Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14 mm F2.8 PRO Lens, Wide Angle Zoom, Suitable for All MFT Cameras (Olympus OM-D & PEN Models, Panasonic G Series), Black

Product Information

The bokeh is very pleasant which is is quite surprising considering that this is a wide-angle lens. If you’re coming from a DSLR then the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO pits itself against the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 and the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8. Panasonic also offer their own MFT Mount 7-14mm as well, but it’s worth noting that is an f/4 lens. I’ll reference these in this review. Horwood House, Milton Keynes, UK The obvious comparison is to the Panasonic 7-14mm f/4. I no longer have my Panasonic, so haven't tested it on the latest 20mp m4/3 bodies. What I'd say about that lens on my 16mp m4/3 bodies is this: like the Olympus, there's a high degree of linear correction being applied, though not quite as much as with this Olympus Pro lens. Field curvature is the big difference between the two lenses, as the Panasonic has far less (but the Olympus seems sharper in the central area and obviously goes to f/2.8). I don't remember having to correct much for field curvature on the Panasonic; it was obvious I have to on the Olympus. But my Panasonic lens was a bit out of alignment (one edge was softer than the other), so it's difficult to make any further comparisons. Flare control on the Panasonic is worse than on the Olympus.

The lens has an L-Fn button, but does not have IS. Surprisingly, the aperture diaphragm is only 7 blades. Whereas the Pana-Leica has a variable aperture of 2.8 to 4, the Olympus has a constant 2.8 aperture. This means that the latter gives you a little more versatility for low-light photography (e.g. astrophotography or weddings). The aperture changes that occur on the Pana-Leica are as follows: The differences in sharpness are minute, and the way in which they handle distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberrations is very similar. (The Olympus lens can suffer more from flare due to the exposed front element.) Their out-of-focus rendering when set to the same value is almost identical and both have an excellent minimum focus distance and a fast and reliable autofocus mechanism. Even the build quality is more or less the same. It was by taking architectural shots that I could really evaluate the performance of the M.Zuiko 7-14mm. E-M5 II, 1/10, f/ 5.6, ISO 200 – 7mmAs a member of the Olympus Pro line-up, the 7-14mm f2.8 is also weather-sealed and features the company’s ZERO coating. It joins the existing 12-40mm f2.8 Pro and 40-150mm f2.8 Pro to deliver an equivalent range of 14mm to 300mm with a constant f2.8 focal ratio and full weather-proofing. The 7-14mm f2.8 Pro was also announced alongside a fourth Pro lens, the M Zuiko Digital 8mm f1.8 Fisheye, the World’s brightest fisheye lens which I’m reviewing at the same time. This is going to look familiar to some of you, mainly because it's virtually the same words I used for handling on my review of the 12-100mm f/4 Pro lens! Yes, Olympus is making the Pro lenses so much the same, that sometimes handling turns out to be identical. Olympus M.Zuiko PRO lenses all feature constant a aperture, covering a complete focal range of 7mm – 300mm (or, 14mm to 600mm in terms of the Micro Four Thirds equivalent field of view). PRO lenses feature the most premium quality optics, superb build quality and are dust, freeze and splash proof.

For example, at 7mm, corrected data has a bit more than 1% barrel distortion, but pure raw data has a whopping 7% barrel distortion, with a slight non-linear aspect to it. At 14mm, the irony is that the lens corrections overcorrect, creating a really small and ignorable faux pincushion from a small and ignorable real barrel distortion. Neither the Pana-Leica nor the Olympus lens has been designed to produce a stunning bokeh but by focusing close and using the fastest aperture available, you can achieve some interesting results. GX85, 1/4000, f/2.8, ISO 200 – Pana-Leica 8-18mm at 8mm E-M5 II, 1/320, f/4, ISO 200 – M.Zuiko 7-14mm at 14mm At a close focus distance, the differences between the two lenses become a little more apparent. Reference image for close focus distance With this 7mm shot, I used the OM-D E-M5 Mark II’s keystone correction to correct converging verticals. Image credit: Andy WestlakeI had the chance to see and try out a prototype of the new lens during the E-M5 Mark II launch in Prague a few months ago, but I wasn’t allowed to bring the pictures home. Despite playing with it for only a few minutes in the tiny corridors and spaces of the abandoned factory, what I saw looked promising. As we’ve seen throughout this comparison, the Pana-Leica 8-18mm and Olympus M.Zuiko 7-14mm perform in a very similar manner, and are thus both perfectly capable of satisfying professional needs. Shot with the Olympus M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO, processed with Adobe Lightroom and Silver Efex PRO 2 Lloyds of London Iconic Shot

Whenever it is necessary to pixel peep to find relevant differences, it means that the lenses perform in a very similar manner. This is the case with these two wide-angle zooms. The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO showed itself to be a highly capable lens, both on the test bench and in real world situations. It is a pro-level lens and its performance should please the most discerning users. The 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO feels dense, strong and solid. All features that I’m sure you’ve come to know from the other lenses in the PRO lineup. No matter what you choose to shoot, if you need a wider field of view then the 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO is ready to step in and serve you well.

A wide-angle lens will always be susceptible to flare, and the Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO is no exception. If you include the sun - or any other strong light source - in the frame, you will likely see a number of ghosts as well as a bit of veiling.

Both lenses employ seven rounded aperture blades, and closing either down to their minimum apertures of f22 will deliver 14 diffraction spikes. I’ve illustrated this below with photos from each lens, and while the spikes on the Olympus look a little better-defined in this example, the most important aspect to achieving the best result with an ultra wide at a tiny aperture is to keep the front element meticulously clean. At 14mm f/2.8 the lens maintains strong performance. It scores 2,266 lines, with edges that show about 1,800 lines. At f/4 the average score improves to 2,482 lines, and edges hit 2,200 lines. It hovers around 2,500 lines through f/8, and shows just a slight drop at f/11 (2,435 lines). At f/16 and f/22 diffraction takes its toll; at those very narrow apertures images show 2,014 lines and 1,483 lines respectively. Finally at 14mm, the Leica has a slight advantage at the fastest aperture (f/3.6 vs f/2.8) and the performance becomes the same from f/5.6 once again. The end result though is you’ll need to choose lenses with very small f-numbers if you want to achieve very shallow depth-of-field effects with Micro Four Thirds. Conversely, with a larger inherent depth-of-field, you won’t need to close the aperture as much if you want to get more in focus.

Ease of Use

When zoomed in at 14mm, it becomes even better and you can really see how versatile this lens is. It is a characteristic that Olympus has implemented on all its Pro lenses. They all have very close focusing capabilities that remain constant throughout the entire zoom range. It is one of my favourite characteristics for sure. E-M5 II, 1/400, f/ 5.6, ISO 200 – 14mm E-M5 II, 1/400, f/ 5.6, ISO 200 – 14mm – Crop