Wide angle battle , Pl8-18 vs O9-18 vs laowa 7.5

Mike Wingate

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
2,961
Location
Altrincham
Real Name
Mike Wingate
Shooting with a GX80. I bought the P7-14. Being f4 has never put me off. Often used with a tripod, often sat on the floor in churches. Triggered with the app or 2 sec delay. I often shoot with it on max 7mm. Not going to get much wider. Great for interiors if there is enough light. I made and used a plastic and card square filter holder that I have since discarded. I went on an outdoor shoot with a pro in the hills above Sheffield. He used Olympus m43. He offered me a go with his Laowa 7.5. I thought it was lovely. Small, light, feet in every shot. Fast and bright, not too much worry about focusing. If that lens was not so expensive, I would have one. Making do with my P7-14, at least I can zoom and save pixels.
 

Paul C

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 29, 2017
Messages
168
"I really enjoy my samyang fisheye, but many times the fisheye is not the right tool"

Amen ... !


That is the fisheye problem: to make an ultra-wide rectilinear picture you have to stretch out the image corners. You can either do that in the lens - or in software.

The rectilinear lens will always need to be big and heavy and expensive to fit in the multiple lens elements, and all the high-density glass needed to make that magic trick work. The fisheye solution is far cheaper to build, which is why we now have several affordable choices for M4/3 ranging from Cheecar Fujian's 8mm c-mount up to native M4/3 Samyangs and 7-Artisans models, as well as several free-to-download de-fishing software programs.

The problem then is in visualising the "defished" image in the EVF as you compose - and this isn't always easy to do. Now what we need is someone to make a matched optical viewfinder to show the ultrawide perspective that will fit into the hot shoe and help demonstrate our compositions as we take the image !

Given the breadth of skills and experience on the MU43 pages - it is a good time to ask you all - "has anyone made such an accessory?"
 

amit

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
164
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #24
"I really enjoy my samyang fisheye, but many times the fisheye is not the right tool"

Amen ... !


That is the fisheye problem: to make an ultra-wide rectilinear picture you have to stretch out the image corners. You can either do that in the lens - or in software.

The rectilinear lens will always need to be big and heavy and expensive to fit in the multiple lens elements, and all the high-density glass needed to make that magic trick work. The fisheye solution is far cheaper to build, which is why we now have several affordable choices for M4/3 ranging from Cheecar Fujian's 8mm c-mount up to native M4/3 Samyangs and 7-Artisans models, as well as several free-to-download de-fishing software programs.

The problem then is in visualising the "defished" image in the EVF as you compose - and this isn't always easy to do. Now what we need is someone to make a matched optical viewfinder to show the ultrawide perspective that will fit into the hot shoe and help demonstrate our compositions as we take the image !

Given the breadth of skills and experience on the MU43 pages - it is a good time to ask you all - "has anyone made such an accessory?"
Well, olympus has it in the em1iii (maybe also in 5iii) ,however ,only with the olympus 8mm pro fisheye .
 

Egregius V

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Messages
754
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Real Name
Rev. Gregory Vozzo
The problem then is in visualising the "defished" image in the EVF as you compose - and this isn't always easy to do. Now what we need is someone to make a matched optical viewfinder to show the ultrawide perspective that will fit into the hot shoe and help demonstrate our compositions as we take the image !
I'm not aware of a viewfinder that accounts for a particular angle of view or focal length. I just compose with the fisheye perspective knowing roughly how a defished projection will differ. With defishing, the result can vary quite a bit depending on the projection you use (rectilinear, equirectangular, panini, etc.). Rectilinear, especially, can be a lot wider than the actual focal length of the fisheye lens due to its extreme angle of view which keeps lines straight but stretches the image toward the edges and corners. It's normal for me to obtain a 4-6mm defished composition from a 7.5mm Samyang fisheye lens.

Here's an example:

Out-of-camera fisheye JPEG:
P9121069-smaller.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Equirectangular Panini projection, uncropped:
P9121069_projected-uncropped.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Final cropped image:
P9121069-equipanini-smaller-finished.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


On Flickr: click here.

(It could use some color/tone reprocessing and touching-up, but I still like the composition - it's what I envisioned when I took the shot.)
 
Last edited:

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,642
Location
USA
... What do you guys say?
Well it depends a lot on what problem you are trying to solve. How do you use your images? If you are not making very large prints and you are not cropping out tiny sections of images you will probably not see any "quality" differences among M43 lenses. Viewing on a computer monitor, uploading to social media, etc. are just not very demanding. If that's your use case, you can omit "quality" from your selection criteria.

