E-M1/M5 with Lumix 7-14mm Test

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by jsusilo, Sep 17, 2013.

  1. jsusilo

    jsusilo Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 28, 2012

    "As you can clearly see, the OMD EM1 suffers to exactly the same extent as the EM5 before it, suffering from quite dramatic purple blobs on the image. To be fair in this particular example they're quite well hidden when viewed at lower magnifications, but I have seen other situations where the purple artefact has been visible even with the image viewed on the camera's screen without zooming-in. It is a real issue if you'd like to shoot bright lights with this lens on an Olympus body."

    "Interestingly while many owners of Olympus bodies and this lens have reported the issue, most people have assumed Panasonic bodies avoid it altogether. As you can see from the GX7 crop though, this is not the case - the same flare blobs are present on the image when you know where to look, but crucially they're much less noticeable. As far as I understand this isn't down to digital correction, but more likely a difference in filtering on the sensor - as both Olympus and Panasonic use different sensors."

    "But one thing's for certain: the OMD EM5 remains a superb camera, especially if you find the compact size appealing. It's testament to how much Olympus got right that even 18 months later with a better-featured model announced, it's still a lovely camera to own and use.
  2. KVG

    KVG Banned User

    May 10, 2011
    yyc(Calgary, AB)
    Kelly Gibbons
    unless the em1 has lens correction like panny/nikon/canon body's it will still be there.
  3. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    It's very hard to correct for IR contamination. Too bad really - an IR filter is not an especially difficult thing for Olympus to have included on the sensor.
  4. jsusilo

    jsusilo Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 28, 2012
    I imagine the discussion among Olympus camp be along the line of "why fix this issue if we plan to release 7-14 f/2.8 ourself .. as that only means boosting sales of our competitor .. oopss I meant our partner" :):)
  5. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    To me, its not a sensor issue by Olympus but a lens design flaw..

    Why would Olympus put an IR filter on it`s sensor... cause Panasonic made a design issue that has to be corrected by the camera body.. to me.. thats a major mark against Panasonic.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Bokeh Diem

    Bokeh Diem Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Mar 14, 2010
    The 7-14 was designed to work with Pany cams, not Oly. No blobs on my G2's, G2's, Gh2's or G5's over a span of four years.

    Notwithstanding supposed adaptability across the standard comments about the 7-14 being an inferior lens when used on Oly cams seem somewhat out of place. If users are concerned that their Oly cams cannot use other lenses by other manufacturers it seems to me that this is an Oly issue, period.
  7. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    Well, you're entitled to that opinion, but since the lens has imaging qualities that cannot be obtained elsewhere within the micro 4/3 system, and the cameras do not, the easiest way around the problem is to buy one of the cameras that properly work with the lens. Which is what I did, and will continue to do, and Olympus will not get my camera business as long as they can't properly work with the outstanding lens who's imaging qualities cannot be obtained from Olympus.

    BTW, Olympus cameras are also subject to the same problem with the Olympus 9-18mm lens, but to a lesser degree. So what do you think about Olympus being victim of the same problem from one of their own lenses?
  8. RobWatson

    RobWatson Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The suggested filter is a blue/UV filter (Wratten 2A) that does not have NIR filtering.

    Is NIR leaks another problem?
  9. pclewis

    pclewis Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 12, 2013
    Back Filter

    The issue is UV. Since Oly does not filter it in the camera I requires a filter like the 2A. The 7-14 does not easily accommodate a front filter, so go over to the other site:


    and check out how it is done. I assure you it works. Other alternative is wait and see if Oly makes a 7-14 that does not have the issue. No reason for the camera body to deal with this. Do not confuse CA issues with the purple flare from UV issues.

  10. emptysensor

    emptysensor Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 8, 2011
    It really annoys me that this is still a problem. It is in both company's best interest to ensure the compatibility of everything across the standard, not just mechanically and electrically, but also optically. There's obviously still a problem and these guys (both companies) need to get together in the same room and fix it, regardless of what the cause is. There's really no excuse for this to still be an issue. We should be able to select lenses and bodies based on our needs and the nuances of each product, not because of an obvious defect that no one is willing to take ownership of.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. cmpatti

    cmpatti Mu-43 Veteran

    May 8, 2011
    Berkeley, CA
    What annoys me is that this "issue" continues to be raised when an easy, inexpensive, and complete solution has been fully demonstrated to exist. It's right there in the link in pclewis's post. Took me about 5 minutes to install, and not only is the "purple blob" problem solved, but my 7-14 now accepts filters. I don't really every reader of this forum to know about it, but you'd think that a camera reviewer like Cameralabs (whose reviews I generally think are very informative) would have done some research.
  12. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    There is a std that both manufacturers and other 3rd parties go by. How a particular manufacturers handles uv obviously isn't part of that (or NIR etc).

    Olympus isn't privy to panasonic design team and how they produce their lens.

    Just because some online guy figured out a bandaid for a panasonic lens on an Olympus body for 1, perhaps as you feel 2 lens if you include the 9-18 is hardly a reason for them to add a blue uv cut filter to their body.

    Perhaps panasonic should change their lens coating to accomodate Olympus and also have less in body adjustment required... Also, a reviewer shouldn't be "rigging" their setups with bandaid fixes as well as very few people will apply that bandaid. Adding a filter can and usually degrades iq and can lead to a lot of undesirable effects like flare etc.

