Also at the OM-D an excellent combination

I hesitated long zuzulegen me this lens. I had the popular belief that zoom lenses, and especially those covering such a wide range, be a bad compromise connected me, also because I did 17-85mm very bad experience with a not so extreme Canon. Since the images in wide angle were really really dismal. Maybe because I had also a Monday lens.

Now what the above M.Zuiko concerns there are indeed also correspondingly negative comments. So I would have never bought it, I had not seen the great pictures that my son has thus made his ann PEN. There was really nothing to complain about.

So now I have this lens on my OM-D E-M5 and find this combination very successful. In contrast to a camera bag with several lenses, take this little unit with love always. I have to now also a compact neoprene sleeve.

The lens is not particularly bright, but this weakness is like the OM-D confidently with the really great stabilizer and good photosensitivity from. The build quality seems better than generally reported. In all my experiments and compare the results ware always more than acceptable. New experience is being able to take pictures without camera shake even in low light in an old factory building with a maximum focal length.

With all the images I was immediately pleased, for errors you have to look with a magnifying glass. I have to the focal lengths of 20mm and 50mm set and images respectively compared with the Lumix 20mm 1.7 and the 50mm Macro Zuiko 2.0. If I go the images on 15 "MacBook and forth turn I see at 20mm no difference and at 50mm a little more contrast in single focal length lens. Taking a closer look you can see at 20mm a significant CA in the border area, the Lumix absolutely no. You can see the CA Although easily corrected, but then the edge region of course remains in the detail sharpness significantly behind the Lumix back. But as I said, all that one sees only with a magnifying glass. At 50mm, the CA will disappear almost completely, the edge sharpness remains clearly behind the fixed focal length lens. In both cases can I work out no difference in the middle.

For the long focal length I currently have no comparative lens, I see something CA but not as pronounced as in 20mm and the sharpness is in the marginal area slightly worse than in the middle. All similar to the other two comparison points.

As I said, the fault must search you, they do not fall without further on. For me, the practical results are essential and how it is now looks to be responsible of this objective in the future for a good 90% of my pictures.

Whether I happened to get a super-good lens I can not say, only that the work of my son probably just as well. If you compare the good and bad reviews here, one would have to assume that approximately every 20-th lens is flawed.

Although it's not perfect, I give this lens 5 stars, simply because it has convinced me and exceeded my expectations.