Couple of ebay sellers offering nice deals on the 4/3 14-54mm lens

Discussion in 'Hot Deals - Find a Great Deal? Share It Here.' started by dougjgreen, Aug 12, 2014.

  1. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    The asking prices of these lenses are well under $150, and they are both willing to accept lower offers. These are the version I of these lenses. Version II will focus on CDAF cameras as well as the E-M1, but that version typically sells for over $300.

    This lens is significantly better and faster than the 14-42 kit lenses for Micro 4/3, and while it's not as good as the 12-40mm, it also can be gotten now for a small fraction of the cost. After a couple rounds of offers and counteroffers, I was able to buy this lens from the first seller for $100 + 8% California sales tax, with free shipping. If you have an E-M1, this is a very interesting lens option - although it will not focus well on any Micro 4/3 cameras OTHER than the E-M1. I should also add, this is a weather-sealed lens, when used with a weather-sealed 4/3 to M 4/3 adapter.


    http://www.ebay.com/itm/181461275248

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/161392110138
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Canada
    David
    Thank you Doug for the tip. I'm also looking for this lens with the same seller as I'm finding situations that I need a zoom of this focal length but faster than my 14-42, but for $100 that's a good price! Now I know how low I can go to get it! Let us know how this lens actually performs on a body other than the E-M1.
     
  3. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    I have no plans on using it on anything other than an E-M1. I would expect that it focuses as badly on other M43 bodies as my 11-22 did, which was basically, that it hunted a lot and often missed focus entirely. OTOH, on my E-M1, the 11-22 focuses just as fast and accurately as it does on my E-520. These lenses really only work with cameras having PDAF.

    BTW, I started at an offer of $90, seller came back with $105, I came back with $98, and seller came back with $100, which I accepted.
     
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Has anyone tried this on the E-M1? The 14-54II focuses less well on the E-M1 than it does on the E-M5 as an example. For this sort of $$ this would be worth getting as a rough service lens (in boats/sand etc) if it works well ish.

    I found this on DPR, I'll have to try the MkII again as this was not what I found the last time on the E-M1:

     
  5. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Canada
    David
    Actually I prefer manual focus over auto for stills, landscapes and portraits unless I shoot sports with my E-P5 and 35-100/40-150 so I should be ok with it. Who knows, the next E-M5 Mark II Olympus is working on may have PDAF sensors and a new better sensor. By then when I eventually upgrade, all is well!

    Thanks again for the tip Doug. I really appreciate it!
     
  6. kenez

    kenez Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Apr 18, 2012
    I have both the Mk I and Mk II versions of this lens. Optically they are identical. On my E-5 the 14-54 Mk I was my go-to lens with extremely fast focus. On my EM-5 both versions of the lens were useable for static objects but slow to AF and not really useable for moving subjects. I was disappointed that when I upgraded to the Mk II verison I couldn't tell much difference between it and the older MK I version on my EM-5. Maybe it's a little faster when using the screen in Live View mode.

    On my EM-1 I couldn't tell any difference between the Mk I and MK II versions as I suppose the camera was primarily using PDAF for AF. Regardless, I was a little disappointed in the AF speed of both lenses on the EM-1, especially in low light, when compared to other 4/3 lenses such as the 50-200mm SWD which focuses very fast on my EM-1. Because of this I decided to buy a 12-40mm to take advantage of the extra 2mm on the wide end and gain faster AF. I am pleased so far, however, I do miss the extra reach of my 14-54mm lenses.

    For the money, you can't beat the 14-54 MK I. Just be aware of it's limitations in the AF department.
     
  7. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry

    Thanks, that mirrors my experience. I have the 50-200 and 150f2 and had a 12-60SWD, they are all pretty quick to focus on the E-M1. The 14-54MkII not so much. I was hoping the PDAF only Mk1 might be better on the E-M1.
     
  8. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Quick question...can you disengage AF, focus manually and still have IBIS work at all focal lengths?
     
  9. kenez

    kenez Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Apr 18, 2012
    As far I as know IBIS is independent of your focus preference (AF versus manual). That's why even the older OM lenses are stabilized on the newer Olympus bodies.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    FYI, my 14-54mm lens arrived today - nice condition for what I paid for it: Focus performance wise, on my E-M1 it's pretty fast, but it just flat out misses focus about 10% of the time when going from distant to close focus, or vice versa. within a reasonably close span, focus is very quick and accurate. Checking out older reviews of this lens, this mirrors what LensTip said about this lens when used on 4/3 DSLRs.

    As for focus on my E-PL5, it was, surprisingly, not as bad as I expected. It's slower than on the E-M1, and it tends to overshoot the focus point and come back to it, but it does this a bit faster than I expected it would. I would not say it's unusable on the E-PL5, except that it's a big lens that is imbalanced on a small camera.

    All in all, a very nice lens and a screaming bargain for the $108 all in that I paid for it.
     
