OK guys, here are the results of the comparison test between the Leica D Vario-Elmarit 14-50mm and the Zukio Digital 14-54mm which was kindly loaned to me by chancy for this purpose.

The 2 lenses were compared at focal lengths of 14mm, 35mm and 50mm and at apertures of 2.8 (for 14mm), 3.5 (for 35mm & 50mm), 8 and 16. All were shot in RAW by L1 which was mounted on a tripod, using timer mode and converted using SilkyPix all with the same parameter settings.

The first set comprised of 100% crops from the centre of the target as shown.


#1 Focal Length 14mm


#2 Focal Length 35mm


#3 Focal Length 50mm

The second set comprised of 100% crops near the edge of the target as shown.



#4 Focal Length 14mm


#5 Focal Length 35mm


#6 Focal Length 50mm


OK, let the fireworks begin !

pixel sharpness of panasonic seems to be better than olympus.

Hello Tomcat,

I wonder if your observations concur.

Taking into consideration that the Venue imaging engine is at work here, it does appear that up to F8 across all focal lengths, the Leica maintains better colour contrast and edge resolution. Tonal rendition is consistent on the ZD but the Leica seems to hold snappier tones at the largest aperture.

For optical performance at the lenses edges, it seems that the Leica is ahead at 14mm but the ZD catches up trailing slightly behind at 50mm.

From the current samples, the Leica appears to be consistently superior to the ZD. When prices of the Leica lens which will soon be sold separately from the L1 becomes available, we can have a better idea of the true value of this lens over the well regarded ZD.

Cheers,

Hi chancy,
I don't think the Venus Engine III has much influence here as I had shot in RAW all the way. Like Olympus' TruePic TURBO, the Venus Engine III only come into play during in-camera image processing when shooting in jpeg. That is why Olympus RAW images when converted to jpeg using other third-party RAW converters do not show the same Oly colours as out-of-camera jpegs and jpegs created by Olympus Studio.

The Leica did seem to come out slightly better than the ZD from these test shots but it may not be that significant in real life usage.

Hello Tomcat,

Thanks for clearing the muddled facts in my head, you're correct to point out that the imaging processing engine has no role in the affecting the lens evaluation. Venus & TruePic are hardware image processing engines that characterizes the Panasonic and Olympus look respectively, esp. out of camera JPGs.

As for JPGs processed from SW based RAW converters. I am inclined to believe that by defining how much information they capture in RAW & Olympus' intimate knowledge of this format during RAW conversion, they are (as would most camera manufacturers) draw on these advantages to extract out the extra bits of quality & help define the 'look' that generic RAW converters overlook, although it's just as much about programmer ability as well :-)

I also think that even if both E330 & the L1 share the same sensor, they may be written to different RAW formats exploiting the LiveMOS sensor in their own ways. Hence, this may account for slight differences in resuults as well. But this point is not in context of the tests conducted but rather a comparison between SP & Studio.

I think what the word that pops in mind from the tests of the samples is consistency, that is consistency in colour contrast across F-stops & focal lengths.

Thanks for your clarifications.

Hi chancy,

To my eyes, another observation from these test shots seemed to be that there is greater propensity for the Leica to exhibit CA than the ZD. Do you also feel that way?

Panasonic has claimed that the Venus Engine III will correct for CA in the out-of-camera jpegs. Maybe this is another test that has to be done to verify their claim.

Hello Tomcat,

tomcat wrote (View Post): › Hi chancy, To my eyes, another observation from these test shots seemed to be that there is greater propensity for the Leica to exhibit CA than the ZD. Do you also feel that way? Panasonic has claimed that the Venus Engine III will correct for CA in the out-of-camera jpegs. Maybe this is another test that has to be done to verify their claim.

Your observation is true, indeed, CA is noticeably present on the Leica especially the edge samples and at larger apertures. And since the test environment is not one that induces a lens to produce CA, it may be likely that the lens is CA prone when lighting turns adverse in real world shooting. Thanks for pointing me to this phenomenon.

It would be nice to verify the claim on the Venus Engine. But I think you have a battery more of tests to conduct which I'm sure the Olympus internet community by now is appreciative of.

Your contribution has again been very insightful & useful, and may I with your permission transfer this post to Mytikas Knowledge Base.

Cheers,

Not really sure whether there would be more CA during normal usage or not as I haven't seen any in my normal shots so far. I think I will be bringing this camera and lens on my holiday trip this weekend and put it to the test.

And of course you can move it to the Knowledge Base.

Hello Tomcat,

Well, the L1 is indeed is "freshly baked" and nothing like a wift of fresh air in the fields to surface its character :-)

Enjoy your trip, and let photography comes before tests :-)

[11 Oct 2006] Yet another in a series of fine posts on Panasonic 4/3 Lens test by Tomcat moved to Mytikas Knowledge Base.