OM-D + Ultra-Wide vs. D300 and 12-24 f/4

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Pili, Jun 12, 2013.

  1. Pili

    Pili Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2012
    Boulder, CO
    Can anyone with an OM-D plus Oly 9-18 or Pany 7-14 comment on image quality compared to the nikon setup? Since moving to m4/3, I've been committed to moving to the format completely but I'm having second thoughts.

    The downside to hanging onto the the nikon setup is that it would be primarily relegated to situations when I'm not trekking the camera around on my back for long distances (I'm over it), but it's very hard to justify having a dedicated wide angle for both systems (especially when I already have the 12-24 which is a great lens). On the other hand, both wide angles for m4/3's seem like compromises.

    Would I be happy with the quality of the 9-18 + OMD combo? The 9-14 sacrifices the ease of using filters. Decisions, decisions!
  2. keko

    keko Mu-43 Rookie

    May 19, 2013
    I'm not sure my comment will be of much help since I've never used the 9-18 or 7-14.
    However, I'm very familiar with the output of a Tokina 12-24 on Nikon and Fuji pro DX bodies, and when compared to my lowly Panasonic 14mm + Panasonic 0.79x wide angle adapter I have a hard time picking which output is better technically. I would think the 9-18 and 7-14 would match in many respects the F-mount output.
    You might want to read what Thom Hogan has to say about the E-M5 sensor and the lenses. I think he uses the 7-14 quite extensively, and some primes....
  3. Pili

    Pili Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2012
    Boulder, CO
    Thanks for the tips, reading through his review was enlightening. I actually went back at an older image shot with the P14 and took another try at PP after reading a few of his articles. I think I can be happy with the OM-D now that I know my skill with camera RAW still needs work, not necessarily better lenses.
  4. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I currently have both the MFT UWA zooms, although I intend to drop one of them. They are both pretty good IMO. The 7-14 has the edge in IQ, but it's not all plain sailing. It's a little sharper, but... it flares badly and this can be a real issue for landscape shooting on the more recent Oly bodies where it manifests itself as purple blobs. I'm awaiting the rear filter holder from the 8mm fisheye which together with a Wratten 2A gel filter should significantly reduce this problem - we'll see.

    The 9-18 is smaller, lighter and takes filters. If it went wider than 9mm, I'd drop the 7-14 in an instant, but there are times where you just need the widest you can get.

    I used to shoot Canon FF and I reckon both of these lenses give the 17-40L a run for its money. However, the Canon UWAs are pretty poor performing in the corners at anything less than f8 - certainly not up to the delights of the Nikon 12-24. My personal view is that if you're a landscape shooter and are particularly critical of corner-to-corner sharpness then the Nikon 12-24 will be hard to live without. For most other uses, the 7-14 or 9-18 will fit the bill just fine.
  5. Sahib7

    Sahib7 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 25, 2013
    I've compared the Oly 9-18, the Pana 7-14 (OM-D) and the Nikon 10-24 (Nikon D90)
    Here's what I've got:

    • At 10mm the Nikon was slightly sharper and showed lower CAs compared to the Pana at 7mm
    • At every other tested focal length my Nikon 10-24 was less sharp than both Pana and Oly
    • The Pana is sharper at all tested focal length than the Oly
    • Field of view of Pana 7mm and Nikon 10mm is very similar (despite equivalence calculations....)
    • The Nikon 10-24 is the most versatile of the bunch (focal length at 35mm: 15mm-36mm!), but compared to the other two it is relatively soft at every focal length, except 10mm, and demands to be shot at f8 to get good results corner to corner

    Hope this helps a bit!

    My conclusion:
    A combination of Oly 9-18mm and Samyang 7.5mm (my sample is unbelievably good) might be ideal and is still less expansive than the Pana and the Nikon. This combo is still smaller than the Nikon setup.
    If you want all in one lens, I would suggest the Nikon (just stop down to f8).
  6. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    Very good. Much appreciated. The 7-14 looks like the one to get. How do you feel the Pan 12-35mm or the Oly 12mm f2 stack up?
  7. Pili

    Pili Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2012
    Boulder, CO
    Thanks for the feedback everyone, I'm going to give the Oly 9-18 a shot first, and possibly add the Samyang down the line. Based on everyones comments, I don't think I'll be unhappy with the sharpness (stopped down).
  8. Sahib7

    Sahib7 Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 25, 2013
    You will be happy with the Oly for sure!
    Adding the Samyang will give you all possibilities you need.

    I've sold my Nikon 10-24 and I've returned the Oly and the Pana.
    For now I'm happy with the Samyang and the 12mm of my Oly 12-50 (which is arguably not the best image quality wise). I would be happy to exchange my 12-50 for a new Olympus 12-x lens with higher quality (still hiping for a m43 12-60, maybe something like this might get inteoduced together with the new OM-D later this year).

    Ad 12mm f2.0:
    I've never used that lens, but it looks nice, albeit pricey....
  9. bassman

    bassman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 22, 2013
    New Jersey
    The Bassman
    I believe that the Panasonic has a better IQ than the Olympus, but I doubt it is enough by itself to justify the dollars and weight. So I looked at my shooting history to help inform me as to which FL range might be more suitable.

    I analyzed my LR database to see what I might give up in choosing between the 7-14 and the 9-18. I use the Tokina 11-16/2.8 on my Nikon D7000, so I selected all 'Flagged' images with focal lengths of 11mm and apertures less than f/4.0. I included the f-stop screen to help understand whether the fixed 4.0 vs. the variable 4.0-5.6 might be important.

    I found 9 images out of the 40,000 in LR. Of which 4 were cropped anyway. Not a big loss ...

    Of course, I don't know what pictures I never took that might require wider than the 11mm DX frame (FX 20mm/m43 10mm or less), but it can't be a big number.
  10. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    FWIW, I have the 9-18 & OM-D and D7100 & Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, and the Oly combo is significantly sharper in the corners and edges. I also have the 12/2 and think it's a better lens than the 9-18.
  11. I tend to agree with some of the others. I do use my Oly me5 more and more because it is much easier to travel with. In fact my m43 kit will be going to Europe with me tomorrow. For what I do the overall file of my oly gear cannot compare with the files from the D800 but I wouldnt expect it to. Howevr it beats the hell out of any of the point and shoots I have used in the past and definately beats no camera at all.
  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.