  11. zenmoto

    zenmoto New to Mu-43

    2
    Aug 14, 2014
    Size-wise how does this lens compare to the 12-40? I've been considering moving from a Panasonic GX1 to an OM-D. I've also got a desire for a fast moderate-wide zoom. I've been considering the EM-5 with a 12-40, and I can probably do this lens instead and jump to an EM-1 for about the same price. The slow/missed focus might be enough to push me to stick with the 12-40, though.
     
  12. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    Pretty close: It weighs 53 grams (~ 2 ounces) more, and it's 3mm longer than the Micro 4/3 12-40. But keep in mind that the adapter adds another ~ 1.5 ounces and 19.5 mm to it.
     
  13. kenez

    kenez Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Apr 18, 2012
    If the choice is EM-1 with 14-54mm or EM-5 with 12-40mm I would say without question go for the EM-1 and 14-54mm. I have owned all the various combinations so I am speaking from experience. The EM-1 will also open up all the great 4/3 lenses as possibilities whereas the EM-5 doesn't auto focus great with those lenses. It also has additional shooting features over the EM-5 and the landscape grip is integrated into the body rather than an accessory. The 14-54mm is a great lens with a very useful range. I like my 12-40mm but not enough to go back to the EM-5 from the EM-1.
     
  14. aalstin

    aalstin New to Mu-43

    Greetings from a novice in OZ. I have the EM1, I am not a professional, just a bloke who decided to try a great system and I have to agree with the bloke immediately above me here

    I have so many lenses, 14-150, 75-300(11) digitals,(fantastic and fun starters) then I discovered the MMF3 and all the 4/3 lenses

    14-54 (11), 12-60 swd, 50-200 swd and non swd, 7-14, 35-100,18-180, 11-22. They are all fantastic, my favourite is 50-200 non swd

    Then, I lashed out on the new 12-40 Pro and the 40-150 Pro with MC-14. and still my favourite is the 50-200 non swd with MMF3

    No I don't have too much money, I just don't have a wife and there's no tow bar on the hearse, so can't take it with me

    About a week ago I discovered the V 3.0 firmware update for the EM1. I truly cannot believe the difference in the performance of the 4/3 lenses since the update. Hey 18-180 , well it's cheap as is the 14-54 (11), but they're fun and for a few $s great toys and they take honest easy shots

    Also, with a range of adapters that are available on Ebay, I am also able to use my old (very old) manual focus 35 mm tamron and olympus OM lenses from the 80's. (I had a minolta X700 for the oldies)

    I think I have 15 or 16 lenses at my disposal. They're all fun, I just love to play. There is so much available and all so damn cheap

    I actually think I'll get rid of the 40-150 Pro, I know Robyn Wong reckons it's great but I just reckon the 50 -200 with MMF 3 and EC 14 (as required) can't be beaten

    There you go fellas, My two bobs worth from the great Southern Land

    and in closing. Thanks to this Forum, it truly is the most incredible source of knowledge for M4/3 on the web

    Best wishes to all, have fun, capture that moment, it will be there after you're gone

    AA. www.alstin.com.au (just so you can see what I do)
     
  15. svtquattro

    svtquattro Mu-43 Veteran

    354
    Sep 24, 2012
    Vancouver, Canada
    People, The 14-54 II is NOT slower on the E-M1 vs E-M5. I spent a weekend with my new E-M1 (firmware v1.3 only) and 14-54II and in good light, it focuses similar to my old E-620, which is to say, decent, except the focus points cover a wider range. I can even do C-AF Tracking on slow objects decently. In low light, it's about as slow as the E-M5.

    But the E-M5 with 14-54 II is not satisfactory unless you are shooting static objects. I'm personally impressed with the E-M1 PDAF and 14-54II as I've been waiting a long time to use my favourite lens again.

    That 14-54 I or II is a total keeper. LOVE IT. at $100 I'd buy a second!!!
     
  16. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    My experience is different (v2 and v3 firmware). I would say the 14-54II is too slow with any body for moving subjects. Personally I find it slower than the 12-60, 14-35, 50-200 and 150f2 on the E-M1. The 12-60 and 14-35 are very close to native m43 performance. Part of the "problem" with the 14-54 is the comparison between it and the SWD lenses on the E-M1. The E-M1 takes full advantage of the faster focusing SWD motors. On regular m43 bodies the PDAF only lenses are pretty slow and the 14-54II or any CDAF optimised lens is generally better - but not native performance.

    I really like the 14-54, but there are better choices with the E-M1 IMO.
     
  17. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Hi - why do you prefer the non-SWD over the SWD?
     
  18. aalstin

    aalstin New to Mu-43


    Paul, I probably can't explain it. I believe the glass is the same, the SWD just doesn't feel right to me. The non swd, I just pick it up and use it, it just feels natural to me and the swd is a bit noisier in its operation

    No other real explanation I guess
     
  19. svtquattro

    svtquattro Mu-43 Veteran

    354
    Sep 24, 2012
    Vancouver, Canada
    Wow, then I will not upgrade my firmware!!! I spent the weekend on the ski hill shooting all manner of moving subjects with good success!