Finally I have my 2.8 Zoom

Psynema

Psynema

Well-known member
The Olympus 14-54mm Mark II 2.8-3.5

I RECOMMEND :D

Not enough talk on these boards about 4/3rds Oly lenses.

The Mark ii (not to be confused with the Canon Mark ii) is a 2nd version of this lens that is more compatible with GH1, specifically autofocus.

Works fine. I sold my 20mm 1.7 to afford this new lens since I never had a zoom and have no regrets (I plan on getting a 30mm 1.4 sigma to OFFICIALLY replace the 20mm)

Never liked the focusing on the 20mm - manual was a pain as it took too many turns, auto focus hunted too much. You could to the AE Lock or switch to MF dial tricks, but those were extra steps and could ruin a shot handheld in documentary work.

Oly has just what I wanted a VERY FAST AND MORE ACCURATE autofocus that automatially goes manual when recording (I like auto focus to start, then manual focusing). The focus ring is just right - I can access nearly any subject with one turn of the ring without going off target. The Bokeh is just right. Enough separation, yet not intrusive to the point where you're guessing focus.

And most of all IT IS DEFINITELY SHARPER than the 20mm 1.7 by quite a margin. I still love the 20mm 1.7 but it just wasn't me and I have other priorities. To me, at least the way I shoot, 20mm was a fence sitter as far as bokeh is conerned...sure it looks PHENOMENAL up close, but in real life you rarely get to shoot a subject that close. To me the 20mm bokeh was too tele to get enough in focus or too wide to get really creamy bokeh and I find I'm in limbo for a lot of event shoots where I can't get close enough - a lot of subjects past a few feet out the bokeh just looks like soft focus on 1.7.

Sure I'm losing a stop but again, glad I finally have a zoom and I'll get a sigma 30mm 1.4 to suit me for low light situations.

I also want to mention THIS LENS IS A VERY NICE MACRO LENS. It lists its minimum focus distance at 8 inches, BUT I HAVE RAZOR SHARP TEST shots of my eye when it was 2-3 inches from the lens at full zoom.

Damn.

I'm sad about losing low light and it being 3.5 on the long end, but oh well. Everything else is top notch and I recommend this lens to anyone still debating what they should do for a faster zoom lens. It's cheaper than the Leica 14-50 OIS (which is plastic in build and has complaints of breaking). I was also debating the Sigma Macro 18-50 2.8 but that has no autofocus on a GH1 and is completely unavailable in every store I checked.

So to conclude, if you want a modern/electronically connected fast zoom walkaround lens...GET THIS ONE - it's a shame not many people talk about Olympus four thirds lenses on here, I didn't even entertain the idea of buying one until a week or so ago.

You totally need this if you're into photography as well. The autofocus is very quick and very accurate with sharp glass to back it up. I'll have some shoots coming up later in the month and I'll post some samples if anyone wants.
 
Seems nice! 14mm f/2.8 is great! One of the main reasons I like the 20mm though is the size...I got it mainly for photography to be my go anywhere lens on the camera, and it's done that quite nicely. 4/3rds lenses are relatively large compared to m4/3 pancakes.

Seems like a great lens though.

I might get the 14mm f/2.5 when it comes out.
 
That's awesome, Pysnema. Let's hear some more feedback as you use it. Sounds like you found a great lens. I just clicked the "buy" button on the Tamron 17-50 with Nikon mount this morning (and a Jinfinance "G" adapter). I hope you don't make me regret it! The 2.8 throughout the range, plus feedback from Simon Hofer on this board, helped me make my final decision. But the wider and longer range of the Oly, along with the partial autofocus has me in doubt mode again!
 
Ron Rodenmeyer said:
That's awesome, Pysnema. Let's hear some more feedback as you use it. Sounds like you found a great lens. I just clicked the "buy" button on the Tamron 17-50 with Nikon mount this morning (and a Jinfinance "G" adapter). I hope you don't make me regret it! The 2.8 throughout the range, plus feedback from Simon Hofer on this board, helped me make my final decision. But the wider and longer range of the Oly, along with the partial autofocus has me in doubt mode again!
Click to expand...

