Panasonic 7-14mm for the G1... is it worth the cash?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Conqueror, Sep 17, 2010.

  1. Conqueror

    Conqueror Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Jun 4, 2010
    Panasonic 7-14mm

    Specifically to use with the G1 is it worth the cost in your opinion - I guess nearest thing would be the M ZUIKO 9-18MM but no IS?

    Its a lot of money for just the one lens ( 7-14mm) i've no idea if itll hold its value either.
     
  2. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    I wondered the same thing and finally after testing both, I got the 9-18.
    It was a good move.
     
  3. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Jan 19, 2010
    Midwest
    Real Name:
    Paul
    The 7-14mm does not have OIS built in, so that is a wash. Having owned both, I find the 9-18mm much more useful as a general wide walk-around lens. If you are looking for an extreme wide angle, the 7-14mm can't be matched, but being able to add filters and being ultra compact are great pluses to the 9-18mm (the 7-14mm is small, the 9-18 is miniscule).
     
  4. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    Optically I didn't see that much of a difference between them either.
    They are both excellent choices.
     
  5. Conqueror

    Conqueror Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Jun 4, 2010
    Ah didnt realise the 7-14mm had no IS.

    This makes the 9-18mm seem almost a no brainer (in terms of sheer value). Especially since it will take a protective filter. I may as well save the cash. The difference is something like 400 £ here.
     
  6. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    Who needs IS anyway.... Especially on a wide?
     
  7. Narnian

    Narnian Nobody in particular ...

    Aug 6, 2010
    Midlothian, VA
    Real Name:
    Richard Elliott
    $500 is a psychological ceiling for me for buying lenses. I'd love the 7-14 but the 9-18 is a better buy IMHO from talking to people here.
     
  8. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Real Name:
    Ad
    Concerning the Panasonic 7-14mm holding its value, I bought mine for € 999 and I think I would get € 750-800 on eBay for it now. In my book that's not too bad. Don't know about the Olympus 9-18mm.

    I don't use the 7-14mm very often but when I do, I like the feel of it, reassuringly solid and the images are beautiful. I must admit I hardly ever use it below 9mm. The only keepers I got at 7-8mm are interior shots to show our new furniture to our daughter who lived in Barcelona at the time, so utility pictures only really :smile:. Still I'm not thinking about selling it, even though it's the most expensive lens I have ever bought.
     
  9. Andrew Riddell

    Andrew Riddell Mu-43 Regular

    41
    Aug 21, 2010
    London
    Leaving the cost out of it, the decision depends on what and how you like to shoot. The difference in angle of view between 7 and 9mm is _much_ more than you might think! If urban architecture is your thing (as it is mine), the extra width is worth the price.

    Andrew
     
  10. Conqueror

    Conqueror Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Jun 4, 2010
    Yeah im into buildings and landscapes.. I dont do sports or wildlife.. wouldnt mind a macro lens for messing around one day.. but right now id much rather a wide.

    At the moment ive got the G1 kit lens and the 20mm panasonic.

    How often do you use the 7-14mm Andrew?
     
  11. Conqueror

    Conqueror Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Jun 4, 2010
    Narnian, yes im like that, I have ceiling for everything and analyse any purchase to death.
     
  12. dko22

    dko22 Mu-43 Regular

    163
    Jul 26, 2010
    Stuttgart, Germany
    the lenses have quite different characters. If you don't like the stretching kind of perspective distortion which is part of the character of an ultrawide then there's little point in spending the extra money. If you do, then nothing above c. 15mm in 35mm equivalent will do. There really is quite a difference going to 18mm (ie the 9mm of the oly). I used 17mm and that's not wide enough for the effect I look for. Would have loved the Sigma 12-24 if it hadn't been completely unusable above about 18mm and was very smeared at the edges at virtually all apertures.

