Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko ED Lens

I am thinking about getting one of these lenses to replace the 14-42 f/3-5-5.6 lens that came with my camera (Oly E-410). I like the f2.8-3.5 on this lens as it will be a little faster than the f/3.5-5.6. Anyone here have any experience with this lens, the f2.8-3.5, and or any comments? Thanks.

Bob

The Zuiko 14-54mm is a quality lens and the one I use the most for "I don't know what I'm going to see" dives. It gives you moderate WA (28mm equivalent) and acceptable semi-macro. You can click on my links to see examples.

The Zuiko 14-54mm is a quality lens and the one I use the most for "I don't know what I'm going to see" dives. It gives you moderate WA (28mm equivalent) and acceptable semi-macro. You can click on my links to see examples.

Thanks for your reply and link to your photos. They look really good. I especially like your North Carolina u/w photos with the Olympus and Discovery dive shops. I mainly dive with Discovery and have been on all the wrecks you were. In fact, had a good day out yesterday on the U-352 and the Schurz. As I haven't gotten into macro potog. yet, this lens will probably do just fine for me. If you're ever out this way in the future, let me know.

Bob

Ditto. I originally bought my E330 with the single-lens kit including the 14-42 (which I believe would be the older style than what you have), got a 14-54 used, and marvelled at both how much sharper it seemed wide-open, as well as how much faster the AF was. That might not be quite as true with the newer 14-42 and newer Oly DSLRs, but on the 410 you should still see a noticable speed increase.

I don't know that you'll really "use" the larger apertures underwater much - but the lens quality and AF speed will both be very nice. And the vig on the 14-54 rev 1 (no need for the "II" version with the 410) should be pretty reasonable - $300ish. This lens is also environmentally sealed which again *shouldn't* mean anything UW (a flood with saltwater is still gonna eat it up) but is a little more protection for salt-air conditions (topside shots, etc.).

Of course the 12-60 gets great reviews too, but the cost is much much higher, and again, with the 410 you're not going to see some of the extra AF speed advantages any more than you would on the rev 2 14-54.

Ditto on that. It can do sort of macro to sort of wide angle. Very sharp. I really liked shooting it with an E520.

Jack

Wife uses 14/54 almost exclusively. The 14/42 is a poor lens.