Hi Guys :smile: I am a self confessed prime junky and have tried everything in MFT apart from Oly 75 mm 1.8 and newer 17 mm 1.8 . I agree that primes offer exellent IQ and are much faster and offer significant low light advantage . But we also know that some of us dont like the hassle of changing lenses and I am one them .I was never a fan of kit lens but since I picked up Oly 14-54mm II , life has changed . This is sort of all in one lens for me . I have sold PL25, Panny 14mm 2.5 , Panny 20 mm and now left with only Oly 45 mm 1.8 which I will never sell. I dont crave for sold lenses anymore as Oly 14-54mmII is as good as any of them . I shot this street festival in my suburb and these images are shot with OMD+ 14-54mm II and are straight OOC JPEGS .I did shoot raw but didnt want to waste time on processsing at this stage . Enjoy these images and feel free to comment . Cheers Bhupinder 1 {} {} 2 {} 3 {} 4 {} 5 {} 6 {} 7 {} 8 {} 9 {} 10 {} 11 {} 12 {} 13 {} 14 {} 15 {} 16 {} 17 {} 18 {} 19 {} 20 {}
From a purely technical perspective: I'm less than impressed. Most of these shots are soft (a kinder soul might call it a 'glow', but I won't), many are slightly over-exposed, and the focus is off on several (motion blur or just focussed oddly). Part of it is the midday sunlight (not flattering or easy to shoot), but these shots aren't selling the lens to me - the only shot I really like is the 5th (wide-angle shot down the street) in terms of color, contrast and sharpness.. Not much that compares to what I get from the 14, 20 or 45, anyway. I like the composition (content) of quite a lot of the shots, but in terms of quality, I don't see many that couldn't have been handled with equal aplomb and quality by a good point and shoot (like the RX100, Panny LX series or Oly XZ)
I rarely use zooms, but this kind of parade like setting is one of the situations I'd use one more often than not too. I have a 14-150 that I shoot a couple of annual parades with and its pretty key to be able to swing between wide angle, neutral, short tele, and long tele very quickly and transparently. And as long as there's enough light, it works well. For more typical street shooting, I'll still stick with a prime every time though. I sort of agree that SOME of these technically are a little soft - it works perfectly on some but is mildly distracting on others. But some look just about perfect, so that's probably just missing focus slightly on some of them? But I'm DEFINITELY jealous of your summer weather! -Ray
I too am a bit underwhelmed by the softness. I owned the first version of this lens, and in careful comparison with the 14-42 on E-500, the 14-42 actually, very slightly, edged out the 14-54. But the extra light and reach, made the 14-54 much more desirable lens to use. But the size and lack of wide aperture caused me to sell it. Your use of the lens, overcomes any slight (perceived) softness. Well done. A small amount of PP could go a long way to mask the slight "lack". AND, you are the only one that needs to be happy,with the lens. Enjoy!
It seems to me you've captured the spirit of the event. Your framing at any focal length is very good. Ya know...for the first time using a lens under pressure, you did very well. Ray etc are right about the technical issues but that will cure itself quickly upon practice.
I don't know, this lens performs well for me. I had the 12-35 at the same time. Can't say it was any better, at least not to my eyes. The out door shots were shot with a Hoya ND-8. The last one is with a 12-35. Of course, they lose a lot in transition from LR to here.
Thanks guys ,I agree some pics looked quite soft but thats my fault.Here are some tweaked ones. Cheers {} {} {} {} {}
Hi Bhupinder, May I ask why did you choose Oly 14-54mm MrkII as your walkaround zoom? Why not use Panny 12-35 instead, for example? You won't need an adapter from 4/3 and the Panny is lighter... I am just curious :smile:
Hi.. Panasonic 12-35mm is quite expensive and I have quite a few primes . I like look and feel of 14-54 mm and it gives u extra reach as well. Some reviews do suggest that its sharper than Panasonic but I cant comment as I havent used Panasonic . Cheers Bhupinder
For me it's the price. I'd love the 12mm option but @ $500+ difference it's not worth it to me. The extra reach is very useful, too.
Have you tried or wondered about trying the 12-60 to see how it compares with the 14-54? Or is the 12-60 just a bit too heavy and bulky?
The 12-60 would be better except its auto focus on m4/3 is dog sh$t. The 14-54mkII focuses nearly like a native lens. The 50-200 is a wonderful lens also, but you basically have to manual focus. The AF is sooo bad on m4/3 bodies.
