Panasonic 7-14mm vs Olympus 9-18mm

Testing:

Comparison shot #1
Full Image, Test #1

The following tests were performed in bright daylight using the OM-D E-M5 and each of the lenses.  All comparisons below are at 9mm and f/5.6.  For wide-angle use like this, shooting is generally done stopped down and both lenses perform best around f/5.6.  I took shots of two scenes, one with a medium close subject, and one that would have the lenses focus closer to infinity.  Both lenses were focused at the same focus point.  With bright sunlight and the OM-D’s in-body IS, there should be no impact from camera shake.  I performed Chromatic Aberration correction in Lightroom 5 for both lenses.  As a note, the 9-18 has higher levels of lateral chromatic aberration right out of camera, though lateral CA is fully correctable on both lenses with Lightroom or other CA correction tools.  Since it’s a normal part of my workflow, I decided to leave it here to get the best idea how the final image would look when shooting with these for real work.

Test 1:

The full scene for this first test is visible above (the Olympus shot is shown).

Below, you’ll see 100% crops from each of the lenses.  The focus point was centered, and each lens was shot at the same settings.  Crops were taken from the center of the image and the upper right corner for comparison. Click on the image (and click on the green arrow at the bottom of the screen after clicking if it is lit up) to view full size.

Olympus 9-18mm vs Panasonic 7-14mm, 100% crops
Olympus 9-18mm vs Panasonic 7-14mm, 100% crops

Here, the center crops show very little difference.  Both are impressively sharp in the center region with good contrast and color.  The Panasonic shows perhaps a hair more contrast.  On the edge, the Panasonic performs a bit better, pulling higher levels of detail as well as a little higher contrast in the extreme corner.  However, the Olympus still performs well here.

Test 2:

For the second test, I took a wide shot of the city along the river.  Not my best work compositionally, but it provides detail at the edges on a predominantly infinity focused subject with some high contrast work thrown in.  All shots again were taken at 9mm and f/5.6, focused in the center (the area where the pathway and the bridge cross).  The full scene (the Panasonic shot is shown) is seen below:

Full Scene, Test #2
Full Scene, Test #2 (click to enlarge)

Again, 100% crops are shown below.  Here, there are crops from the image center, the right side near the edge, and the left edge. Again, click to enlarge, then click on the green arrow at the bottom of the screen to see the crops full size.

Olympus 9-18mm vs Panasonic 7-14mm, 100% crops
Olympus 9-18mm vs Panasonic 7-14mm, 100% crops

This test yields some interesting observations.  First, the Panasonic is generally a little sharper across the whole frame at infinity, though the Olympus is very close in the center, but lags a little on the edges with regards to resolution.  Still, both lenses again would yield fine prints here.  The Panasonic does show one of its main weaknesses on the right side crop: Purple Fringing.  While the lateral CA of both lenses is easily correctable with one click, purple fringing is harder to deal with.  Lightroom has tools to reduce purple fringing, and they work in many instances, but in some cases, it can’t be properly corrected without serious work.  There is obvious color fringing on the railroad bridge in the Panasonic shot.

Test 3 – Flare

Finally, since one of the other main complaints about the 7-14mm is its tendency to flare (especially with purple blobs in some cases on recent Olympus bodies), I took a shot with the sun in the top of the frame to take a look at how each lens responded with regards to flare. Click to enlarge each image.

Flare Test - Panasonic 7-14mm
Flare Test – Panasonic 7-14mm
Flare Test - Olympus 9-18mm
Flare Test – Olympus 9-18mm

Here, you can see that the Olympus 9-18 handles flare much better than the Panasonic.  There is a slight hint of flare in the water below the one railroad trestle, and that’s about it.  On the Panasonic side, there is much more complex flare, and the bright purple flare pops out as a few of the spots in the center.  While in this image, the purple spots would be very easy to edit out, that is often not the case, so it is something to watch for.

Final Thoughts:

One final thing to note is the big strength of the Panasonic…width.  Compare the 9mm shot that was used for the first test, to the extra width from the same spot with the Panasonic at 7mm:

Comparison shot #1
Olympus 9-18mm @ 9mm
Panasonic 7-14mm @ 7mm
Panasonic 7-14mm @ 7mm

The final rundown:

  • The Panasonic 7-14mm is significantly wider than the Olympus 9-18mm
  • The Panasonic 7-14mm is slightly sharper than the Olympus 9-18mm, especially on the image edges
  • The Panasonic 7-14mm is more solidly built than the Olympus 9-18mm
  • The Panasonic 7-14mm has better lateral CA control than the Olympus 9-18mm, though both are fully correctable in post-processing
  • The Panasonic 7-14mm has a constant f/4 aperture through the zoom range, as opposed to the variable f/4-5.6 aperture of the Olympus 9-18mm
  • The Olympus 9-18mm is significantly smaller than the Panasonic 7-14mm
  • The Olympus 9-18mm controls purple fringing extremely well, unlike the Panasonic 7-14mm
  • The Olympus 9-18mm controls flare much better than the Panasonic 7-14mm
  • The Olympus 9-18mm can natively mount filters
  • The Olympus 9-18mm is significantly less expensive than the Panasonic 7-14mm ($699 vs $959)

