Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14 mm F2.8 PRO Lens, Wide Angle Zoom, Suitable for All MFT Cameras (Olympus OM-D & PEN Models, Panasonic G Series), Black

Product Information

The obvious comparison is to the Panasonic 7-14mm f/4. I no longer have my Panasonic, so haven't tested it on the latest 20mp m4/3 bodies. What I'd say about that lens on my 16mp m4/3 bodies is this: like the Olympus, there's a high degree of linear correction being applied, though not quite as much as with this Olympus Pro lens. Field curvature is the big difference between the two lenses, as the Panasonic has far less (but the Olympus seems sharper in the central area and obviously goes to f/2.8). I don't remember having to correct much for field curvature on the Panasonic; it was obvious I have to on the Olympus. But my Panasonic lens was a bit out of alignment (one edge was softer than the other), so it's difficult to make any further comparisons. Flare control on the Panasonic is worse than on the Olympus. The Nikon also has the same DOF and total light gathering of a mythical m43 7-12mm F/1.4 ,and the 14-24mm needs to cover a sensor with almost 4x the area. Despite it now being in its 13th year and it has been overtaken a by a few modern UWA FF lenses , It is demonstrably better than the 7-14mm "pro" Olympus is building a nice series of professional lenses and the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8 is proof once again of their top optical quality. You get excellent sharpness, very well controlled distortion and some close focusing capabilities that make it a surprisingly good lens for close-ups and details. I don’t think we can really ask for more than that. Physically though the Olympus 7-14mm f2.8 is quite a different beast to the earlier Lumix G 7-14mm f4. Measuring 79mm in length, 106mm in diameter and weighing 534g, it’s significantly larger and heavier than the Lumix G 7-14mm, which measures 70x83mm and weighs 300g; yep that’s almost half the weight. I’ve pictured them side-by-side below and it’s clear how much heftier the Olympus lens is, thanks to its brighter focal ratio and weather-sealing. You will however notice they share a similar design with a bulbous front-end which extends within the barrel as the focal length decreases; both also employ large lens caps which slide over the built-in hood petals and neither offers a filter thread.

The lens is also capable of delivering excellent results with the 40/64mp High Res Shot function found on the OM-D E-M5 mark II. You can see an example below. E-M5 II, 1/640, f/ 5.6, ISO 200 – 7mm – HRS E-M5 II, 1/640, f/ 5.6, ISO 200 – 7mm – HRS – Crop

Optical quality

I didn’t find any relevant traces of chromatic aberration, apart from at the shortest focusing distances when using the fastest aperture. Vignetting is almost completely absent. The only real limit to be aware of is flare. Most of the time they are small but very much present when using the lens at 7mm. The reason is that at this focal length, the front element is very much exposed and the hood doesn’t protect it that much. Even when the sun or other strong sources of lights aren’t in the frame, you can end up with flares quite easily even when the light is coming from the left or the right like in the example below. I was concentrating on the bridge in my composition and the sun was on the left. I didn’t notice the flares in the middle until I saw the image on the computer. E-M1, 1/250, f/ 8, ISO 200 – 7mm MPB puts photo and video kit into more hands, more sustainably. Every month, visual storytellers sell more than 20,000 cameras and lenses to MPB. Choose used and get affordable access to kit that doesn’t cost the earth.

A petal-shaped hood is built onto the front of the lens, which does a reasonable job of shading the lens from extraneous light that may cause issues with loss of contrast or flare. Strong sources of light in the frame, such as the sun can cause flare and a noticeable loss of contrast. There isn’t the option to attach a circular filter thread. Olympus won’t produce an optional filter holder so we will have to wait for a third party manufacturer to do it. LEE recently announced a filter holder designed especially for Super Wide angle lenses. For now only DSLR lenses are compatible but they should increase the list soon. Let’s hope that the 7-14mm f/2.8 will also be included. When compared to other micro 4/3 lenses, the 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO is a hefty beast. It’s significantly larger than any other ultra-wide for the system, and has a substantial and bulbous front element. However, you’ll find it’s similar in size to many other ultra-wide lenses for other mirrorless systems, such as the Fuji 10-24mm f/4 and the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4. The lens is made for the serious shooter, and is really intended for use on the cameras with more substantial grips, such as the Panasonic GH4, Olympus OM-D E-M1 and so on. The 7-14mm f/2.8 is a large lens for Micro 4/3, but isn’t overly large compared to many wide-angle zooms. Sharpness: I was very surprised at the central sharpness of this lens. Very surprised. Wide open it may be my sharpest m4/3 zoom I've tested in the central region, and that's at 7mm and out to about 10mm. Exceptional performance. At 14mm wide open, the center sharpness falls off just a bit wide open and f/4 is the best aperture. Still excellent performance in the middle of the frame, though. The zoom ring is on the stiff side, but smooth, exactly the way I like it. There's no zoom creep when you point the lens down. It's also easy to distinguish the zoom ring from the focus ring, even though the two are close together.The " small DOF " at 14mm is huge It is more about the total light gathering . The 14-24 and 14-30mm allow one to stop the lens down should one wish to do so. The 14-30mm mirrorless still allows for better DOF control and total light gathering whilst being smaller and lighter . With the bonus of taking filters natively I've heard you say how much you dont like the Oly 7-14 numerous times before and you are more than welcome to your opinion. I've owned and used the Nikon for several years so I'm more than familiar with it. I had the chance to see and try out a prototype of the new lens during the E-M5 Mark II launch in Prague a few months ago, but I wasn’t allowed to bring the pictures home. Despite playing with it for only a few minutes in the tiny corridors and spaces of the abandoned factory, what I saw looked promising.

I used Imatest to evaluate the 7-14mm's performance when paired with the 16-megapixel OM-D E-M1. At 7mm f/2.8 the lens scores 2,463 lines per picture height on a center-weighted test. Thats' better than the 1,800 lines we want to see at a minimum. Image quality is even through most of the frame, but the outer third portion is weaker, though it still shows better than 1,900 lines. Image quality is basically the same as the aperture is narrowed through f/5.6. At f/8 the edges improve, scoring just shy of 2,200 lines. Diffraction is a minor issue at f/11, but the lens still shows 2,384 lines. At f/16 there's a more noticeable drop (1,983 lines), and you should avoid using f/22 as the sharpness decreases drastically to 1,383 lines. As in all Pro lenses the manual focus ring is great but in autofocus I have had it wandering a bit. Easily fixed with bbfBokeh is a word used for the out-of-focus areas of a photograph, and is usually described in qualitative terms, such as smooth / creamy / harsh etc. In the Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO, Olympus employed an iris diaphragm with 7 rounded aperture blades for a pleasing bokeh. This performance reminds me a lot of the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8: some people don't think that lens performs all that well, but that's because they're trying to make it capture flat fields and aren't compensating for the field curvature. Linear Distortion: As is becoming common in m4/3, there's a huge difference between whether you look at this lens with the Olympus supplied corrections (in-camera JPEGs and many raw converters), or you look at the bare raw data.