Not with Instagram's boxy narrow frames, you won't.

With apologies to Al Pacino, "Say hello to my new little friend!" This new(ish) lens of mine was born to be wide. The likes of Instagram and its narrow aspect has no place for a lens like this, which is just fine by me. It's the Olympus 7-14mm (effectively 14-28mm) f/2.8 Pro lens. It's not new but new to me; I found a second hand bargain.

I have Olympus Pro lenses for standard length (12-40 (or 24-80 equivalent) f/2.8) and long length (40-150 (80-300) f/2.8). My beloved 8mm (16mm) f/1.8 fisheye is a Pro lens, as are a couple of primes that I have like my 25mm (50) f/1.2. However my standard wide angle is the distinctly un-Pro, bog standard 9-18mm (18-36) f/4 to f/5.6. I explained my reasoning for this way back in a 2016 PAD shot titled 160115_182527_1150039 The Compromise Candidate (Fri 15 Jan). That was almost 7 years ago now.

In a nutshell, I don't shoot wide very often. At the time the 7-14 Pro lens cost "over a grand" according to my description on that photo. It's closer to 2 grand today. That's a lot to spend on an occasional use lens.

It's not exceptionally light for a wide angle lens either, at 534 grams. My 12-40 f/2.8 workhorse in comparison is a mere 382 grams. That's a lot of weight to lug around Europe for occasional use if there is another alternative. The 9-18 won't give the same image quality (IQ), but it's not a bad lens and weighs only 155 grams.

So what has changed? Someone was asking me about second hand lenses a week or so back and in the course of my research... I found that a second hand 7-14 Pro had newly arrived at one of my usual places. That place is a pain in the backside to deal with but their second hand gear is generally of high quality, and with a price many hundreds of dollars less than new... it was too tempting to resist.

What does that mean for the Compromise Candidate? Probably not much. That's especially true now that I have my IQ-rich fisheye which, if you know how to use it, can serve quite well as a standard wide lens. Also, it's only 315 grams. When/if I ever make it back to Europa, I doubt that the 7-14's weight would justify a place in the camera bag. The featherweight 9-18 will probably still go alongside the fisheye.

Domestically it will be a different issue. If I'm not going to be lugging gear long distances, and I'm going indoors or to the expansive outdoors, I'd like to have the 7-14 with me.

But first, a few tests to make sure that all is well... and of course to satisfy my curiosity. I left home late this morning so I had to squeeze in a few quick sunrise shots before calcio practice. ("Soccer", if one insists on being a barbarian.)

So here we are; sunrise at Corrimal Beach with Towradgi Creek flowing through it, and a few seagulls bathing alongside. It may not be the greatest shot I'll ever get from this lens, but I can taste some potential there.