So at the end of the day: It’s really hard to choose between them.  There are things each lens does very well, and some things that each lens doesn’t do so well.  Ultimately, it’s going to come down to whether you feel the extra cost is worth it for the extra width of the Panasonic, or whether the size advantage of the 9-18 is more important.  In my mind, they are close enough optically to make optical quality more or less a moot point between them.  The Panasonic is sharper, but the Olympus controls other aberrations better, providing images without fringing or distracting flare.  For me, I think the small size is going to end up winning out, and my much beloved 7-14mm will need to find a new home.  I will miss that super wide end, however.  I guess I’ll just need to bring my even wider Panasonic 8mm fisheye out more often.

Happy Shooting!

 

 

 

 

Comments

21 responses to “Panasonic 7-14mm vs Olympus 9-18mm”

  1. Mike Aubrey Avatar
    Mike Aubrey

    Before you go and get rid of the 7-14mm, you may want to check out this solution to the purple blob problem…assuming you haven’t seen it already:

    http://www.mu-43.com/f38/my-definitive-post-7-14mm-purple-blob-problem-45013/index7.html#post467068

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      That is very interesting. The purple blob issue isn’t the main impetus here, to be honest…it’s size related. I still love the 7-14, and I am not 100% made up, but I think for how I shoot nowadays, the 9-18 may make more sense at the moment. Thanks for the link, though…very nice, and if I keep the 7-14, I’ll look at doing that. (I have the 8mm fisheye now, but of course, I don’t really want to cannibalize that…)

      1. Mike Aubrey Avatar
        Mike Aubrey

        Yeah, I totally understand. I have the 9-18mm, but regularly debate whether I should switch to the 7-14mm. It’s really tempting…I get tired of stitching 9mm shots together, for example here: 6.85mm-equivalent stitch.

  2. R. V. Abbott Avatar
    R. V. Abbott

    You may want to check out this solution, which allows you to put filters on the back end of the 7-14mm…
    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3480692

    By the way, do you think it makes sense to own the 9-18mm if you own the 12-35mm? I used to use the 9-18mm a lot for sightseeing. Very handy focal length and very compact. But after getting the 12-35mm, I thought there was too much overlap, so I replaced the 9-18 with the 7-14mm. A great lens, but I haven’t used it as much as I expected to… I use it mainly for architectural shots.

  3. lisandra Avatar
    lisandra

    holy crap! the difference between 7 and 9 is way more noticeable than I expected!
    Id keep the panny, but you know how I am.

  4. mike davis Avatar

    Purple flare was not a problem with the 7-14 on my Panasonic G1; but can be on my OM-D. If you follow some of the links above (to which I contributed) you will see that it’s as much an Olympus problem as a 7-14mm.

    I still love the lens with either camera.
    M.

  5. Vladislav Avatar
    Vladislav

    Thanks for excellent and practical review! Don’t you just hate when a better made (all metal), better optically, about the same size, and cheaper lens is introduced… but there is no good camera body to use it with?! I am talking about Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM, see: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-efm-11-22-4-5p6-is-stm But… could I really force myself to use Canon EOS M and enjoy the experience? Probably not, so unless EOS M MkII comes out, Olympus 9-18 is on the top of my list.

  6. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    Thanks, I had the 9-18mm for my OM-D but sold it once I got the 12-35mm. It just wasn’t wide enough for me, plus the extra width gained (9mm vs 12mm) seemed rather soft and I usually ended up cropping some of it away.
    I really want to get the 7-14mm but being a OM-D user I am definitely hesitant due to the purple blob issue. How often do you run into it with the OM-D, how about indoors with window light? Is there any issue with the 7-14mm and the GH3?

    1. Simon Avatar
      Simon

      Andrew, I have used my 7-14mm on my GH1, and since my OMD, I also use my 12-35mm on the OMD (it’s my main system for working shoots now). I can tell you that the purple you see in the test images are not as dark in the JPG, they become more prominent when processing the raw files in either Lightroom or CaptureOne v7. If you are a JPG shooter, it’s there when there is strong spot light sources in the image (eg sun, lamp etc) but it’s usually not as bad or distracting as in this test, and strong window backlight does create some flare but hardly noticeable. If you process you raw files, you can desaturate the purple colour seperately and this helps a lot. This also helps for the purple fringing which also is visible and often annoying on strong contrast areas. With all that bad news behind us, the 7-14mm is awesome for exteriors and interiors even with window backlighting, and is sharp all through the range. The purple fringing rarely bothers me, and flares you can see in the viewfinder and control them. I however like using a Cokin Graduated ND filter on my 12-35mm and would have liked to try the 9-18mm to use this filter. Pity the edge quality is a bit soft.