    Best thing if you can't try both lenses is to look for samples at 14mm equivalent taken by folk who know how to use the lens and decide if you love or hate the effects
     
  13. Jimboh

    Jimboh Mu-43 Regular

    75
    Sep 17, 2010
    Florida
    7-14, not worth it IMO

    Certainly in no way bashing it. I bought both the Panny 7-14 and Oly 9-18mm and did comparison, especially indoors in the Fairmount hotel. If prices were within $50 of each other, I would have kept the Panny, as the extra 2mm does make a difference at that extreme WA, and the lens does not overlap the stock GH-1 14-140 lens.

    Money was a factor and I opted for the cheaper lens, the Oly 9-18mm. I have grown to love it and don't miss the panny. I think one UWA should have a place in your bag. what's way-cool about these lenses is by tilting up/down slightly you can create a whole new image due to perspective shift intrinsic to UWA.

    Panny is solid build and heavier, and larger. Oly has little lense wobble fully extended, but no impact to photos. But Oly about the size of a Gerber baby food jar! You can put a filter on, but in practice, polarizer does not work as well due to curvature at extreme WA. Panny, no screw on filter.
    As other posters indicated, image stabilization for UWA is not needed and not missed.

    I found the Oly surprisingly to be slightly sharper in comparison (not enough to notice in practice), and both lenses to be order of magnitude sharper than the kit lens, although my major beef with the 14-140 lens is at telephoto end, not WA.

    I love the size ofthe Oly, and lightens up the camera considerably. Only improvement I'd like to see would be wideer apeture. Some new lenses are about to be announced and if rumors are right it will be tough call against brighter prime rumored to come out in Q4 2010, or this zoom. I will stick with the zoom as it is so versatile vs prime if I had to pick.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. feppe

    feppe Mu-43 Regular

    89
    Aug 31, 2010
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Has anyone done any large prints (13x19" or larger) from photos with the lens? Now that it looks like an ultra-wide prime is not coming in the foreseeable future, I might just get this instead of the just-announced 14mm panny.
     
  15. f6cvalkyrie

    f6cvalkyrie Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 12, 2010
    Brussels, Belgium
    Hallo Harry,

    I've integrated several 7-14 shots in calendars in A3 format.
    No problem at all with the picture quality, even when the pic takes the whole page.

    What kind of trouble were you expecting ?

    C U
    Rafael
     
  16. feppe

    feppe Mu-43 Regular

    89
    Aug 31, 2010
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Thanks! I was expecting mainly softness in corners which is a common issue, especially with zooms.
     
  17. crcal

    crcal Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Jul 21, 2010
    Honolulu, HI
    I'd say the 7-14mm is worth its price. The build quality of the lens and image quality from it are excellent. There's no other option if you want the 7-8mm perspective. Constant f/4 is very nice too.
     
  18. Andrew Riddell

    Andrew Riddell Mu-43 Regular

    41
    Aug 21, 2010
    London
    Sorry for the delayed response (the day job takes priority - and pays for the lenses!).

    At the recent London Open City weekend (an architecture fest) I found I was using the 7-14 about 15-20% of the time. I've also been visiting this year's Serpentine Pavilion (by Jean Nouvel) and the usage here was c.50% due to the constraints of the site. On a recent visit to Brussels, usage was lower, but that was down to the shots which I was looking for.

    What it comes down to (at least for me) is the ability to get the shot I want, and I find I'm using the MFT 7-14 just as much as I do when using my FT kit.

    Andrew
     
  19. CPWarner

    CPWarner Mu-43 Veteran

    244
    Dec 24, 2010
    Real Name:
    Cliff
    Well, the data over on SLRgear.com says it is quite sharp to the corners even at 7 mm. My experience is that it produces images that hold up quite well in prints 15"x20". It is a very good lens, and one of the reasons I have purchased cameras in this system. As to filters, the only thing I miss is the ability to use something like a SinghRay variable ND filter as that is very useful for waterfalls and other water type shots.