Ocean's reviews
-
Olympus 14-150mm f/4-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital
5 out of 10 points and not recommendedlight, small, thin, seems solid, good Near-Performancesometimes too light, no hood - to protect, expensive, CA, dust-problemsOlympus FT useres have always dreamt of such a Holiday-Lens with good performance, now its real - but not for FT - too bad!
reviewed July 31st, 2010 (purchased for $500)
I tested against Panasonic 14-140 mm, which is heavier, has built in OIS, comes with Sun-Shade and has a little better sharpness und no chromatic aberrations.
Even if it is more expensive, I kept my Panasonic.
I think Olympus can do much better (I have most Olympus FT lenses!)
but for a E-PL1 or E-P 3 its a good and much needet lens for starters with too much money!
small and handy but I am not used to the extreme cheap-construction Level without lens hood and every few month I got dust between the lenses
Optics are good - the first half year, with a bit to much CA. With weekly practice it's getting worse.
The price is much to high, it's just a cheap-starter Zoom.
The Panasonic 14-140 mm ist by far better.
Olympus can do much better.For best possible optical Zoom results, I would prefer the Panasonic 12-35 mm & 35-100 mm OIS! -
Olympus 90-250mm f/2.8 Pro ED Zuiko Digital
9 out of 10 points and recommendedbest Tele-Zoom since today, full compatible with extenders and wide openheavy, should co like 2,8/90-300 mmthere is no better Zoom, I tested them all, even the Nikon 4/200-400 mm nor the Canon 5,6/100-400 mm can reach it.
reviewed July 31st, 2010
But the Olympus 2,8/300 mm is still sharper at f: 2,8.
Its a little short, I would prefer it from 90-300 mm.
But gone, Olympus should now create a 4,0/50-300 mm!
But this Tele-Zoom is worth every cent! -
Panasonic 14-140mm f/4-5.8 ASPH MEGA OIS LUMIX G VARIO HD
8 out of 10 points and recommendedsmall, good build, sun shade, no CAs, very sharp for a zoomheavy, thick, OIS could be better, no really good near performancebetter than Olympus 14-150 mm, but heavy and expensive
reviewed July 31st, 2010 -
Panasonic 7-14mm f/4 ASPH LUMIX G VARIO
9 out of 10 points and recommendedsimply the BEST, light, short,Plastic, expensivemy Olympus 4/7-14 mm showed some better colors in the picture, but the Pana is so much lighter and smaller
reviewed July 31st, 2010
and with the fantastic G2 its a dream lens in every holiday!
Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Sigma, Tamron have bad dreams on this lens and nothing to compete with. -
Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 ASPH LUMIX G
7 out of 10 points and not recommendedlight, seems solid, no CAOverpriced!, no good AF-Performance, Noise, no OIS, Flare, Vignetting, plastic, to thinfarly overpriced, should cost around 180 !
reviewed July 31st, 2010
Good in low light, but the AF is far to slow!
I hope for better mFT primes!!!! -
Panasonic 8mm f/3.5 LUMIX G FISHEYE
9 out of 10 points and recommendedsmall, light, seems solid, good performanceto expensiveas good as my Olympus 3,5/8 mm Fisheye
reviewed July 31st, 2010
and better then any othe Fisheye from Sigma, Canon, Sony
and as good as Nikon Fisheye -
Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 ED M.Zuiko Digital
7 out of 10 points and recommendedlight, small, sharpf:6,7 only, not dust-proof, no hood, extreme high price, crappy plasticsoptics are good - small and handy but I am not used to the extreme cheap-construction Level without lens hood and every few month I got dust between the lenses
reviewed November 22nd, 2011 (purchased for $800)
Optics are good - the first half year, with a bit to much CA. With weekly practice it's getting worse.
The price is extreme high, it's just a cheap-starter Zoom.
The Panasonic 100-300 mm ist by far better.
Olympus can do much better. -
Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital
7 out of 10 points and recommendedgreat sharpness and brilliance, very smallcrappy socket, no hood, CA, cheap plasticsI like the small little zoom.
reviewed November 22nd, 2011 (purchased for $600)
but I am not used to the extreme cheap-construction Level without lens hood and I got dust between the lenses
Optics are good with a bit to much CA. With weekly practice it's getting worse.
The price is to high, it's just a cheap-starter Zoom.