How do you control aperture though? That's why I wanted a lens that can communicate with the camera. Plus I do photo as well and adapted lenses don't do TTL that well and barely at all on some, hence the Oly. I too wish it was a constant 2.8 throughout the range, but there really isn't much option for the Gh1 if you want autofocus and TTL and the ability to adjust the aperture in camera.

I have no clue why they list the min. focus at 8 inches when i'm doing it at 2-3 inches. I'm guessing the micro four thirds, without a mirror box, changes the flange distance for the better. In any case, the 45mm 2.8 which is a m4/3 native lens, is listed at 5.5, almost double what the Oly is doing on my gh1, so glad I didn't buy the $900 whopper now. Not that I had that dough to begin with.
 
Psynema said:
How do you control aperture though? That's why I wanted a lens that can communicate with the camera. Plus I do photo as well and adapted lenses don't do TTL that well and barely at all on some, hence the Oly. I too wish it was a constant 2.8 throughout the range, but there really isn't much option for the Gh1 if you want autofocus and TTL and the ability to adjust the aperture in camera.

I have no clue why they list the min. focus at 8 inches when i'm doing it at 2-3 inches. I'm guessing the micro four thirds, without a mirror box, changes the flange distance for the better. In any case, the 45mm 2.8 which is a m4/3 native lens, is listed at 5.5, almost double what the Oly is doing on my gh1, so glad I didn't buy the $900 whopper now. Not that I had that dough to begin with.
Click to expand...

Which end of the zoom range are you focusing that close at? Also are you getting sharp 2-3 inches in video mode or photos? It's possible it could be getting an acceptable level of sharpness for video that is not acceptable for photos. The flange distance is the same because the adaptor adds flange distance.
 
Psynema said:
How do you control aperture though? That's why I wanted a lens that can communicate with the camera. Plus I do photo as well and adapted lenses don't do TTL that well and barely at all on some, hence the Oly. I too wish it was a constant 2.8 throughout the range, but there really isn't much option for the Gh1 if you want autofocus and TTL and the ability to adjust the aperture in camera.
Click to expand...

This adapter allows you to control the aperture with a manual ring of some sort. Apparently it's different than the thumbscrew design of Ciecio 7's adapter. I think you turn it, and it hard clicks a stop. I'll leave the lens close to or wide open most of the time with a Fader on it outdoors.

It's not a a perfect solution, but it's reasonably priced and hopefully it will hold its value somewhat if I decide to sell it one day.
 
Ben_B said:
Which end of the zoom range are you focusing that close at? Also are you getting sharp 2-3 inches in video mode or photos? It's possible it could be getting an acceptable level of sharpness for video that is not acceptable for photos. The flange distance is the same because the adaptor adds flange distance.
Click to expand...

Actually I did this with photo and brought it into lightroom at full zoom range.

I'd say it's a min. focus of just shy of 3 inches, maybe 2.8 inches. I can get my finger in focus touching the lens hood if that helps.
 
Holy cow, just as I was about to pull the trigger and buy a GH1 (with kit lens and 20mm f1.7). I really dig this suggestion because I've got an Olympus kit too and I sure could use this lens (dual use makes it an easier sell to the missus as well).

Some quick questions:

1. It AUTOFOCUSES, but goes in to MANUAL when you are recording? So I can focus using auto, but rackfocus during recording?

2. Do you think its a better all-around lens than the kit lens? I may just buy a GH1 body and skip the kit lens altogether if it is...

3. If its Oly 4/3 we're talking about, I've had my eye on the 12-60 for the longest time. Do you have any idea if this is going to autofocus as well?

4. What adaptor are you using with it?

Anyway, thanks for the post!

rgds/ RandyQ
 
RandyQ said:
Holy cow, just as I was about to pull the trigger and buy a GH1 (with kit lens and 20mm f1.7). I really dig this suggestion because I've got an Olympus kit too and I sure could use this lens (dual use makes it an easier sell to the missus as well).

Some quick questions:

1. It AUTOFOCUSES, but goes in to MANUAL when you are recording? So I can focus using auto, but rackfocus during recording?

