Leica D Vario-Elmarit f/2,8-3,5 Asph vs Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54 mm f/2,8-3,5

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You can read it here (in Spanish, but the graphs are easy to read):

 

http://www.dslrmagazine.com/pruebas/pruebas-tecnicas/olympus-frente-a-leica.html

 

(several pages).

 

The author is Valentín Sama. He is an optician, researcher, camera collector and editor of the FV Magazine.

 

R.

[jonoslack]

HI There

Thanks for the link to this - I can't read spanish, but the graphs are easy!

Still, this should not be a surprise to anyone - having used many lenses from many different companies, the Zuiko 14-54 shines out as a splendid lens (as long as you get a good one). I reckon it's about the best 'carry about' zoom available.

 

Image stabilisation has an effect on lens quality (especially at the edges) - Anders Uschold's reports in the BJP show this quite clearly.

 

What this says to me is that the Leica/Panasonic lens is also an excellent piece of glass, and that there is, as expected, a trade off between the sharp corners of the Zuiko, and the Image stabilisation of the Leica.

 

Kind regards

jono slack

jonathan slack - photographs

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Bob Ross]

Hi Ruben,

Thanks for the link. Like Jono I have the 14-54mm and have happily used it for three years. When the Leica 14-50mm was announced, there was speculation that it would trash the Zuiko, yet your link is the second observation that the lenses are close, but different in performance. The mid range zoom lenses from Oly have been quite amazing and I am one of those prime lens guys...:-)

Bob

[andy_mclean]

I've got to agree with Jono and Bob; the 14-54mm Zuiko is excellent. At the time, 2 to 3 years ago, the Zuikos 11-22, 14-54 and 50-200mm were the defining glass of the E-system and led me, as a leica user to adopt Oly's system vs other 5-6 MP offerings. I have to say that since then I've been dissappointed a little with the direction developments there have taken, but still, that glass is not my source of disspappointment. The pannie/leica 25mm f1.4 is of far more interest to me than the 14-50mm IS lense is since it fills a big gap in the current lsense line up.

 

What has struck me since is that the E-1 with this glass doesn't produce very satisfying B&Ws without a considerable amount of post processing. I am begining to suspect that this a consequence of the contrast of the glass. My dlux2 gives BETTER B&W results from a simple desat or grey scale flip than the E-1 and it's glass gives....

 

So i'm very interested in the 4/3rds leica glass rendering in this respect. For sure these things are subjective for the most part, but having come from leica M to E-glass.. and now serioulsy questioning continued investment in the Oly system vs going back to the M(8)... the pannie/leica lenses are of considerable interest to me.

 

Andy

[albertwang]

Alas, to have both would solve the problem! Leica-oly isn't too bad on the combo.

[ptomsu]

I've got to agree with Jono and Bob; the 14-54mm Zuiko is excellent. At the time, 2 to 3 years ago, the Zuikos 11-22, 14-54 and 50-200mm were the defining glass of the E-system and led me, as a leica user to adopt Oly's system vs other 5-6 MP offerings. I have to say that since then I've been dissappointed a little with the direction developments there have taken, but still, that glass is not my source of disspappointment. The pannie/leica 25mm f1.4 is of far more interest to me than the 14-50mm IS lense is since it fills a big gap in the current lsense line up.

 

What has struck me since is that the E-1 with this glass doesn't produce very satisfying B&Ws without a considerable amount of post processing. I am begining to suspect that this a consequence of the contrast of the glass. My dlux2 gives BETTER B&W results from a simple desat or grey scale flip than the E-1 and it's glass gives....

 

So i'm very interested in the 4/3rds leica glass rendering in this respect. For sure these things are subjective for the most part, but having come from leica M to E-glass.. and now serioulsy questioning continued investment in the Oly system vs going back to the M(8)... the pannie/leica lenses are of considerable interest to me.

 

Andy

 

Man,

 

I sold my E1 and all OLY glass and bought an R9/DMR and I do not regret it. So if you do not need SLR and no AF it might n´be definitely best to go for M8 and some nice glass.

 

I was also very much disappointed by Oly and their 4/3 story, first starting to sell this only in exclusive stores and a year later you could buy it elsewhere for less money of course. Also thy absolutely failed in delivering on their promises of having another Pro Model at least 3 years after the E1, which was already low end range of resolution when it appeared. But there is nothing so far and only promises and if something will come it will be in the 10-12MP range - so what, my DMR and my D2X can do both since years.

 

And finally I believe now in a certain minimum sensor size for quality, at least Crop 1.5 as in Nikon or 1.3 as in Leica or even better 1.0 as today in Canon and hopefully soon in Nikon and a bit later in Leica R.

 

Peter

[Fotomiguel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Olympus seems to be sharper on the edges. Image stabilisation has an negativ effect on lens quality at the edges, but you get big advantge in poor light conditions.

 

My question is: Would we get the same test result, if we did the same test with O.I.S off????

 

Thank you!

[albertwang]

And why not get both? Switch back and forth.. .delicious!