Amin
Hall of Famer
The new Olympus M. ZD 14-150mm f/4-5.6 lens joins the Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f/4-5.8 as the second "superzoom" lens for the Micro Four Thirds system. The new Olympus covers the wide angle to super telephoto range, extending a bit longer than the Panasonic for a 28-300mm equivalent range in 35mm frame terms.
The first thing I noticed when unboxing the Olympus lens was that there was no hood included. Unfortunately this seems to be the norm for Olympus Micro 4/3 lenses. Fortunately, this lens seems to be resistant to flare.
The second thing which struck me was how small and light the Olympus superzoom is. It's a significant reduction in both respects from the Panasonic superzoom. Here are the two lenses side-by-side:
The Olympus lens is roughly 40% lighter than the Panasonic (280gm vs 460gm). At current street prices, it's about 20% less expensive ($600 for the Olympus versus $760 for the Panasonic).
The other significant difference in specifications between the Olympus and Panasonic superzooms is that the Olympus lens lacks in-lens image stabilization. The Olympus bodies offer in-body image stabilization, so it was not necessary to incorporate stabilization technology in this lens which has been designed for use on digital Pen bodies.
The build quality of the Olympus lens seems very good. There is no significant barrel wobble when extended (the lens nearly doubles in length when zoomed). The focus ring is smooth. The zoom ring offers consistent resistance throughout the zoom range, and there is no zoom creep.
Focus is quiet and fast (much faster than the Olympus 14-42 and comparable in AF speed to the Panasonic 14-140).
Uncorrected, both the Olympus 14-150 and the Panasonic 14-140 have quite a bit of barrel distortion at 14mm. Fortunately, the distortion for both lenses is automatically corrected for in-camera JPEGs as well as by most of the popular RAW converters. You are unlikely to encounter this distortion unless you go looking for it.
Color fringing is another story. The lateral chromatic aberration of the Olympus lens is not automatically corrected in-camera, nor is it automatically addressed by most RAW processing applications. In contrast, color fringing is automatically addressed when using the Panasonic lens on a Panasonic body, both for in-camera JPEGs as well as for RAW files processed in applications which support those corrections (eg, Lightroom).
For the following 100% crop comparisons, I used an Olympus E-PL1 body and Adobe Lightroom 3.2RC. Thus, the color fringing for both lenses has been left uncorrected (due to use of an Olympus body), and the distortion has been corrected.
We'll start with 14mm and f/4, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Right upper corner:
Right lower corner:
Left lower corner:
14mm f/5.6:
14mm f/8:
~50mm f/5.6, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Right upper corner:
Right lower corner:
Left lower corner:
~50mm f/8:
~140mm ~f/5.6, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Lower portion, left of center:
Top:
Right lower corner:
~140mm ~f/8:
Overall conclusions of sharpness comparison:
Here are some bokeh comparisons of resized images made at ~140mm:
In use, I've found the Olympus lens to be plenty sharp with pleasing bokeh. Here are resized photos of my wife and son using this lens wide open (f/5.6) at full tele (150mm):
In the center, this lens is at least sharp enough wide open to show every bump and hair on my son's nose (100% crop):
I recently took just this lens and the Olympus E-PL1 on a short family trip to San Diego, CA. The Olympus 14-150 is incredibly versatile, perfect for the occasion. A few images from the trip (all are in-camera JPEGs, resized but otherwise straight from the camera):
The first thing I noticed when unboxing the Olympus lens was that there was no hood included. Unfortunately this seems to be the norm for Olympus Micro 4/3 lenses. Fortunately, this lens seems to be resistant to flare.
The second thing which struck me was how small and light the Olympus superzoom is. It's a significant reduction in both respects from the Panasonic superzoom. Here are the two lenses side-by-side:
The Olympus lens is roughly 40% lighter than the Panasonic (280gm vs 460gm). At current street prices, it's about 20% less expensive ($600 for the Olympus versus $760 for the Panasonic).
The other significant difference in specifications between the Olympus and Panasonic superzooms is that the Olympus lens lacks in-lens image stabilization. The Olympus bodies offer in-body image stabilization, so it was not necessary to incorporate stabilization technology in this lens which has been designed for use on digital Pen bodies.
The build quality of the Olympus lens seems very good. There is no significant barrel wobble when extended (the lens nearly doubles in length when zoomed). The focus ring is smooth. The zoom ring offers consistent resistance throughout the zoom range, and there is no zoom creep.
Focus is quiet and fast (much faster than the Olympus 14-42 and comparable in AF speed to the Panasonic 14-140).
Uncorrected, both the Olympus 14-150 and the Panasonic 14-140 have quite a bit of barrel distortion at 14mm. Fortunately, the distortion for both lenses is automatically corrected for in-camera JPEGs as well as by most of the popular RAW converters. You are unlikely to encounter this distortion unless you go looking for it.
Color fringing is another story. The lateral chromatic aberration of the Olympus lens is not automatically corrected in-camera, nor is it automatically addressed by most RAW processing applications. In contrast, color fringing is automatically addressed when using the Panasonic lens on a Panasonic body, both for in-camera JPEGs as well as for RAW files processed in applications which support those corrections (eg, Lightroom).
For the following 100% crop comparisons, I used an Olympus E-PL1 body and Adobe Lightroom 3.2RC. Thus, the color fringing for both lenses has been left uncorrected (due to use of an Olympus body), and the distortion has been corrected.
We'll start with 14mm and f/4, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Right upper corner:
Right lower corner:
Left lower corner:
14mm f/5.6:
14mm f/8:
~50mm f/5.6, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Right upper corner:
Right lower corner:
Left lower corner:
~50mm f/8:
~140mm ~f/5.6, center crop:
Left upper corner:
Lower portion, left of center:
Top:
Right lower corner:
~140mm ~f/8:
Overall conclusions of sharpness comparison:
- The two lenses are close in overall performance.
- The Olympus extreme corners are overall less sharp at 14mm.
- Lateral CA is an issue for both lenses.
- Sharpness is similar for the two lenses at 50mm and 140mm, with slight lens decentering issues giving the edge to the Olympus on the left side of the frame and the Panasonic on the right side of the frame.
- Neither lens delivers high performance in the periphery of the frame at 140mm.
Here are some bokeh comparisons of resized images made at ~140mm:
In use, I've found the Olympus lens to be plenty sharp with pleasing bokeh. Here are resized photos of my wife and son using this lens wide open (f/5.6) at full tele (150mm):
In the center, this lens is at least sharp enough wide open to show every bump and hair on my son's nose (100% crop):
I recently took just this lens and the Olympus E-PL1 on a short family trip to San Diego, CA. The Olympus 14-150 is incredibly versatile, perfect for the occasion. A few images from the trip (all are in-camera JPEGs, resized but otherwise straight from the camera):