Sometimes, though, you just need the extreme wide but rectilinear. You can google "Chauk Htat Gyi Pagoda" and you won't see many images like this one:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

7mm with the Oly 7-14. A very special purpose tool. My 9-18mm just wouldn't have been able to pull this one off. I bought the Oly lens specifically for this SE Asia trip, knowing that I would be taking a number of temple and other interior shots. It's a heavy brute though, nothing I would carry on a regular basis. I sold it after the trip. I often do that with special lenses that suit a particular trip. The 100-400mm for Africa, for example.

Another thought: stitched panoramas. You don't need a new lens for this. For landscapes with nothing in the foreground you can just hold the camera normally and pivot your body to get a series. The result is incredibly sharp/lots of pixels. This one, for example, was shot with maybe five segments (don't remember) and the 45mm 1.8:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

There are flags on that right hand tower where I can see individual stripes. The image is 10,428x3294 pixels. The print on our wall is about 48" wide, the limit of the photo printer. Looking at the detail, I'm sure it could be printed twice that wide. No wide angle lens necessary and, due to no foreground objects, no need to screw around with pano fixturing. This one was shot off a tripod due to the low light, but no "nodal" fixture.
 

Holoholo55

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,545
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter
Well it depends a lot on what problem you are trying to solve. How do you use your images? If you are not making very large prints and you are not cropping out tiny sections of images you will probably not see any "quality" differences among M43 lenses. Viewing on a computer monitor, uploading to social media, etc. are just not very demanding. If that's your use case, you can omit "quality" from your selection criteria.

Sometimes, though, you just need the extreme wide but rectilinear. You can google "Chauk Htat Gyi Pagoda" and you won't see many images like this one:


7mm with the Oly 7-14. A very special purpose tool. My 9-18mm just wouldn't have been able to pull this one off. I bought the Oly lens specifically for this SE Asia trip, knowing that I would be taking a number of temple and other interior shots. It's a heavy brute though, nothing I would carry on a regular basis. I sold it after the trip. I often do that with special lenses that suit a particular trip. The 100-400mm for Africa, for example.

Another thought: stitched panoramas. You don't need a new lens for this. For landscapes with nothing in the foreground you can just hold the camera normally and pivot your body to get a series. The result is incredibly sharp/lots of pixels. This one, for example, was shot with maybe five segments (don't remember) and the 45mm 1.8:


There are flags on that right hand tower where I can see individual stripes. The image is 10,428x3294 pixels. The print on our wall is about 48" wide, the limit of the photo printer. Looking at the detail, I'm sure it could be printed twice that wide. No wide angle lens necessary and, due to no foreground objects, no need to screw around with pano fixturing. This one was shot off a tripod due to the low light, but no "nodal" fixture.
The panorama is very convincing (that's a great shot), but do you think you could have done a panorama inside the pagoda? When the subject is that close and an angle to you like that, I doubt that a panorama could have worked. What do you think?
 

AmritR

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 18, 2017
Messages
86
Location
Alkmaar
on an em10, the Olympus 9-18 would be a very nice small companion.
Review: https://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/529-oly_m918_456

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I have the Pan/Leica 8-18, as a ‘replacement‘ for a Nikon 17–35 f2.8. Beautifull lens, but considerbaly larger then the Oly 9-18.
https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/1043_leica818f284

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


And the Olympus 7-14:
https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/961_olympus714f28pro

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Laowa 7.5

https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/1001-laowa75f2mft

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


In German I believe they call it: ‘Die Qual der Wahl’. I have suffered it extensively, and I think it’s very just others do as well :p


Pics stolen from Opticallimits. :whistling:
 

emersonik

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
17
If you're after compact size go for the 9-18mm. If you want superior IQ and pro build, pick the 8-18mm or the forthcoming 8-25mm.
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,642
Location
USA
The panorama is very convincing (that's a great shot), but do you think you could have done a panorama inside the pagoda? When the subject is that close and an angle to you like that, I doubt that a panorama could have worked. What do you think?
I think a pano there is absolutely do-able.

My only experience with panos, though, has been freehand with a level camera. To shoot a pano there the camera would have to be tilted up. I know that can be done but I have never tried it and am not sure whether pano hardware would be needed. (like https://www.acratech.net/acratech-panoramic-head-can-be-used-like-a-long-lens-head/) Possibly a level camera in vertical/portrait orientation and a medium wide angle lens would work, then crop off the bottom half.

Another question would be whether those display cases are close enough to cause problems unless a nodal rail was used. (here: https://www.acratech.net/nodal-slide-by-acratech-for-accurate-panorama-photography/ and a good video here:
 

Holoholo55

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,545
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter
I think a pano there is absolutely do-able.

