|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on August 19, 2020 Pros: gorgeous wide angle 14-28 equivalent. content weight Cons: easy flare Opinion: if you use it indoors it's great. on the outside, the flare appears easily, which in the end bothers a lot. I only use it for indoor movies and it's fine even with low light. very well usable. built-in lampshade. It is not very light to be a micro 4/3 and it would be better to combine it at least with an om-d 5 (for the 10 does not seem proportionate) |
 | sent on February 14, 2020 Pros: Pro Cons: Ghost and flare to iosa Opinion: I bought this lens recently I let myself be carried by the brand and because I also have the 12/100 great. The optics is wonderful but just a light point a window and creates indomitable Ghostias I do not know whether to take the panaleica or not. Used on the Olympus M1 mk2 I will do other tests but I think to give up and even if the panaleic is a 16mm equivalent I will make a reason. I'm sorry but taking photos must be relaxing and unfortunately with this lens you can not, I had to listen to the advice of some friends who here on yuza had warned me. I have to thank Mr. Gabriele of Fotomoderna who makes me change with the panaleic . I'll keep you updated on the Pana as well. |
 | sent on April 28, 2019 Pros: Impeccable construction, tropicalization, weight, ergonomics Cons: Ghost as soon as the sun is also just sideways, normal with a front lens so curved, but annoying Opinion: I took this lens to take pictures in confined spaces and interiors, above all, and I must say that it behaves very well, is sharp, in the center, already at full aperture. Excellent handling and the maximum opening of 2.8, which allows you to take freehand shots, thanks to the stabilized sensor of the machine, otherwise unthinkable. Unfortunately the ghost phenomenon occurs fairly easily with strong lights, even only lateral and, unfortunately, is the worst defect of this beautiful optics, but quite normal, given the curvature of the front lens. It is still something to take into account, before making the purchase, because it is not very easy to control. The weight is in the norm and the construction, as for all the PRO lenses of Olympus, really flawless. In short, a goal, for those who love the focal court, to have in their outfit. |
 | sent on July 10, 2018 Pros: Focal range, maximum aperture, sharpness, in close-up photography has a nice bokeh. Cons: Barrel distortion at short focal lengths (but if you shoot in jpg you don't notice it corrects the machine, and when you import the RAW either, it fixes the software.... but, it is not correct) pity that to mount the filters you have to buy an adapter ring that make you pay TR Oppo for what it is. Wanting to say it is a bit unbalanced forward, pesantuccia frontal lens. Opinion: I'm crazy about him, when you need a wide angle lens for the Olympus there's just him. I really like its blurry wide-angle in the close, soft and pronounced maintaining the readability of the background. Unless he has to do genres that don't contemplate him he's always in the bag. Coupled to 12-40 + 40-150 is the Triad handyman or with the 12-100 remaining a little ' shorter. |
  | sent on May 06, 2018 Pros: Construction and handling. Cons: Flare (but normal with this type of frontal lens). Opinion: Recently purchased to implement the Olympus excellent kit for the street since the FF with its size often "scares" the subjects especially in some countries. It is a wonderful lens that is worth every € that costs as yield, size quality construction etc. Together with the 12-40 F 2.8 Pro is a perfect pair that is in a small bag and allows you to shoot almost in any situation. In short, the ideal kit for the street. |
 | sent on February 14, 2018 Pros: Construction, tropicalization, FN button on the barrel, sharpness, colors, focal range and constant aperture Cons: Heavy, big and suffers a lot of ghosts, Price. Opinion: tried in a day in full sun, we clarify ... the lens is a show, made excellent ... no FLARE ... but GHOST yes, inevitable with the sun in the frame ... you have to make eye and a some attention during shooting ... they are not excessive if well controlled, sometimes they can also give an added value if well managed (but they must like and it is a matter of taste) ... however, not easy to use ... not suitable for a beginner or a purist, the color rendering, sharpness and speed you AF are excellent, as a true lens PRO ... I will update later after a more intense use ... |
 | sent on January 13, 2018 Pros: Sharpness a knife! Three-dimensionality, colors, mechanical workmanship Cons: Flare! Opinion: Lens with a spectacular sharpness, beautiful three-dimensionality, colors with little need for post process, annoying the fact of not being able to manage a door filter or more serious hood, the biggest problem is the flare, compared to other ultra-wide with this I have to sometimes serious problems in the management, I use it with ND filters 150x150 absent vignetting, overall it is a gorgeous lens deserves a 10 |
user58495  | sent on September 20, 2017 Pros: Construction, optical rendering, definition, colors Cons: Sensitive to flare Opinion: Strongly built lens: the mechanical click that disengages the autofocus is Swiss watch. Excellent performance at all focal lengths, very good at maximum aperture. Flare and especially eye contact when shutter-blinking. sensor is dirty or dirty the lens you will find in the picture all the puddles almost perfectly in focus. I happened and from the electronic viewfinder, you did not see this problem, it came up unfortunately and, dramatically, at the opening of the raw.rn For the rest soon falls in love with this optic, for yield, for construction and robustness, sharpness and colors. I gave it 9 ... i dont forget to point out that it is equipped with a multifunctional button which of course can be assigned a long series of features and is a solution that other brands should also be inspired by. |
  | sent on June 12, 2017 Pros: Construction, sharpness, tropicalization Cons: It suffers to flare only with artificial lights then at night and fixed lenses, but normal for lenses like this in my opinion Opinion: A great lens that does not make me regret the 15 30 tamron f / 2.8 I had when I used the FF system. Sharpness, robustness, tropicalization, light and beauty of the images. The fact that it suffers a bit of flare can be solved at the shooting stage by putting your hand on the indicated side, on the other hand it's an ultra wilde and I think it's normal. Returns gorgeous essential colors to form the olympus triad: 7-14, 12-40, 40-150. I would highly recommend the landscape photographers and lovers to the starry sky. The price is absolutely honest for what it returns in full |
 | sent on February 22, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, construction, diaphragm. Cons: Flare, weights and ingobri. Opinion: For me that I came from the Canon 16-35 this lens has been the purchase of natural m4 / 3. It 'a tank, built as best you could and not to tropical conditions that I consider essential for a lens to be used in extreme conditions at times. This of course is reflected in the weight ef the half kilograms, but the e-m1 is well balanced; anyway if you want this focal length with an aperture of 2.8 there are no alternatives. The sharpness is excellent and reduced focus distance combined with the fairly bright aperture allows multiple compositional variables with subjects in the foreground and background blur. The lens hood is fixed and manage filters is not simple; on the market are of the holder for both the plates from 150mm to 100mm; I gave it a self-made with a funnel spending less than 5 euro, to which I attached a filter holder and 3cm thick I have my "tool" that allows you to use the filters, without any vignetting even 7mm with a single plate. The real problem with this objective is the flare, very frequent anddifficult to eliminate in post; you need to verify their presence during shooting for failing surprises successivamente.rnVoto 9. |
 | sent on January 05, 2017 Pros: Opening - Sharpness - Detail - Speed ??- Strength Cons: nobody Opinion: I use it for about a year on both M1 and M10 ... I can only say that at the moment is the best lens I have in mano.Considerato do all that on a micro 4/3 at f4 photographing just about anything .. .devo tell which is the perfect lens and worth every euro.In f 2.8 is exceptional indoors or blurred, and I must say that with the M1 I have no special flare issues |
 | sent on November 23, 2016 Pros: aperture f2.8 - build quality Cons: flare Opinion: In my experience the 7-14 PRO is a zoom really successful. The quality of images produced is excellent, in addition to being clear also has a great microcontrato, higher than the 12-40 that has a flatter yield. The quality and solid construction are excellent and despite everything remains small and light enough in relation to the opening f2.8 which I consider essential on m43 format. I had the version 43 that besides being f4 was much bigger and heavier and I think optically lower. I also had the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 ... The only really negative aspect is the flare that occurs very easily, you have to be very careful in handling the frame. Normally, if I realize, I use your left hand to do the necessary shade to eliminate flare. Overall it is a great goal that is worth its price. For those who complain about excessive weight and dimensions, the system provides the excellent Panasonic f4 ... but I think a stop on m43 often makes a difference. |
 | sent on October 21, 2016 Pros: exceptional optical zoom olympus pro. Cons: none. Opinion: I am posessore of this optical Pro for about six months and I have to sire chje and 'really eccellezionale nearly all diaphragms, as f.4 in F.11 and' also very excellent as flare and notidezza even at the edges, only 2.8 at the edges extremes and 'slightly weaker, but it' s just a small costatazione.rnvengo from 7/14 f.4 always per0 from olympus 4/3 system wheredoes optics started to f.4, and I must say already to that opening was superb perhaps the progettistsi have wanted to exaggerate bringing it to 2.8 to make the objectives olympus pro 2.8, but it 's just the only flaw that can annotare.rnmolto recommended for those who want the wide-angle extreme, I I like these kinds of optics that esasperarno the psospettiva, I am entusiasta.rnvoto. 10 less |
 | sent on April 26, 2016 Pros: Lightweight, compact, well built and with excellent quality. Cons: Suffer from flare but then is an ultra-wide Opinion: Goal really succeeded. He was able to reduce the old 7-14 F4 optical quality in a large, heavy lens half, bringing the maximum opening at 2.8. well-positioned buttons, well built and great quality even at the edges. The only thing to be careful is the risk-flare that with this ultrawide is always at the gates (but it is also normal). |
 | sent on November 27, 2015 Pros: lightweight, compact and very functional. Cons: the price Opinion: I took it today, so I cant say much. The pictures are very beautiful, the manual is great, very convenient to the ring switching from auto focus to manual. The auto focus is fast and very accurate, as well as manual. With f. 2.8 allows for great shots even in low light. Now I use it I know you can be more precise. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
