14-42 Kit lense over 14mm Prime

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Jaffa1975, Jun 2, 2012.

  1. Jaffa1975

    Jaffa1975 Mu-43 Regular

    May 26, 2012
    Hi guy's this is a vey low level question based on the threads I am reading hear, however....

    I have my camera (GF3) and its kit lense 14-42, would I see an improvement at the 14 end of the scale with say a 14mm prime lense like the panny 14mm F2.5, or are the images going to be comparable?

    I'm intrested mainly in architectural and landscape stuff

    Thanks in advance
  2. yamark

    yamark Mu-43 Regular

    May 23, 2012
    I had the same exact question a couple of weeks ago. I went ahead and bought the 14mm and it hasn't been taken off my camera since. I don't think much is to gain in image quality. Maybe a touch. What you do gain is a faster lens in all aspects. It's dead quiet too and seems to be great for video. It's great for architecture.

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/10191821@N02/7319884058/" title="P5317162 by photoKY, on Flickr">[​IMG]"281" height="500" alt="P5317162"></a>
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Jaffa1975

    Jaffa1975 Mu-43 Regular

    May 26, 2012
    Thanks for the quick response, now I just need to justify it to my wife :-D
  4. Neon

    Neon Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 12, 2012
    North Wales,UK.
    Just got one from Ebay £120 inc post,brand new.
    Well worth it in my view.
  5. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Real Name:
    I have the 14 as well as 14-45, Oly 14-42II, and several other lenses which include 14mm FOV.

    The 14 is a nice little lens, for sure, but I find the utility of the 14-4x kit zooms much better overall and the IQ is comparable. The 14 can come in handy for two reasons... You need the extra speed in low light situations and/or you need the smaller form factor to fit inside a small space. Otherwise, I think the money spent on a 14 would be better put toward the 9-18 or 7-14, which would be considerably better for architectural and landscape images.

    There are times and places where the 14 is well suited, but overall, I much prefer the 14-45 and 14-42II. My 14 hasn't been mounted in over six months of full time travel photography, whereas the 7-14, 9-18, 14-45, 20, 25, and 14-140 have seen heavy use daily. I like having it available, but I rarely use it. Same goes for my 12/2. Between the two, I'd take the 12/2 anyway as I prefer the angle of view and the IQ is magnificent. If you're really into street photography, especially at night,the 14 would be useful, but personally, I'd save the extra money and just go straight to the 12/2.

    Lastly, if you don't have the 20 yet.... THAT would be my next lens if I were you.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. ckrueger

    ckrueger Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2011
    The 14 isn't going to be an increase in image quality so much as it is a MUCH smaller lens. I use my GF3 with my 20/1.7 and it's a nice camera to stick in a jacket pocket.

    If you're a fan of landscape you might cast an eye towards the 9-18. It's a lot more expensive, but if you like wide angle it's an excellent lens that will get you MUCH wider than 14mm but still zoom in far enough that you won't be swapping the lens off the camera constantly.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. yamark

    yamark Mu-43 Regular

    May 23, 2012
    Here's a little test I did comparing the 14mm vs 14-42 in a light controlled situation. Not sure how practical this is. You will not notice any IQ difference. What you will notice is the bokeh on the 14mm is more prominent due to the faster f. All 4 pictures taken in RAW and processed using my own E-PM1 preset in exactly the same manner.

    14mm prime
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/10191821@N02/7321042410/" title="14mm prime by photoKY, on Flickr">[​IMG]"500" height="333" alt="14mm prime"></a>
    14mm zoom at 14mm
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/10191821@N02/7321038536/" title="14 to 42 at 14mm by photoKY, on Flickr">[​IMG]"500" height="333" alt="14 to 42 at 14mm"></a>

    14mm zoom at 25mm
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/10191821@N02/7321030112/" title="14-42 at 25mm by photoKY, on Flickr">[​IMG]"500" height="333" alt="14-42 at 25mm"></a>

    14mm zoom at 42mm
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/10191821@N02/7321034698/" title="14-42 at 42mm by photoKY, on Flickr">[​IMG]"500" height="333" alt="14-42 at 42mm"></a>
    • Like Like x 5
  8. 6x6

    6x6 Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 12, 2011
    I just bought a used 14mm and eagerly await it.
    This Pany lens is vastly overpriced IMO and it took ages to get one at an acceptable price. So now I have 28mm in a very small package and thats what made it so desirable for me.
    Only the Oly 45 is missing from my afordable-three-lens-dream-team: 14/20/45mm!
  9. sym5

    sym5 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 21, 2012
    I just posted about my test of the 7-14, 14 pancake, and 14-42 kit: https://www.mu-43.com/f38/14-vs-14-vs-14-a-27231/ . In my experience, the pancake is a bit sharper and a whole lot more compact. It's basically my default lens because it's so small and easy to tote around. The kit lens is surprisingly good if you stop it down. It's a very practical lens if you have enough light.
  10. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    It's sharp, and it's tiny. If you're keeping your camera in a bag most of the time, it's a nice attribute but not an essential one, but if (like me) you're pocketing it (cargo pants, jacket) more than bagging it, size wins out hugely.
  11. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Real Name:
    I sold my 14-45 to get the 14 f2.5, (luckily I own two other primes - PL25 and the Oly 45) the compact form is great but the thing that sealed the deal was the extra stop and that it focuses closer than the kits.
  12. Brianetta

    Brianetta Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 5, 2010
    North East England
    Real Name:
    Brian Ronald
    The 14mm prime is sharper at the edges of the frame than the 14-42 zoom, and it achieves focus much more quickly. It's also vanishingly small.