1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

14-42 Mark II. Worth upgrading from Mark I?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by jpmccormac, Aug 7, 2011.

  1. jpmccormac

    jpmccormac Mu-43 Rookie

    Jun 18, 2010
    Central Florida
    I've read that the 14-42 MSC Mark II lens is considerably better at AF, etc. Has anyone upgraded to the new lens on an E-PL1? I'm pretty happy with the Mark I lens except for its slow focusing. Thanks.
  2. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Unless you really want the conversion lenses, you're fine with what you have IMHO...
  3. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    It depends how bugged you are by the slow focusing. I used the 14-42 II briefly on my E-PL1 and it seemed a lot faster, but I don' t know that I would go out of my way to upgrade.
  4. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    If you are planning on upgrading your body to a new generation (E-P3, E-PL3, E-PM1) body, then be aware that all internal-focusing MSC lenses like the Mark II kit zoom can be upgraded via firmware update to match the super-fast focus speed of the new R lenses with the new dual-processor for AF.

    So while the focus speed may be a minor upgrade now for your E-PL1, it'll allow for a much greater performance down the road when you upgrade your body.
  5. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 5, 2011
    This is exactly why I'm not planning on buying a MkII for my EPL1.

    I will just get a MkII or (future) MkIII as part of a kit.

    My advice would be for you to invest the money on a different lens instead of buying one that is only marginally better than the one you already have. Besides, the MkI can take some pretty decent macros that the MkII can't, and it is a tiny bit smaller too.

    Look at the pancakes and primes for the focal lengths you like and just get one of those instead. The 14mm Panasonic focuses extremely quickly, and so will the 45mm Olympus.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. jpmccormac

    jpmccormac Mu-43 Rookie

    Jun 18, 2010
    Central Florida
    Good Points

    Good points. I'm also toying with getting the 14-150mm for an all-around travel lens. You point about macro ability was not something I'd considered. Is there that much difference? I don't see it in the specs.

    I have the 17mm f/2.8 and like it very much.

  7. ssgreenley

    ssgreenley Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 12, 2011
    If you're already thinking like that I'd say go ahead and get the 14-150. I have the Mk II and constantly find myself looking for an excuse to buy the 14-150...
    • Like Like x 1
  8. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 5, 2011
    Here is a list of standard lenses: Four Thirds | Micro Four Thirds | Products(Lenses)

    The MkI is .24x magnification, the MkII is .19x.

    The 14-150 is .24x as well.

    Thing is, no other lens other than the dedicated macro does better than 0.24. The Mk.II with macro adapter goes up to .28x, and the 14-150 with adapter will give you .47x, so that might be something to consider.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    I see there is a new firmware 1.1 for M.ZUIKO 14-150mm. The description says it improves AF speed with E-P3. Does it mean I shouldn't upgrade it for use with E-PL2?

  10. Orientator

    Orientator Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 7, 2010
    I've got both lenses, the MK I and II on E-PL1 and E-PL2. From my point of view the advantages are obvious:
    - much faster in focusing (I was surprised about the difference, even on E-PL1!)
    - slightly sharper wide open
    - a bit smaller
    - non-rotating front element
    - significantly better build quality concerning whobbling extend and zoom smothness.

    The one drawback is the focusing distance of the MK II. It depends on the focal length. With 42 mm you cannot focus as close as with 14mm (I would say about 5-10 cm difference) so thats why the max magnification is different.

    Let's come to your question if an update is reasonable. It highly depends on the price from my point of view. I didn't absolutely like the usage of the MK I but now I like the usage of the MK II. But are the photos really better? I wouldn't say significantly.

    Finally I'd say: for 50 € difference after selling the old lens, the update is a good choice for some nice comfort. For 200 € I'd prefer to save the money for a future bright standard zoom. I guess this means in practice that you should update if you can buy the MK II with a kit but don't if you need to pay it separately.

    • Like Like x 1
  11. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 5, 2011
    No, update it anyway.

    Also, sometimes they fix other bugs that they don't list.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.