The Panasonic 7-14 mm ist by far better. -
Panasonic 14-150mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH MEGA OIS LEICA D VARIO-ELMAR
9 out of 10 points and recommendedbest Super-Zoom evernonethere is nothing better - its just Leica colors and metall!
reviewed November 22nd, 2011 (purchased for $1,100) -
Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ M.Zuiko Digital ED
6 out of 10 points and recommendedMacro Mode, fast AFcheap construction, only f:6,3, no IS, no Lens hoodsmall and handy but I am not used to the cheap-construction Level without lens hood
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $300)
Optics are good with a bit to much CA.
Olympus can do much better. -
Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6 ED M.Zuiko Digital
4 out of 10 points and not recommended???to expensive for the quality, CA, no metall, cheap plasticssmall and handy but I am not used to the extreme cheap-construction Level without lens hood and every few month I got dust between the lenses
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $250)
Optics are good - the first half year, with a bit to much CA. With weekly practice it's getting worse.
The price is to high, it's just a cheap-starter Zoom.
Olympus can do much better. -
Olympus 75mm f/1.8 ED M.Zuiko Digital
8 out of 10 points and recommendedgood construction,only silver, no hood, very priceywithout lens hood and only ugly silver
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $1,000)
Optics are very good - but for me it's not a keeper - I like the 1,8/45 mm by far more! -
Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital
7 out of 10 points and recommendedoutside-Metall construction, sharp and fastpricey, only in silver, only f:1,8, no hoodwithout lens hood
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $600)
Optics are very good - but I like the 1,7/20 mm Panasonic or the 1,4/25 mm Leica even more.
The price is much to high.
There should be a black one! -
Olympus 17mm f/2.8 M.Zuiko Digital
5 out of 10 points and not recommended???AF; f:2,8; cheap plastics, no hoodDon't know for whom is it good for.
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $250)
Not very sharp, not fast.
Not my lens.
At last, to pricey for the construction. -
Olympus 300mm f/2.8 Zuiko Digital
9 out of 10 points and recommendedextreme sharp, solid construction, even very good with convertersto heavy, no SWD-SFthe best 300 mm I've ever used, even better the the newest Canon and Nikon stuff.
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $8,000)
But it is very heavy for a 300 mm.
Optics nearly perfect! -
Olympus 150mm f/2 Zuiko Digital
8 out of 10 points and recommendedextreme sharp, good construction, even very good with convertersno SWD-AF, cheaper plasticsvery sharp - even with converters - much to like about it - but I would prefer SWD-AF
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $2,500)
we will need this lens for mFT! -
Olympus 15mm f/8 BCL-1580 Body Cap Lens
6 out of 10 points and recommendedgood & small jokeno AF, no Aperture, no electronicsnice idea - the most expensive camera-cap.
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $80) -
Sony E 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 PZ OSS SELP1650
5 out of 10 points and not recommendednice idea, small, blackvery weak plastics, not really sharp, no hoodMy first one made noises while Zooming.
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $300)
The second got cracked by letting it fall from 4 inches on the table.
Third wasn't sharp enough.
I would love to have a good 16-60 mm - but this isn't!
It has the quality from cheapest compact-cameras.s
The price is much to high, it's just a cheap-starter Zoom.
Even Panasonic can do it much better. -
Sony E 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS SEL1855
7 out of 10 points and recommendedsolid, good hood, sharp in black versionlargei experienced with silver and black Versions - the black ones are by far better - optical (but only with Nex 7) - maybe selected.
reviewed December 30th, 2012
it's not very small but I like it a lot more then my new 16-50 mm pancake.
After 18 months it is better then expected and with the new AF from Nex 6 - most pics are now sharp.
Not so good with Nex 5n or Nex 3. -
Sony E 55-210mm f/4.5-6.3 OSS SEL55210
5 out of 10 points and not recommended???long, not very sharp, CA, silverI tested against my Tamron 18-200 mm NEX - which was sharper at 200 mm, had better AF and feels much more solid.
reviewed December 30th, 2012 (purchased for $300) -
Sony E 10-18mm f/4 ED OSS SEL1018
8 out of 10 points and recommendedsharp, small, feels solid, good hood, blacklarge hood, not cheapone of the best Nex-Lenses so far. I have tested it against Panasonic 7-14 mm an different other ww-zooms.
reviewed December 30th, 2012
feels solid, no massive distortions - great lens.