Olympus Cameras and Four Thirds System Digital SLRs Forum

Olympus Cameras Forum Discuss Olympus film and digital cameras as well as Panasonic and Leica Four Thirds System digital SLRs - forum moderator is Greg McCary.
Olympus E-System Digital SLR Reviews >>
Panasonic Four Thirds Digital SLR Reviews >>
Leica Four Thirds Digital SLR Reviews >>
Official Four Thirds Web Page >>
Olympus OM-System 35mm SLR reviews >>
Olympus Cameras History Page >>
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,094

    14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    I never thought I'd have much use for a standard zoom. The focal range is nearly useless for most of the work I do, and when I am in that focal range I am usually using the ZD 50mm F/2, which is an AMAZING lens and I have no reason to replace it.

    In any case, the 14-42 kit lens on the E510 is a sharp, light lens but it has a few flaws that make it a paperweight for me; It is too slow and doesn't provide enough magnification. F/3.5-5.6 just doesn't cut it for indoor ambient light shots, and a wide lens needs to focus close enough to the subject to distort perspective. I guess that's just a journalistic approach to shooting wide, but I think that getting right into the action makes wide angle shots less snapshotlike and more inclusive of the audience. A good wide angle shot needs to have a 3D quality to it, and sometimes that means getting VERY close. The added sharpness certainly won't hurt either, since it will likely see the most duty as a snake-in-habitat landscape lens.

    The 14-42 is actually a very sharp lens, I didn't really have any issues with its performance there.

    So, I went to buy the ZD 70-300 at calumet the other day, and of course they were out of stock. Seems every time I go there, they only have my second choice. Instead of the 70-300 I bought the 14-54.

    The 50 F/2, 14-54 and the 70-300 will be my stable until I strike the lottery, so it was a planned purchase anyway. The only other option might have been the sigma 150 macro, but they don't carry sigma 4/3 lenses.

    Compared to the 14-42, the 14-54 is a behemoth. It is probably twice as long, weighs at least five times as much, and is built like a tank. It is even heavier than the substantial 50 f/2, because of the more complicated build. I am struggling with this point, because I think that the small size and weight of the olympus kit lens is a huge asset. On the other hand, it is extremely solid and has a very good feel to it. I still might like a smaller, lighter lens with the same build quality, even if it meant sacrificing a few mm off the long end. Although pretty solidly built, the 14-42 has the same cheap feeling that the canon 50/1.8 has.

    As far as image quality goes, the 14-54 is a head and shoulders above the 14-42. Having only fired a hundred or so frames with it, I am still finding out how it will be useful to me, but I can see that the bokeh is much improved, and the extra speed and performance is much appreciated. Sharpness seems great, and contrast and color are great also. There is something about the way an image looks when it is shot with good glass that is not quantifyable - something about the way the in-focus parts look, and the out of focus parts. This lens definitely exhibits that look.

    The 14-54 also focuses quite closely - I think this lens will make a fine field lens for me, although honestly the wide end is more important than the long end. I'm not sure I'll use this lens much at the long end when I have the 50/f2 at my disposal. It will make a nice general purpose lens, for when a lens change is not really necessary, and it will make a fine ambient light indoor lens. More as I shoot more with it.

    Erik Williams

    Olympus E3, E510
    12-60 SWD, 50-200 SWD, 50 f/2 macro, EX25, FL36's and an FL50r.

  2. #2
    Senior Shooter Greg McCary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Rome Ga.
    Posts
    10,550

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    Thanks for all of the info Erik. I must agree the 14-54 is quite a step up from the kit. The extra weight doesn't bother me and the performance in stunning. You really couldn't ask for a better lens. You also have me wanting the 50mm. I have been shooting macro with the 14-54 and find it so good I have quit using the EX-25 with it.
    I am like Barney Fife, I have a gun but Andy makes me keep the bullet in my pocket..

    Sony a99/a7R

  3. #3
    Member Atomic2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Chicago Il
    Posts
    331

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    hah, i was at calumet earlier today as well trying the 14-54!

    you overpayed though, they were asking 450 for it no? go over to Helix on Racine and try the 12-60. theyre selling it for 870 dollars and the performance of it will BLOW YOU AWAY. trust me on this. im in quite a pickle trying to justify to myself spending that much money or just settling for a 14-54 myself.... ugh

    actually, can you do me a favour and go try the 12-60 and do a quick side by side for me pretty please?
    E-3, E-510
    12-60 2.8-4.0
    40-150 3.5-4.5
    Sigma 30 1.4
    Zenit 58 F2 [with M42 adapter]
    Metz 48

  4. #4
    Senior Shooter Greg McCary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Rome Ga.
    Posts
    10,550

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    I would have to drive to Atlanta to try one out. About an hours drive. It's the nearest camera store to carry any of the good stuff. what's different in your opinion between the two?
    I am like Barney Fife, I have a gun but Andy makes me keep the bullet in my pocket..

    Sony a99/a7R

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,094

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    Atomic2:

    I'd be glad to do a side by side, but I will be very surprised if the 12-60 is better than the 14-54 on the E510 - everything I have read has indicated that the SWD lenses are designed for use on the E3, and don't achieve the speed they are capable of on any other body (yet).

    That said, I don't mind overpaying occasionally. First, I wanted the lens for the weekend and four days is cutting it a bit close for shipping. Second, if it sucks, I have a brick and mortar store to return it to. Having it in-hand and piece of mind were worth my $50. I really can't justify spending $800 on a standard zoom, I'd rather have the 14-54, a sunpack flash, and the 70-300 or the sigma 150 macro. I use telephoto and macro much more than standard focal lengths. Either that, or save the extra $400 saved on the 14-54 as a nest egg for a super-wide lens; the difference from 54-60mm isn't that great, but from 7-12mm is a HUGE difference!

    Now I just need to raise a few more $ to get the 70-300, I really could have used that on my trip. I just raised $150 by selling the 14-42 and a wide angle adaptor for my last camera, so that's a start!!
    Erik Williams

    Olympus E3, E510
    12-60 SWD, 50-200 SWD, 50 f/2 macro, EX25, FL36's and an FL50r.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,094

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    Erik Williams

    Olympus E3, E510
    12-60 SWD, 50-200 SWD, 50 f/2 macro, EX25, FL36's and an FL50r.

  7. #7
    Member Atomic2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Chicago Il
    Posts
    331

    Re: 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 - you need this lens.

    Helix is in Chicago, on Racine. There prices are about 10-15% cheaper than calumet
    E-3, E-510
    12-60 2.8-4.0
    40-150 3.5-4.5
    Sigma 30 1.4
    Zenit 58 F2 [with M42 adapter]
    Metz 48

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •