|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
4
|
86580
|
7/19/2010
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Purchase
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
None indicated
|
|
| Reader Review Rating Averages |
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
|
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
|
Readers'
Overall Rating
|
|
6.50
|
9.00
|
8.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perry Rhodan
Registered: January 2010
Posts: 16
|
|
Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital review by Perry Rhodan
|
|
Review Date: 7/19/2010
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very cheap and compact, good IQ, ok AF.
|
|
Cons:
|
Pretty wobbly lens.
|
|
Very compact and average IQ. AF and IQ no match for the EPL1. For the price a very good starterlens. 9-18 and 14-150 are a a lot better (and pricier).
|
|
PeterB666
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 5
|
|
Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital review by PeterB666
|
|
Review Date: 5/19/2010
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact, light weight, good close focus and general image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Rotating front element and won't focus with Cokin filter holder as weak AF motor
|
|
This lens has some great plusses. Very good image quality in most situations, very compact when not in use and excellent close focus distance - you get 0.25m at the 42mm end of the zoom.
On the down-side, there is some play in the double telescoping design which gives the impression of a cheap point and shoot camera's lens. It doesn't affect image quality but dosn't instill confidence in the construction.
The front element rotates when focused and zoomed. When using manual focus, you have to be careful not to knock the lens barrel otherwise you need to refocus.
The AF motor is very weak and cannot handle the load of a filter and lens hood combined. Nor can it take a Cokin P series filter holder and in any event, the rotating front element and inability to retain focus when changing filters makes this lens close to useless for ND filters etc.
If this lens was aimed at point and shoot photographers, you may forgive these short-comings but the Olympus PEN has a much wider market. If the lens was redesigned to be more like the M.Zuiko 9-18mm with a non-rotating front element, it would be a much better proposition.
It is a pity because the photographic quality is very good for a kit lens.
|
|
richeso
Registered: April 2010
Posts: 2
|
|
Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital review by richeso
|
|
Review Date: 4/17/2010
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic
|
|
Good light and very sharp. Downside is the cheap build
|
|
logaandm
Registered: March 2009
Posts: 6
|
|
Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital review by logaandm
|
|
Review Date: 9/20/2009
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, light, good image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Telescoping is strange. Filter size is very odd and doesn't match 17mm. No hood.
|
|
Acceptable quality for a kit lens.
The collapsing lens is a little strange, but it does make the camea smaller and easier to put in the bag. When collapsed smaller than the Panasonic G1 kit lens.
Image quality is comparable to Panasonic G1 kit lens - I would give a slight edge to the Olympus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