2. Do you think its a better all-around lens than the kit lens? I may just buy a GH1 body and skip the kit lens altogether if it is...

3. If its Oly 4/3 we're talking about, I've had my eye on the 12-60 for the longest time. Do you have any idea if this is going to autofocus as well?

4. What adaptor are you using with it?
Click to expand...

1. YES
2. Never owned the kit lens, but it's certainly allows in more light and is sharper and has a closer focusing distance. The Kit lens of course has OIS, continuous autofocus and a longer range.
3. 12-60 doesn't autofocus on a GH1. There's a chart online.
4. I use the Panasonic 4/3 to m4/3 adapter for $110
 
Muchos gracias!

One last question - is the lack of OIS a big deal, considering we are talking about a walkaround lens here?
 
RandyQ said:
Muchos gracias!

One last question - is the lack of OIS a big deal, considering we are talking about a walkaround lens here?
Click to expand...

Once you approach 50mm on any GH1 lens you need to be VERY CAREFUL and have a bit of luck. Or just carry around a gorillapod, some form of portable support. below 50 you're fine, but I wouldn't recommend handheld panning, tilting, ENG style on any of these camera's really.
 
How do you find the manual focus on the MKII? The original version was a fly by wire type, similar to the kit lens, and these take a bit of practice to manually focus. The 12-60, along with the other Olympus HG lenses, look good in this respect as they have mechanically coupled focus. They won't AF on the GH1 though as far as I can tell.
 
AdrianF said:
How do you find the manual focus on the MKII? The original version was a fly by wire type, similar to the kit lens, and these take a bit of practice to manually focus. The 12-60, along with the other Olympus HG lenses, look good in this respect as they have mechanically coupled focus. They won't AF on the GH1 though as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...

I'm totally fine with the manual focus, it's smooth.
 
Ok here's some low light stuff wide open - I did the camera strap pressure trick to get the 54mm fairly steady with less jitters. I did brighten the shots up with Lyric Shadow Highlight so you get an idea of what a final curve may look like indoors. Lit mainly by computers and one bulb atop.

 
Psynema said:
I also want to mention THIS LENS IS A VERY NICE MACRO LENS. It lists its minimum focus distance at 8 inches, BUT I HAVE RAZOR SHARP TEST shots of my eye when it was 2-3 inches from the lens at full zoom.
Click to expand...

Here's a quote from the SLRgear review: "Olympus boasts a minimum close-focusing distance of 22mm (just over 8 1/2 inches), the same as the predecessor version of this lens, as is the magnification ratio: 0.26x (1:3.8). It's worth noting that the close-focus range is taken from the image sensor, not the end of the lens, as this produces a practical close-focus range (from the far end of the lens) of just under 2 inches."

So it depends on where you measure it.
 
Late said:
Here's a quote from the SLRgear review: "Olympus boasts a minimum close-focusing distance of 22mm (just over 8 1/2 inches), the same as the predecessor version of this lens, as is the magnification ratio: 0.26x (1:3.8). It's worth noting that the close-focus range is taken from the image sensor, not the end of the lens, as this produces a practical close-focus range (from the far end of the lens) of just under 2 inches."

So it depends on where you measure it.
Click to expand...

ah good to know, every other lens I had was from the edge of the lens...odd.
 
I'm also a really happy owner of the 14-54 MK II.

I've owned the Kit Lens that I've sold cause of the speed of the lens.
Then I buyed the pricy Leica 14-50 f2.8/3.5 that I sold cause for some reason i HATED how the manual focus worked (not smooth at all).
I've buyed the Olympus 14-54MKII months ago and been SUPER satisfied about the result.

The wide end also give a special 3d effect under certain situation.
(it might be me also, but I don't know)

Olympus lens +Panasonic Anamorphic
(Also, I know the same show have been used, I'm just showing the clips to the band so they choose the one they like the most)





NO ANAMORPHIC HERE, and some shot are filmed with a HG20. Some might not like the slow shutter speed but still. (also some shot are with a 50mm f1.4 from pentax)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top