OM SYSTEM OLYMPUS Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 Lens for Micro Four Thirds, Black

Having used this lens for a couple weeks now, I can now safely say that it's great. If I could I would give just about every good product 4.5 stars, because nothing's perfect, and neither is this lens. But I feel fine bumping it up to 5. At 9mm the lens shows considerable distortion, even for being corrected. If the in-camera correction were absent, it would be verging on obscene. But this is a wide-angle lens (though to be fair, it's not really THAT wide), so I personally expect a fair amount of distortion. It's also surprisingly sharp in the center even at f4. By 5.6 it sharpens up a bit, and softer corners definitely get better. But it doesn't sharpen up much past 5.6, and starts to lose it pretty early, around f11 or a little earlier. At 18mm, the lens is not as sharp in the center, but the lens is pretty much distortion-free. So you get essentially a 36mm 5.6 at tele with no distortion, which is a pretty good focal length, even though the aperture at that length isn't great. Close focusing distance is better than I expected (of course I didn't expect much), with macro abilities coming in at relatively weak, but certainly not terrible.Chromatic aberration? I use the E-PL2, so yes, it's there, and it could probably be better dealt with. But for me it's really not that much of an issue.The price could always be lower, but to be honest, it's not that bad for what it is. On the whole, well worth it!(Update 12.26.12)So believe it or not, I've now gone through selling all my mft gear, moving to Canon, then selling my Canon gear, moving to Nikon, then slowly adding back in MFT gear (basically because of the sensor in the OM-D). Recently I re-purchased the 7-14mm Panasonic, but was getting too many nasty purple flares (a well-documented issue with the OM-D, I was to find), so decided to go back to this little gem of a lens. I have not regretted one moment of it. Shot a wedding just recently, using both my Nikon D600 and my Oly E-M5, and hands down the best shots of the day were taken with the Oly + this lens. It's just a pleasure to use, from the light weight and compact size to the epic images, it does not disappoint. And since I use it now almost exclusively at 9mm (though the lens performs nicely throughout the range--see mention above), for me at this point the aperture is essentially fixed. One of my favorite lenses of all my gear (Nikon, Oly and Panasonic), highly recommended.(Update 11.27.13)I light of the fact that I've used both the Panasonic 7-14mm and this lens, both for extended periods, I thought I might add my two cents (though I know many others already have). The Panasonic is hands down the sharper animal. It is quite sharp for a zoom lens, in fact. In my opinion, the Oly just doesn't quite compare on this front. But, the Oly wins for size and the fact you can use filters (if that is important to you... I don't ever use them). The Panasonic is small, but the Oly is REALLY small. Both are lightweight, and both are great lenses. Yes, the Panasonic wins on the aperture, being constant. They are both excellent lenses, and I would recommend them both.However the 9mm wide on the Oly is a little easier to handle than the 7mm of the Pana. If you want super wide, there's no way you can beat the Pana. But the 9mm, to me, is a little more realistic of a focal length. Things around the edge of the frame don't look as unnaturally flat and odd on the Oly as they do on the Pana. The 9mm perspective just looks fantastic.So the extra 2mm (4mm equiv) to me ends up being unnecessary. It's fun, but I didn't end up utilizing it quite as much as I thought I would. So these things, the size, and the cheaper price, lead me to recommend the Oly over the Pana.But if you are looking for the widest you can get on m43, then there's really only one option (short of using adapters).

I made an emotional leap and bought the Lumic G 7-14 right when I got my GF1 a while back. I had dabbled with wide-angle photography and found the images very compelling so I went for it.For a long time I only had the 7-14 and the 20mm pancake and I have to say it changed my picture taking. Limited to this range, with no long zoom, I began to seek wider perspectives, and ways to use depth of focus to pull out an object that would otherwise be lost in its surroundings. Soon, my portraits, especially of groups, started to swim in context, something so often lacking in portrait photography. But most notably both lenses produced fabulous images, rich and deep in color, crisp and worth taking time to really study, rather than glance at.I still longed for a telephoto, but was unsure whether the current 45-200 would meet the same optics standards as the 20 and 7-14 so I held off.Then came the Olympus 9-18. Initially I dismissed news of the lens as covering an area I already had well in hand, but then I read reviews and began to think about it. Deciding to take the plunge I ordered the lens pretty much the day it came out and was surprised when it came very quickly. It is stunningly small, not to pile on but it is something to remember because it takes BIG images. Sweeping shots that encompass the scene and deliver it in one big, satisfying mouthful to the viewer. At the end I could find little to differentiate the images from the 7-14 barring the added range at the bottom end, which should not be discounted. But soon I found I was not carrying the 7-14 anymore. It was larger, more specialised. The 9-18 with my GF1 would hang around my neck with my 20mm in my bag and I would find myself forgetting to switch to the pancake, as the 9-18 came close to touching its range anyway.So what am I saying? For those that enjoy wide angle shooting as a standard, the 9-18 is spectacular and will possibly become your go-to lens, especially during the day when you can keep your aperture as low as possible. For thiose that only dabble in big sky shots, the 7-14 has more of that fabulous bottom range and the images are a touch more vivid, crisper in the center, slightly more satisfying.They both have their place, depending on what your desires are, but ironically I would recommend the 9-18 to the true lover of wide angle, and the 7-14 to the big shot tourist, even though that may seem counterintuitive. 9mm is that sweet spot of 90 degree horizontal view, and really where you want to be before barrel distortion becomes the main theme rather than a feature. So pick your poison and enjoy.

The small size of the 9-18mm is the first striking observation when I unpacked the lens -- it's only slighty larger than the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens and much smaller (in its retracted position, it extends for use with a small slide switch on the lens barrel) than the Panasonic 14-45mm lens. Zooming is smooth and the lens extends as it zooms but not enough to become awkward. Image clarity and color are very good and the field of view range is excellent for wide angle work. The lens is threaded to accept 52mm filters and does not rotate while focusing or zooming -- so a circular polarizer will remain in adjustment.A slight amount of chromatic aberation is apparent in the corners of the image but not in the central area, not objectionable to my eye and easily corrected.The 35mm equivalent 18-36mm field of view is outstanding on a Micro Four Thirds camera -- especially for such a small and lightweight lens.The chief competitor is the Panasonic 7-14mm lens, also rated highly by reviewers and offering the advantages of wider field of view (35mm equivalent 14-28mm) and some auto-correction when used on a Panasonic camera but more expensive, larger and does not accept filters.This lens is not stabilized on a Panasonic camera but is stabilized on Olympus cameras since they have camera-body stabilization -- although a wide angle lens shows little hand vibration.I would give the lens 5 stars but I'm disappointed at this price that it comes without a hood or even a soft case, items that are included on lenses like the Panasonic 14-45mm, 45mm and 45-200mm lenses.Overall, I highly recommend this lens so far based on a few days use.