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!

Disappointed with the 14 or impressed with the 12-50?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by dakarp, Aug 31, 2012.

  1. dakarp

    dakarp New to Mu-43

    May 22, 2012
    I picked up one of the de-kitted Panasonic 14/2.5 primes that are reasonably prices on eBay. It is surprisingly small--I didn't expect it to be even smaller than the 20. However, I can't decide whether I'm unimpressed with the image quality, or super-impressed with the quality of my Olympus 12-50 kit lens (on my EM-5).

    At the same aperture, the image quality seemed quite similar to my eye, save for more chromatic aberration in the prime, and MAYBE slightly sharper corners in the prime, but nothing I'd really notice. (Take that with a grain of salt--this is my first non-point-and-click camera. I've learned enough to shoot in manual, but I'm still a complete beginner.)

    Of course, the 14/2.5 is capable of a much wider aperture than the kit, but I don't know how useful that will be on such a wide lens. Maybe it will be helpful shooting indoors without a flash? I doubt I'll have much call to try to get a shallow depth of field on such a relatively wide lens.

    So, is it just the case that the kit is quite good? I'm trying to figure out if there are enough use cases that I should keep the 14, or if I'd be better off just using the kit when I want that FoV. I DO like the fact that it is so small, and that may be enough (especially considering the price).
  2. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Nov 7, 2010
    I have had the same thought dakarp. My 14/2.5 doesn't figure to get much use, but given the low resale value and the convenience of having such a small lens it is hard not to keep.
  3. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    I love the size and the ability to use it indoors without a flash. It's an awesome walk around lens. I rarely use a zoom, other than the 100-300, and that I tend to use more at 100 than anything else. I like the discipline of zooming with my feet whenever I can. :biggrin:
  4. The P14 hasn't impressed me to the same extent that the P20, PL25, and O45 have, but it's tiny and it's cheap. It fits neatly inside the lens hood of my O45 as a wide-angle option when I'm carrying only prime lenses.
  5. dakarp

    dakarp New to Mu-43

    May 22, 2012
    Hmm... indoors, wide, without a flash--maybe it is worth keeping as a "walking around museums" lens?
  6. zucchiniboy

    zucchiniboy Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 13, 2010
    San Francisco
    I think the 14 is one of the most underrated m43 lenses. It's actually one of my most used lenses. As sharp to my eye as the 20, and at least twice as fast to focus. Not only that, it ways TWO ounces. Two! I can throw it in a bag, a pocket, wherever.
  7. greenarcher02

    greenarcher02 Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2012
    Manila, Philippines
    I use it on cramped spaces where my Oly45mm is having a hard time fitting subjects into a frame.
  8. strang

    strang Mu-43 Veteran

    May 7, 2012
    I use the PL25 for this. Because I want that 50mm view for still life.

    I use it all the time for its auto focus speed and lock accuracy. But it's not just speed, but accuracy. The 14 is great in any light as long as the subject has contrast. It's really important to get an AF lock without much fussing around. The 20 fails on me for the brief period of trying it, and I bought it for low light shooting too so I thought that it kind of defeated my purpose for it.
  9. mister_roboto

    mister_roboto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 14, 2011
    Seattle, WA, USA
    I went from the Oly 17 to the Pana 14, and while the focal length was totally different- the resolution on the 14 blew the 17 out of the water.

    The 14mm is probably the best price to quality deal out there in µ4/3.

    I would love a Mk2 17 mm though :smile:
  10. sLorenzi

    sLorenzi Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 15, 2010
    The 14mm IMO, is sharper than my 14-45mm at f4.0. Wide open it's less sharp but still very good to me. I can say that at f2.5 it is as sharp as the 14-45mm at f3.5.
  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.