    So in your train of thought, why hasn't panasonic fixed the banding issue with the 20mm on Olympus bodies.. I'd said that's a way more significant issue then the uv issue on the 7-14..
  13. bassman

    bassman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 22, 2013
    New Jersey
    The Bassman
    I have exactly the same problem on my E-M5 with the Olympus 9-18. So I neither think its a Panasonic problem, nor a 7-14 problem, but a "wide angle on the camera" problem.
    • Like Like x 2
  14. emptysensor

    emptysensor Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 8, 2011
    I did do the filter holder mod on my 7-14, but that's outside what I'd consider a simple solution. I'm sure plenty of people wouldn't feel comfortable making the change and they really shouldn't have to. It is a band-aid solution that shouldn't have to be done.
  15. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    What incentive does Panasonic have to fix it? There is no native lens that is that wide (without going to 4/3), same with the 20mm pancake. Why would they spend more money to fix things on cameras they didn't make any money on? The "excuse" is that Panasonic stuff works better on Panasonic bodies. No banding on the 20mm, faster focusing, no purple blobs (which also occur on Oly bodies with the 9-18 Oly lens). If you don't like that, sorry.
  16. emptysensor

    emptysensor Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 8, 2011
    As I said they should both get together to find a solution, also with banding and rattle snaking, as plenty of people still complain about those. If Panny's lenss work better on Olympus cameras they'll sell more lenses. Seems like a reasonable incentive to me.
  17. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    It seems the same misunderstandings / incorrect assertions come up on every thread about this purple flare & reflections issue, so I feel compelled to clarify a few points:

    * This issue is caused by the particular UV filtering or lack thereof on the sensor, NOT the lens.
    * It has no relation to in-camera CA correction for Panasonic lenses.
    * The color of the flare is affected by the UV filtering, hence why it's purple on some newer bodies but green on others.
    * This is not specific to the 7-14mm, or even to Panasonic lenses. I have seen examples from the 9-18, PL 25, 20mm, and others. Being a sensor filter issue it can theoretically appear with any lens, it's just more frequent and obvious with flare-prone wide angles
    * This is not exclusive to the OM-D line, though clearly more of an issue there. I have experienced the issue several times on the GH3, though it is clearly less pronounced or common.
    * This is likely an issue with Sony sensor production/design; a number of other Sony sensor equipped cameras have exhibited purple flare and reflections, even the iPhone 5.

    * This can be band-aid corrected, as others have pointed out, with application of a Wratten 2A pale yellow UV filter, which returns the flare to it's usual green hue instead of purple

    If anyone was going to "fix" this issue it would need to be the camera/sensor manufacturers, and presumably at the production stage. It's unfortunate and frustrating, but this is not a lens design issue, it's within the sensor construction. Without knowing the whole story, I can only assume the benefits of the current UV filter design changes are outweighing Olympus/Sony concerns about customers occasionally experiencing purple blobs.
    • Like Like x 3
  18. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    Geesh….from reading this thread one would think the Panasonic 7-14mm on an Olympus camera is a problem all of the time.

    Which is extremely far from the case for me. I have 100s of photos without the "purple blob", a few had purple flair that I wanted to keep and it was not much of problem to remove the flare. There have been the very rare occasional photo where the "purple blob" flare did sneak in on me causing rejection the photo.

    Anyone using this lens and camera combination that frequently has issues with the "purple blob" should probably change their style or their equipment.

    A couple of things -
    If one wants a zoom lens with a 14mm (35mm equivalent) within the focal length, the options are pretty slim. So equipment needs to be chosen to fit the needs.

    No lens is perfect, good photographers know the sweet spot and weak points of their lenses. They can either avoid the latter or find a way to use it to their benefit. The Panasonic 7-14mm on an Olympus camera is no different in this regard.

    Out of the options available for a zoom lens with a 14mm (35mm equivalent) focal length, the Panasonic is an extremely good lens, maybe only outdone by Nikon's twice as expensive 14-24mm. Even zooms with near 14mm (35mm equivalent) the Panasonic holds its own.

    All of the sniveling, whining, and complaining about the lens on the Olympus cameras will not get Panasonic to "fix" this current lens nor Olympus to redesign their cameras for this lens.

    You can either work with the lens, pick an alternative, or maybe go sailing.

    OM-D E-M5 with Panasonic 7-14mm, 1/3200 at 7mm,f/4.0, ISO 200mm
  19. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 15, 2011
    I disagree that it's solely a sensor issue. Do you not find it odd that Olympus lens do not exhibit the issue with maybe the exception being the occasionally the 9-18 where as a tone of pana ones can exhibit uv handling issues. Also, Olympus Sony sensor cameras have significant better iq (gx7 unknown) so perhaps pana sensor handling of uv solution causes ISO noise which to many is undesirable. If the gx7 is close iq to em5, curious if the flare blob issue now becomes evident with the 7-14 on a pana gx7.

    Either way, Olympus designed lens do not have it as an issue - Panasonic by the post above have it as a signature to many many lens so why would Olympus address the issue, it's a Panasonic problem. You may not see it on pana bodies but its prob corrected in body which could be a reason of there noisier file output.
  20. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    I just picked some lenses I've seen it with here on the forum, off the top of my head.

    Examples with Olympus 14-54mm and 50mm, and the same user is reporting it with the 14-42mm and 12-50mm Olympus m4/3 lenses:


    According to this post, an Olympus rep's response was

    ""This has been reported in occasional conditions and is to do with the micro lenses of the OM-D sensor. The sensor has many advantages (low light/dynamic range etc ) so this is a modest trade off."

    To address your other point, the GH3 is believed to have a nearly identical sensor to the OM-D EM-5 and essentially identical IQ. However, the prevalence of this issue is greatly reduced on the GH3. Presumably that would indicate that there are things that can be done to mitigate this issue without significantly effecting the image quality.

    This issue also appears on the EPL5 which shares the EM-5 sensor, so I too will be curious to see if the GX7 is also affected.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.