Review on Olympus E 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 Zuiko Lens: Versatile Wide-Angle Option for Olympus DSLR Cameras by Tom Reid

Pros: Very small, very light, easily fits in pocket Super wide angle is very useful Built-in image stabilization Much better design than my other standard Olympus class lenses Wide filter ring prevents vignetting (use only one filter) Pictures in good quality except: Cons: barrel distortion at wide end (correctable in Photoshop) Last few pixels not as 'clear' as in center It takes practice to keep horizon level and not create weird perspective Design not so good as Olympus"Pro lenses There are wider lenses for other brands (which weigh twice as much. Hehehe.) There are better ultra wide angle zoom lenses (in the $1500 range. hahaha!) My reference materials are: E-410 , 9-18mm, 25mm pancake, 35mm macro, 40-150mm (small), 14-54mm, 70-300mm (14-42m lenses) m and 18-180mm sold ) I bought an Olympus system to get excellent image quality with a small size and low price if it weren't for the rumors about this lens. When it was announced it seemed better than I had hoped! I bought it in advance for a trip to China (I usually wait for the price to drop) which is good because I've used 9-18mm about 70% of the time! I also took a 14-54mm and a 40-150mm kit lens so I ended up with a small, high quality and versatile kit that I always carried in my pockets and around my arm/neck. The 9-18 is perfect for on the go and fits in your pocket. or you can wear it with a camera all day and not get tired. More importantly, at tourist attractions you can get very close to your subject (if the perspective doesn't bother you) so you're in other people's photos, not them in yours! In addition, there are a surprising number of objects that can be photographed fully or unobstructed with just an ultra wide-angle lens. Great for "spying" shots of people who think you're pointing the camera at something else. Plus, you can slow your shutter speed down to 1/20s and still get sharp shots, which is a huge benefit for cameras without an image stabilizer. Imagine what it would be like on a camera with IS! Image quality is good but there is noticeable barrel distortion closer to 9mm. Otherwise I would say the IQ is between 14-54 and 40-150 but closer to 14-54. Glare wasn't a huge issue for me, but it was more than it was on my 14-54 (and I love getting the sun in the picture). Keeping the lens clean helps a lot with flare. The contrast (which I like) is much better than the 40-150 but not as good as the 14-54mm. There are chromatic aberrations, and they're slightly worse at the edges, but not critical. I focus less on sharpening because all Olympus lenses are sharp and I rarely see the full angles of my shots, but the sharpness from f/4 to f/10 is about the same as a 14-54mm. The 14-54 appears to have less angular deviation from f/2.8 to f/8 than this lens does from f/4 to f/8, but that's a very minor consideration. Other thoughts: Build quality is better than my other Olympus standard. Lens quality, including surface texturing and less plastic noise when you reach the limits of the zoom range. The stroke on the scale is very short and has a long range. Now I think my 14-54mm is too big and I have a 25mm pancake to fill the gap between 9-18mm and 40-150mm. With a 9-18mm, 40-150mm and one of <Olympus 14-54mm, Sigma f/2.8 18-50mm, Pancake Olympus 25mm or Sigma 30mm> you have with the E-420, E-520 a small but unusual setup or E-620. Alternatively, use 9-18mm, 35mm macro and 70-300mm for landscape/macro/wildlife. You'll see many tourists passing by with a Nikon D300 or Canon 50D and a large lens that, despite the smaller zoom and aperture, weighs more than your camera and three lenses combined. You'll be surprised how they fool themselves into thinking they're taking better pictures (of the same thing)! Update: I returned to China for an extended stay and have used the 14-18mm range quite a bit to photograph people in the city. I'm glad the image quality is good throughout the zoom range. I've found this lens to be the anchor of my small lens collection now. Things that strike me even more after a few months are that the 9-18 has more contrast than the 40-150mm and the build quality is much better than the 40-150mm or other standard class lenses (other than the Pancake 25 mm?). . My 40-150 has quite a few notches. 9-18 has only 3 hairline scratches which are difficult to see even on close inspection. Update #2: In a year and a half this lens will be widely available and I'm getting better at it over time. I've never had a complaint about the final image quality of images taken with this lens. The only complaint I've ever had is barrel distortion because I hate correcting it in Photoshop. The contrast is still not 14-54, but that doesn't seem to matter. It still holds up great with no signs of abuse, although I've abused it (in various forms) on occasion.