.Zuiko 7-14 and it balances great with E-M1 + Grip so it is a nice combination.

With my grip-less E-M5 however, Lumix 7-14 is a better match.

benvendetta
25th June 2015, 11:05 AM
OK, the 40-150 Pro is quite large but I consider all the other Pro lenses that are currently available to be just fine, size wise. I guess that if you are coming from the dSLR world (Oly or other) they seem small but if you have come straight into M43rds you will think them big. You can always use the other, slower M43rds lenses, which are still pretty good. You pays yer money..............
Me, I have little or no problem with the size of the Pro glass. My E-M1 is a great size too, even with the battery grip, which helps handling a lot IMO.

Graham_of_Rainham
25th June 2015, 12:12 PM
Having had the old 7-14, I did some analysis and found the most of my shots were taken around a 10mm FoV.

Therefore for me the 9-18 made a lot of sense and when I got one the 7-14 didn't get a lot of use.

Working out what focal length you use most and spending money on those lenses, to me gives the most value for money.

*chr

drmarkf
25th June 2015, 05:34 PM
I played briefly with the new 7-14 at last week's Lincoln streetwalk with Steve Gosling.

I was confirmed in my preference to hang on to my Panasonic f4 for now mainly on size & weight grounds. I'm content with the known limitations of this lens (which are a still well below my own limitations in being able to use it!). Almost all my use is at 7mm.

The Oly 7-14 is a big piece by m4/3 standards, but it's getting some really good reviews and if you are happy with chunky kit and can afford it then I think you won't be disappointed.

As a parallel, I kept the panny 35-100 when I got my 40-150 pro: I use the former as a lightweight travel lens and the latter for more critical uses when the weight isn't an issue. I feel I can justify this 'duplication', but I certainly couldn't at 7-14mm.

Loup Garou
26th November 2015, 08:12 AM
Why you ask, toooooooo heeeeeeeavy, it felt like a house brick.

I feel it's making a bit of a mockery of the M4/3 ethos....smaller lighter cameras.

.
Quite frankly, I do not understand why some people are put off by the weight of this lens. An all metal fast-ish wide zoom lens would be expected to be on the heavy side. This one weighs only 60% of its 4/3 counterpart and is about the same weight as the Panasonic Vario 100-300mm f4.0-5.6 and that has a plastic outer shell.

hotbath1962
26th November 2015, 10:06 AM
I'm considering p/x ing my 4/3 7-14 for the new m4/3 version to save weight. I'd only have the 50mmf2 left and would leave my MMF-3 permanently attached to that. Have any of you moved from the 4/3 7-14 to the m4/3 version on the E-M1? If so, how do you find it? I'm seeing mixed reviews on the newer lens.

Thanks

Philip

pvasc
26th November 2015, 11:11 AM
I don't mind the weight of it, (don't own one) when I played with it at the Lincoln Photo show. One thing I did notice is that on the M5 Mk2 with the grip it is a bit of a tight fit, as in "why are my knuckles dragging on the zoom ring?" tight. I was a bit put off until I realized that I was holding the M5 Mk2. On the M1 there is more room so no knuckle dragging. Don't mind the weight or size, and the images I got I liked...so someday...maybe.

OM USer
26th November 2015, 12:13 PM
7-14mm is a very nice range and I just wish they did it in a non-pro version (plastic and F3.5) with a non-pro price. I'm sure if I got the 9-18mm I would always wonder about the missing 2mm.

benvendetta
26th November 2015, 12:18 PM
I'm considering p/x ing my 4/3 7-14 for the new m4/3 version to save weight. I'd only have the 50mmf2 left and would leave my MMF-3 permanently attached to that. Have any of you moved from the 4/3 7-14 to the m4/3 version on the E-M1? If so, how do you find it? I'm seeing mixed reviews on the newer lens.

Thanks

Philip

Your last sentence is the reason that I am hanging onto the 43rds version for the time being, despite its considerable bulk with (and without) the MMF3 attached.

Graham_of_Rainham
26th November 2015, 02:17 PM
I'm sure if I got the 9-18mm I would always wonder about the missing 2mm.

Probably the only thing you would miss is having your feet included in the shot :D