ZenitE
newbie
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 31
Loc: Leicestershire
|
|
At present I am using a 14-45 kit on a E-500, but the time has come to upgrade. Has anyone had the chance to compare the above 2 lenses? Obviously the Sigma is £100 cheaper but with 2.8 throughout and Macro is it it a better lens?. The 14-54 Zuiko has always been seen as the obvious upgrade, and being a Oly, has higher connotations of Quality. As an aside I've just bought a 70-300 Zuiko and it is a cracker, the purpose of this question is to try and get the highest quality of lenses (on a budget) through the new 9-18 Zuiko, standard quality zoom and my 70-300, so as to have a 3 lens total coverage.
--------------------
Journeyman photographer since 15, loves technology and photographic skill
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4239
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Obviously the Sigma is £100 cheaper but with 2.8 throughout and Macro is it it a better lens?.
Pass, but the term "macro" is misapplied to this lens. Doesn't even get to 1:2.
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 36427
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
I can't really answer this, but I do have experience of the older 18-50 f2.8 on APS-C, and on that format, it's a really decent lens. The newer one is supposed to be improved, so optically, it should be a decent upgrade to your existing lens. However, it doesn't give a very wide angle of view on 4/3, so you would probably be changing lenses more than with the 14-54 if nothing else, particularly if you frequently use the area between 14mm and 25mm - that inconvenience alone might make the Zuiko the better choice.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
zuiko
Olympian...
Reged: 19/06/2006
Posts: 407
Loc: Norfolk.
|
|
Upgrading on a budget? As the 14-54 is being replaced the price is falling for new but a mint second hand one could be in the region of £200 on e-bay. What-ever your choice you will have a nice spread for most situations.
David
--------------------
" ENCEFFC!" "ENNSEAEFFSEA!"" ENNCEFFC!" "ENNCEEFC!"
|
Bone_Idle
Mr Maybe
Reged: 28/07/2006
Posts: 1283
Loc: Bradford
|
|
How about £239 inc postage for a new one on Ebay? Zuiko 14-54mm
--------------------
Thanks
Nick
|
Monobod
'Phantom' of the forum!
Reged: 03/04/2003
Posts: 5672
Loc: Just West of Norwich, Norfolk
|
|
I have the 14-45 on my E-500. I am a bit surprised that you doubt its quality. I have found this lens to give superb resolution, colour and contrast. Are you really sure that you would ever see a difference in reality with the 14-54?
--------------------
David.
-----------------------------------------------
Photos hosted by Flickr.
www.flickr.com/photos/monobod/
-----------------------------------------------
I see the world thro' a viewfinder, but the world watches me via CCTV!
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4239
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Are you really sure that you would ever see a difference in reality with the 14-54?
Well, it's a stop and a third faster at the long end for a start....
|
ZenitE
newbie
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 31
Loc: Leicestershire
|
|
Thanks to all that replied, especially Monobod. If there is such a little difference in quality between the 14-45 and 14-54, then i'll keep my money and hopefully put it towards the upcoming 9-18 which is rumoured to be an "affordable" wide lens.
Thanks
--------------------
Journeyman photographer since 15, loves technology and photographic skill
|
Bone_Idle
Mr Maybe
Reged: 28/07/2006
Posts: 1283
Loc: Bradford
|
|
Take a look at comparisons Here and Here.
They might help.
I think the 14-54 has less distortion, is slightly sharper, is faster and has superior build with weather sealing.
--------------------
Thanks
Nick
|
Repton
Mr Test Shot
Reged: 05/07/2005
Posts: 1757
|
|
Quote:
How about £239 inc postage for a new one on Ebay? Zuiko 14-54mm
I'm tempted myself!!! I don't rate my kit lenses much - about time I got some reasonable glass
|
ZenitE
newbie
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 31
Loc: Leicestershire
|
|
Thanks Bone Idle for the links to the reviews on the 14-45 and the 14-54, they were very helpful. It confirms that the 14-45 is a lot better lens than I thought, and I'll save my money for the 9-18 if the forthcoming reviews are positive. 
--------------------
Journeyman photographer since 15, loves technology and photographic skill
|
raymebaby
newbie
Reged: 10/01/2008
Posts: 45
|
|
I used the 14-54 all last year. Performance was great, and it was very light and compact. I got most of its original cost back on Ebay. I'm using the 12-60 as a standard zoom this year. It's brilliant - a bit bigger and heavier, but the extra bit at each end really does make it so much more versatile; and it's amazingly fast. If you can justify the extra outlay, I'd say - go for the 12-60.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
