Background:
The Zuiko 28/2 has an excellent reputation as one of the sharpest Zuiko's made. I only have one copy, so I don't know if mine is good, bad, or average. I do know that I have an excellent copy of the 16-35, so I decided to compare them.
Note that when I set the Canon 16-35 at 28mm, it actually turned out to be 27mm (according to the EXIF data), so there is a very slight difference in focal length in this test.
Interpretation:
I didn't want to spend a lot of time on this particular test, so I'm just showing two sets of images - corner crops take at f11, and center crops taken at f2.8.
I'm continually impressed with this copy of the Canon 16-35. It does not beat the Zuiko in sharpness or contrast, but it does perform admirably well, especially when stopped down. At f2.8 (wide open for the Canon), the Zuiko pretty well hammers the Cannon.
For those who want the absolute best image quality at 28mm, I think it comes down to two choices - the Zuiko 28/2 or the Leica 28mm. Unfortunately, I have not tested those two against each other yet, so I don't know which is better, but I suspect they are similar in image quality.
The Zuiko 28/2 can be hard to find, but it's not expensive (typically going for under $600), so this may be an excellent option for those who want a serious 28mm prime lens.
Mike
Disclaimer: I will be selling lenses on FM that are mentioned in this report. I make my lens testing available as a way of contributing to the FM community. Unfortunately, some will probably interpret this post as an attempt to manipulate the market in some way. My reputation on FM is important to me, and I would not risk ruining my reputation by posting false test results, or making false claims in this report.
Wow, this is a great test. I have the 2.8/28 distagon, so I wonder how it compares, but this Zuiko looks damn good. I'm taking Guy's advice and I'm currently trying to gather up some wides before I go full-frame.
What's the conventional wisdom on the obvious choice -- the EF Canon 28mm f/2.8? How does the Zuiko or Leica have a discernable edge over the Canon prime?
Another great test Mike. I have the Olympus 28/2 and have not even had a chance to test it yet. Hope it works as well as yours!
FWIW, I have heard this is the sharpest lens Olympus made. (Hard to believe as I've seen some incredible images from Zuiko macro lenses, but it sure looks good here...)
Steve_T90 wrote:
What's the conventional wisdom on the obvious choice -- the EF Canon 28mm f/2.8? How does the Zuiko or Leica have a discernable edge over the Canon prime?
The EF 28/2.8 was the main lens of my (three year) D30 era. When cropped, it produces a great image, even when wide open. There are just five elements (one aspherical), so contrast is high and field flatness is well-addressed. There's no chromatic aberration to speak of. On FF, the EF28/2.8 is not so hot because the image decays visibly at the far edge, and falls apart completely into the corner. However, the lens is small in size and cheap in price, so I highly recommend it. Just don't compare it to a Leica Elmarit-R 28 at $2500!
Thank you, very interesting post. Please forgive my ignorance but can Olympus/Zuiko lenses be used on Canon EOS cameras directly or is some kind of adapter required?
You need an OM-to-EOS adapter to use an Olympus Zuiko lens on a Canon EOS body. They are available on ebay or through CameraQuest, and range in price from $80 - $175. I recommend the CameraQuest adapters ($175).
The Zuiko aperture ring is at the objective/filter side of the lens focus ring, on the Zeiss lenses it is on the camera body side of the lens focus ring, so on teh Zeiss lenses it can be harder to get your fingers in to adjust the aperture without knocking the focus off.
I've been comparing the Zuiko 28/2 against the Zeiss 28/2 and Leica 28/2.8 R. The results are very interesting so far. The Zuiko seems to be sharper than the Zeiss at f/2 and f/2.8.
