14-42mm Micro Four Thirds version one and version two test at ePhotozine
There is a curious new review at ePhotozine! They tested both kit lenses, the first generation 14-42mm for Micro Four Thirds (Click here to read the review) and the second generation 14-42mm lens for Micro Four Thirds (Click here to read the review). And guess what? There is indeed a small image quality difference! ePhotozine writes: “The MkI version of this lens may provide better sharpness from edge to edge, but the enhanced design and faster focusing make the lower sharpness towards the edges penalty worth paying.”
Those are the search links to all version of the 14-42mm lens (as you know there are now three different versions!): Amazon, Adorama, B&H, J&R, eBay.
Mikey
2 years ago |Interesting. SLR Gear has done tests on both of these lenses as well and the mark II version is better than the mark I version in their tests. The results are reversed with ephotozine. I think ephotozines results may be a bit dubious because people seem to just about universally agree that the mark II version is better than the mark I version. ePhotozine may have had a good copy of the I version or a bad copy of the II version, or maybe both of those scenarios are true, resulting in heavily skewed results.
Agent00soul
2 years ago |Maybe they’re the same optically and it’s just sample variation that we’re seeing.
Oliver
2 years ago |I never believed the mark II version should be better than the mark I version. I´m totally satisfied with the mark I version.
Robbie
2 years ago |MKI is a really good lens. May be “really good” is one bad adjective but it usually delivers above average optical quality. It’s AF is excruciating though, on my E-P2…
Michael Meissner
2 years ago |I’ve always wondered if Olympus didn’t fix the wobble issue in the mark 2 lens that was widely reported in one initial E-P1 review and picked up from there. I can’t find the original review right now, but at certain shutter speeds (something like 1/100-1/200) and certain focal lengths (something like 20-30mm), pictures were less sharp than at other speeds. It appeared that a firmware release for the E-P1 helped reduce the issue, but it was still visible occasionally, and likewise using other lenses reduced the chance of it occurring.
shep
2 years ago |The snappy focus speed, nonrotating front element (good for polarizing filter), bayonet for rectangular lens hood, and 2-section collapse design to eliminate any “wobble” are all excellent. Too bad if the edge sharpness is not quite up to snuff, but overall I really find the “II” a big improvement the way I use the lens.
It’s not the same optical design.
Richard
2 years ago |Olympus states that the major changes in the MK II have to do with auto-focus sound levels for video and so on. I would expect they may have optimized the focus firmware somewhat as well. It would be interesting to compare the original, MK II and the MK IIR that ships with the E-P3. The R is supposedly optimized for faster auto-focus.