My only experience with panos, though, has been freehand with a level camera. To shoot a pano there the camera would have to be tilted up. I know that can be done but I have never tried it and am not sure whether pano hardware would be needed. (like https://www.acratech.net/acratech-panoramic-head-can-be-used-like-a-long-lens-head/) Possibly a level camera in vertical/portrait orientation and a medium wide angle lens would work, then crop off the bottom half.

Another question would be whether those display cases are close enough to cause problems unless a nodal rail was used. (here: https://www.acratech.net/nodal-slide-by-acratech-for-accurate-panorama-photography/ and a good video here:
I don't know enough about panoramas to know if that's feasible, but there is one thing to consider, places like that seldom allow tripods to be used. You'd probably have to do a handheld pano.
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,642
Location
USA
I don't know enough about panoramas to know if that's feasible, but there is one thing to consider, places like that seldom allow tripods to be used. You'd probably have to do a handheld pano.
That's called "negotiating with yourself." Don't stop at a barrier that might not be there, just mush on and see.

Actually I think I could shoot off a tripod there; it's a big place with few if any staff. I would set it up and quickly get a shot, then keep working. If some official objected I would stop. I am always ready to apologize profusely but I avoid waking a bear to ask permission. I let sleeping bears lie.
 

Holoholo55

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,545
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter
That's called "negotiating with yourself." Don't stop at a barrier that might not be there, just mush on and see.

Actually I think I could shoot off a tripod there; it's a big place with few if any staff. I would set it up and quickly get a shot, then keep working. If some official objected I would stop. I am always ready to apologize profusely but I avoid waking a bear to ask permission. I let sleeping bears lie.
I shot some photos at a Japanese temple before I saw the sign saying "no photography." Oops.

https://media.istockphoto.com/vecto...=lkHKfNAwRt5MCB0ee6z-8d_LJk1hbeezHEtx-n-W-p4=
 

WhidbeyLVR

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
2,015
Location
Whidbey Island
Real Name
Lyle
The panorama is very convincing (that's a great shot), but do you think you could have done a panorama inside the pagoda? When the subject is that close and an angle to you like that, I doubt that a panorama could have worked. What do you think?
Absolutely possible. Tight quarters, hand-held, ultrawide:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Space Shuttle Atlantis (OV‑104) (3-image stitched panorama)

The trick is to rotate around the lens rather than your body. Pretend the lens is mounted on a monopod.
 

WhidbeyLVR

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
2,015
Location
Whidbey Island
Real Name
Lyle
My only experience with panos, though, has been freehand with a level camera. To shoot a pano there the camera would have to be tilted up. I know that can be done but I have never tried it and am not sure whether pano hardware would be needed.
Here is another stitched pano , but at an angle, hand-held. Also at Kennedy Space Center.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Saturn V, Stage 1 (S-IC) (5-image stitched panorama)

I often project my stitches with something other than rectilinear projection, because the extreme perspective distortion on ultra-WA shots can be disturbing. I often get more pleasing results with cylindrical or Panini projections, but I have used others as well.

I don’t want to hijack the thread any further. Stitching has other threads. This one was about ultra-WA primes and zooms.
 

Holoholo55

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,545
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter
Here is another stitched pano , but at an angle, hand-held. Also at Kennedy Space Center.

View attachment 841135
Saturn V, Stage 1 (S-IC) (5-image stitched panorama)

I often project my stitches with something other than rectilinear projection, because the extreme perspective distortion on ultra-WA shots can be disturbing. I often get more pleasing results with cylindrical or Panini projections, but I have used others as well.

I don’t want to hijack the thread any further. Stitching has other threads. This one was about ultra-WA primes and zooms.
Another very nice pano. It's done so nicely you almost can't tell it's a pano. Just proves that there are other ways than getting it all in with just one shot with a UWA lens.
 

amit

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
164
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #39
my 2 cents: when I upgrade towards an M5iii or an M1ii, the Oly 8mm FE will come next to have both a FE and a good enough and fast “rectilineared” lens to go along the 12-40:
https://www.creativeislandphoto.com/blog/8mm-fisheye-correction
and do look lower in this thread for the examples posted - good enough for me:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4260890
Really really cool innovation by olympus , but this solution require a 1000usd lens and a new body :)
Another thing ,I noticed that some of the fisheye photos can not be corrected with software ,probobly from the same angles the olympus feature will fail.
 

amit

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
164
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #40
Panoramas are not for me , I rather change lenses . For me the fun part is the composition in real time ...
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom