Oly 4/3 9-18mm, a keeper?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by oto02, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. oto02

    oto02 Mu-43 Regular

    167
    Jul 24, 2012
    Melbourne, VICTORIA, AU
    Flo
    Hi guys,

    I got a few 4/3 lenses that I am not sure if I should keep them or should I try to exchange them with m4/3 lil brothers.

    The one that I like on the 4/3 body is 9-18mm, but on my PM-1 (and soon on PM-2) is not on my liking. Also I think the sharpnes of m.9-18mm is somehow better. So the question is, is it worth it to swap or not, taking into account that the former is gonna cost some extra.

    Oly 4/3 macro 35mm, doesn't do much work out at all, IQ okay, but not impressive. Macro Oly m.60mm would be a possible replacement??, having said that I got Oly 45mm and think they would be too close to each other...

    Also was thinking if Oly 70-300mm (which collects dust as well) would be well off to be trade in for a m.75-300 version (or Panny 100-300mm).

    Need to add that I am still having my E-3, and don't really want to get rid of it at the moment, even that in back to my mind is EM-5 or E-7. The ones that I am keeping the 50-200 mkI, 14-54 mkI, EC-14 and EX-25 for.

    Thoughts, thoughts and finally thoughts ...

    Thanks a lot for any opinions.
     
  2. strang

    strang Mu-43 Veteran

    287
    May 7, 2012
    M.ZD 9-18: 155 g, 50 mm retracted.
    ZD 9-18: 280 g, 73 mm.

    M.ZD is 32% shorter and 45% lighter than ZD.

    Enough said?

    Although you would be without a 4/3 UWA.
     
  3. micz87

    micz87 Mu-43 Regular

    103
    May 8, 2012
    EU
    Mine micro 9-18 is lens with witch I am very happy after big and heavy Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon. I love to keep my equipment small ;) 
     
  4. amalric

    amalric  

    183
    Jul 24, 2012
    Rome. Italy
    I wouldn't give away the 4/3 9-18 for the m4/3 one for a simple reason. It is sharp across the frame, while the latter isn't. Just do a comparison at DPR's comparometer. It has also more CA.

    it is also more fragile and it can have decentering issues. For an UWA fast AF is not a great need.
     
  5. I can't think of a whole lot of compelling reasons to recommend the 4/3 (Zuiko) version over the m4/3 (M Zuiko). It's cheaper (which might be reason enough), it's a bit sharper in the corners, and it feels more solid because it isn't collapsible like the M Zuiko. On the other hand, the M Zuiko seems to be sharper in the centre, is much smaller (particularly when collapsed for storage), is much lighter, and focuses a whole lot quicker and quieter.

    Unless you think that you might still want to use it on your E-3 I would consider switching over to the M Zuiko.
     
  6. oto02

    oto02 Mu-43 Regular

    167
    Jul 24, 2012
    Melbourne, VICTORIA, AU
    Flo
    Thanks guys. I'll try to sell my 4/3 9_18mm, which havent used anyway, and trying to get a M. version.

    Cheers
     
  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.