JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ is a standard lens for 4/3, manufactured from 2014. The focus is done by Stepper Motor, it has image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 319 €;
59 users have given it an average vote of 8.4 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Micro 4/3: this lens is compatible with mirrorless micro-4/3.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 220000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
user223923
sent on August 06, 2021
Pros:All for me mediocre without any excellence.
Cons:I find it "dark" and "faded"
Opinion:I'll be used to it too well myself, but I find the quality of this lens mediocre. Not usable for my needs: sold immediately. Clearly it's just my experience. Now on my Olympus I put series lenses and it's a whole other story. Rather than a handyman in the kit, I would have put a 20 mm f1/7 and they would have made a better impression.
Opinion:I do not want to denigrate this objective, but I would like to be useful to those like me who have never tried a Micro 4/3 camera. I had for a couple of weeks an Olympus E-pl8 (same sensor as the new E-pl10) with this 14-42 pancake lens in the kit. Well, I was stunned. It's not like I expected who knows what and of course the camera is cheap (well... the E-pl10 in kit costs 650 euros and the lens not in kit alone costs over 200) but... it's a camera! (By the way, the new 20mpx m43 sensor doesn't seem to be much better.) And the lens as can also be seen from other reviews is not a bottle bottom yet I made a comparison with the same photos made by a cheap smartphone (Xiaomi mi9 lite of 230 euros, to say not a top of the range and that basically costs like this lens) and the photos are qualitatively absolutely similar apart from a little more depth of field, which nevertheless improved them, in favor of the smartphone, and a better (but very little) dynamic range in favor of the camera, while the detail is practically identical. Raw photos processed in LR with white dot in manual against photos taken from the smartphone in jpeg automatically. Yes because jpeg photos directly from camera were really unwatchable. In addition, the maximum opening of the 3.5 lens with the M43 sensor allows you to take decent photos at the maximum around 3200 iso but already we are at 1/30 sec. For heaven's sake, the machine is stabilized.. at least that! because otherwise with little light it would not be usable only with very bright fixes or static subjects. In fact, in my opinion, micro4/3 generally makes sense when used with good light with telephoto jectives. Of course also with quality fixes but at that point you have to evaluate the costs / benefits. While it can certainly have its say in the naturalistic field reducing volumes and weights costs. Otherwise mounting a pancake like this on an m43 for size (e.g. to make street) doesn't make any sense. You get the same or even better photos with a cheap smartphone (or with a compact... they still sell).
Pros:Compactness even in full extension, lightness, good optical performance if the right specimen happens, unexpected resistance to flares
Cons:The construction is acceptable but I would have preferred it all metal type the 12mm f2 or the 17mm f1.8, electronic zoom speed (still improves a lot by setting "High" from Menu), difficulty docking and unhooking from the bayonet due to the ridiculous thickness the die
Opinion:I have the zoom 2.8 triad but I was looking for something extremely compact and light: considering the very low cost I tried this zoom of which I had read unencouraging opinions. I must say that I was surprised, sharpness not at the level of the Pros but very good also at the corners, both at 14 and 42mm. I believe that being a cheap production there is variability between the specimens, if the edges do not satisfy you I recommend you to try with another copy because mine has a definitely appreciable yield
Cons:Average output of kit lenses, no lens hood, electric zoom consumes battery
Opinion:Looking for a very compact compact:-) that did not make me lose too much in quality and still allow me to have interchangeable optics as on the SLR I took a kit OM D 10 Mark II inclusive of this lens. The result is achieved, camera and lens mounted you put them anywhere, not in a pocket but in a normal pocket or in a pouch without problems. The optical performance of the lens is sufficient, in the average of the kit optics and it really allows you to walk without weights and clutter. Closing the diaphragm a lot the sharpness is good, otherwise the images are always a bit mixed, especially at the longest focal length. In short, a perspective from which not to expect much and to replace quickly with something better if you are willing to give up the ultra compactness of the Camera + lens set. A note on the zoom drive. It is electrically assisted and the ring on the optic does not rotate completely but behaves as if two buttons are assembled: turning it lightly on one side goes in tele, rotating it slightly on the other goes in wide angle. In essence you can zoom manually but the displacement of the lenses is carried out by the electric motor with consequent energy consumption. The automatic MAF is pretty fast. The stabilization is entrusted to the sensor in the machine body. In conclusion A view that I do not recommend to buy alone, better to take something else. If you take the camera in kit then it is highly recommended because you would buy a really compact system and overall acceptable quality.
Pros:More compact than a fixed lens! Bright enough to be a 3.5-5.6, coupled to the em10 or em5 Pocket machine
Cons:Extends a lot of on (but it is inevitable for the type of goal), has an absurd tendency to balance white towards the gray/beige even under strong sunlight
Opinion:Great lens, it was the first of my fed m43 Kit, and unlike other, a lens that won't sell. WINS hands down on any 18-55 of march more noble, for clarity and compactness. MAF fast enough even in low light, allowed me to take 2 seconds too Freehand into town in the dark by grabbing the moving objects in a precise and clean, I didn't have a real 1:1 comparison but the MAF I think faster than the 12-40 PRO (which is pa ten of my Kit). As quoted in against, pity the absurd tendency to balance white towards the gray/beige even under strong sunlight, nothing irreparable provided you shoot in RAW.
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
