Please read my older post on this topic for more details and comparisons with what is available on Canon and Nikon dSLRs as I will try to avoid repeating that content here, but instead highlight the differences, now that dpreview has published their excellent technical reviews on the two MFT lenses.
One of the almost unique characteristics of Micro Four Thirds is that it allows creation of beautifully compact, high image quality ultra-wide angle zoom lenses which are perfect for travel, but like everything, there are compromises – in this case, the compact design results in lower image quality in the corners and more distortion than with a Four Thirds equivalent lens. Fortunately, these issues are corrected in-camera (by Panasonic bodies) or can be easily corrected in supported RAW converter software.
Note: the following image comparing the Four Thirds 9-18mm, MFT 9-18mm and MFT 7-14mm is from the dpreview website:
I have compared 3 ultra-wide zoom lenses but note there is a fourth option shown above – the Olympus ZD 9-18mm Four Thirds lens which is cheaper (~$US475), but bigger (uses a 72mm filter) and heavier than the MFT version.
| Olympus ZD 7-14mm f/4 Four Thirds |
Panasonic 7-14mm f/4 MFT |
Olympus ZD 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 MFT |
|||
| dimensions | 86.5mm x 119.5mm | 70 mm diameter x 83 mm length |
|
||
| weight price |
780g
$US1800 |
300 g (10.6 oz)
$US1000 |
155 g (5.5 oz)
$US700 |
||
| diagonal angle of view on 4:3 ratio
35mm equivalent focal length range to give similar angle of view |
114º – 75º
14-28mm |
114º – 75º
14-28mm |
100º – 62º
18-36mm |
||
| filters | not possible |
not possible | 52mm, non-rotating front element | ||
| autofocus | no AF on Panasonic MFT, slow AF on Olympus MFT, normal AF on Four Thirds | good AF on all MFT, cannot mount to Four Thirds | good AF on all MFT, cannot mount to Four Thirds | ||
| construction | 18 Elements / 12 Groups, ED Asph, ED, Super ED weatherproof, dustproof, pro quality |
16 elements / 12 groups, 4ED, 2Asph | 12 elements / 8 groups, 1 ED, 1HR, 2 dual surface Asph, 1 Asph, collapsible design for compact travel | ||
| image stabilisation | in camera (Olympus only) | in camera (Olympus only) | in camera (Olympus only) | ||
| diaphragm | 7 rounded | 7 rounded | 7 rounded | ||
| minimum focus | 0.25m | 0.25m | 0.25m | ||
| use with teleconverter | yes | no TC available for MFT yet |
no TC available for MFT yet | ||
| use with extension tubes | no | no | no | ||
| image quality | superb even without post-processing
flare visible if strong light sources hit convex front element |
very sharp but some softness in corners wide open at either end of focal range
flare visible if strong light sources hit convex front element |
very sharp but some softness in corners
flare is usually not an issue unless light sources string front element obliquely. |
||
| geometric distortion | minimal | +3.4% at 7mm, -0.3% at 12mm and -1.2% at 14mm
corrected in-camera when using Panasonic MFT cameras |
+4.7% at 9mm, +0.5% at 14mm, -0.1% at 18mm
corrected in-camera (Panasonic) and by supported RAW converters |
||
| chromatic aberration | minimal – mainly in corners at extreme contrast situations | particularly visible in corners at wide angles
corrected in-camera when using Panasonic MFT cameras |
particularly visible in corners at all focal lengths | ||
| light falloff | minimal? | some at f/4 but minimal at f/5.6 | minimal | ||
| official website | Olympus America | ||||
| Reviews | my blog post | dpreview | dpreview | ||
| who is it for? | those wanting the highest image quality, professional build quality, weatherproofing primarily for their Four Thirds dSLR | those wanting widest view on their MFT camera for creative use and travel but not needing to use filters | those wanting wide angle on MFT but not needing the ultra-wide angle, and preferring ability to use filters for landscape work
this is perhaps the most practicable lens for most people |
