Leica vs Olympus' zoom lens for the 4/3 standard

[Nemo]

Leica D Vario-Elmarit f/2,8-3,5 Asph vs Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54 mm f/2,8-3,5.

You can read it here (in Spanish, but the graphs are easy to read):

http://www.dslrmagazine.com/pruebas/prueba...te-a-leica.html

(several pages).

The author is Valentín Sama. He is an optician, researcher, camera collector and editor of the FV Magazine.

R.

[BJL]

Thanks,

   at a glance, the Olympus Zuiko Digital comes out slightly ahead of the Pansonic Leica D, with the main differences in the corners: more sharpness and less vignetting. That is fairly consisent with the most commonly claimed strengths of the Olympus 14-54, and of Zuiko Digital lenses in general.

On distortion, I think it says that the Olympus maybe has slightly less barrel distortion at the wide end, but not much difference. (This is consistent with my experience of the Olympus 14-54: easily the least vignetting at the wide end that I have seen in any lens of comparable zoom range.)

More evidence against the myth that the mere involvement of a great German lens maker will produce better lenses than any Japanese lens maker, regardless of price constraints.


Still, the gap is maybe not great, and if one has a use for OIS, the Leica 14-50 is tempting. Panasonic has announced that it will be sold separately from the body, so I wonder what the price will be?

[Nemo]

Well, I think the cause of the size and performace differences between lenses is due to the image stabilization system. Lower performance at the corners and some additional vignetting seems to be the price to pay for the additional lenses mounted on the stabilization mechanism.