    2. Sam Avatar
      Sam

      It’s bad, really bad. I had many ruined shots that exhibited strong CA, purple blobs and flare. I sold my copy of the Panasonic 7-14mm. I mainly photographed indoor. Although sharpness and contrast are fine, the rest is not.

  7. Andy M Avatar

    An interesting read. I’ve just bought a used 7-14, and now waiting for delivery. I’m going to look into some of the options for creating a self build filter mount.

  8. […] Source: https://admiringlight.com/blog/panasonic-7-14mm-vs-olympus-9-18mm/2/ […]

  9. Zuzullo Avatar
    Zuzullo

    When will we see a PRIME 7mm 2.8?

  10. norm Avatar
    norm

    good review…I’ve had the 9-18 for a couple of years now and really like it. For me, the size and price were better. The other point of view about the difference between 7 vs 9mm is the difference at the other end of 14 vs18mm. That 36mm equivalent just works better for me as an all purpose lens…

  11. Sam White Avatar
    Sam White

    I bought a lightly used Panasonic 7-14mm F/4 for use with my Olympus E-M5 recently. The lens looks excellent, it functions perfectly and it came with all the original accessories. Couldn’t pass it up for the ridiculously low price. I’d take the Panasonic over the Olympus any day. With wide angle lenses it’s all about the sharpness at the edges and the Panasonic does a great job here. Center sharpness is excellent, the field of view is noticeably wider (that’s why we buy a wide angle in the first place) and it’s a constant f/4 lens. No need to stop down, it’s that good wide open. Combined with the five axis stabilization this thing rocks in good and bad light.

    1. Mick 1968 Avatar
      Mick 1968

      I agree with you Sam. The Panasonic obviously is the better lens. Never had any problems with purple blobs and CA can be corrected so easy in Lightroom. However, if size and weight are more important then image quality, the Olympus is a nice alternative. The Olympus is not the lens for me. I need a larger FOV and the best quality. I’d rather pay a little more and be totally satisfied when I look at the results, then keep on wishing that my images where a little sharper.

  12. Tamoio Avatar
    Tamoio

    I recently started using a GH4 and I have come to the conclusion that the Lumix 12-35 is no longer wide enough with the additional crop shooting 4K . . .and so it back-to-the-future, 9-18 or 7-14? I wouldn’t be concerned about the slight res hit with the Olympus if I was using it strictly for 1080 or 720p acquisition, but of course in our 4K future everything is bigger and sharper. I can live with the flare on the Lumix and even the CA, the most annoying real practical issue is filter mount, 52mm ND is soooo cheap and the Lumix doesn’t even have threads so its build-your-own or fork out $300-500 for the ‘solutions’ from Fotodiox or Formatt. I’m still leaning towards the 7-14mm but I do have the nagging suspicion that there might be an update in the pipeline from Panasonic–has anyone heard that rumor?

  13. Tozz Avatar
    Tozz

    If you even compare these two lenses you have been lucky with the Oly lens: I´ve had both and my copy of 9-18 was so bad that after buying it I sent it straight away to be serviced because I thought it was totally faulty (soft edges). The lens edge resolution was concidered “normal in factory limits”.

  14. Paul Avatar

    I ran both these lenses for a while and decided to drop the 7-14. However, after finding too many of my 9-18 shots lacking bite and resolution in the corners, I eventually swapped and went back to the 7-14. It’s certainly better optically – still not perfect in the corners, but better; and its inability to take filters is annoying, but all in all it’s the better lens for me. I’ve fashioned up a homemade 10-stop ND using some foam and an 82mm filter. It works without vignetting at 8mm or more so whilst it’s clumsy and ugly, it does the job.

    What I really want us an 8mm rectilinear prime that takes filters – the Kowa 8.5mm looks interesting, but it’s even bigger and heavier than the 7-14 and the price is eye-watering.

  15. Patrick Leahy Avatar
    Patrick Leahy

    Thank You Jordan..

    This real world comparison was exactly what I was looking for…. except for the brand of the 7-14mm.. Yes I know… A bit hard to test the Oly version in 2013…. 🙂

    Something tells me that if you insert the new Oly 7-14mm into this picture you will come up with the same basic result… minus the purple fringing. Slightly different tit for tats but very close optically at 9mm and f/5.6. Since I want a two day hiking lens, I guess I will stop swooning after the 7-14mm and stay with the zoom and a 12mm.

    Regards
    Patrick

  16. Eric Avatar
    Eric

    Would need to also test a Panny body to be fair due to the difference in the cameras’ IR filter or whatever that makes some panny lenses not work as well on Oly bodies, plus any software/firmware corrections might be done better for Oly lenses by Oly bodies and visa versa.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search


Categories


Recent Posts


  1. I think it is near Hillsboro.

  2. This article got me thinking… Why does Canon make RF S lenses starting with 18mm when most full frame RF…

  3. Great review. I shoot Nikon and may try an old Nikon D200 and see how it compares with the new…