GX1 with PZ 14-42 or GX1 with 14 mm + old kit zoom

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Sawfish, Jan 15, 2012.

  1. Sawfish

    Sawfish Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 11, 2011
    I am about to acquire a Panasonic GX1 kit and the 20 mm prime. The camera is an upgrade from P&S and is going to be used with a collection of legacy lenses for macro and telephoto. The shots will mostly be nature, landscape and family.
    I have the possibility to get the camera with the 14-42 zoom + the 14 mm prime at the same price as the kit with the powerzoom. I like the powerzoom because of the compact design, which makes it ideal for both travel and small trips, but I wonder how much I miss if I don’t get the 14 mm prime. My family is also going to use the camera, and I doubt they will benefit from any of the primes.
    I have read WoodWorks review of the PZ 14-42 and he did not rate the 14 mm prime any better than the PZ zoom. He actually recommends the powerzoom in combination with the 20 mm prime.
    Which options would you guys and girls those?

    P. Nielsen
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I'd get the PZ 14-42 with the 20 1.7. That would be my pick.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. wattseee

    wattseee Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 14, 2011
    I'd be going fo thew PZ too. not too much need for the 14mm prime if you've already got 20mm prime and the 14mm end of the PZ.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. st3v4nt

    st3v4nt Mu-43 Veteran

    May 26, 2011
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Since I just acquire the new 14mm lens to completing my 20 and 45 I say go for 14 mm...I love it's capability for close focus...and I love prime pancake lens

    but if you say you need lens for nature and landscape outside at daylight the 14-42 will be sufficient regardless the PZ or regular version, unless you need it for night and family portrait indoor, then 14 prime may be more fit.

    By The Way even the largest and heaviest m4/3 lens IMHO will not bother you for travel and small trips if you compare it with DSLR lens.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. carpandean

    carpandean Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 29, 2010
    Western NY
    I'd get the PZ. I have the 14mm, 20mm, 14-42mm (normal; will sell), and 14-45mm, but I am still actively looking for the PZ. The 20mm lives on my camera, but it would be nice to have a similar size package with zoom capability when I'm just bringing it along for travel, parties, etc., where there will be many different types of shots that I want to take. Until Panasonic makes a version of the Pentax 40mm f/2.8, there's nothing that can give you short telephoto in such a small package (Oly 45mm f/1.8 is small, but the shape is not as conducive to pocketing as a pancake.) Even then, that's two (or three) lenses to bring along, instead of just the one.

    As a point-and-shoot upgrader, the power-zoom should be more familiar to you than to a DSLR user stepping down.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. 13Promet

    13Promet Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 11, 2011
    I've tried both 14-42 lenses on a GF2 first, then on a GX1, even if for a very short time on a trip to Thailand.

    I haven't run accurate tests between the two, but after some weeks shooting them, I can't see any visible difference in quality.
    Moreover, all of the reviews/preiews I've read about the subject don't state any clear winner as for IQ.

    So, as usual, it comes down to how their features fulfill your needs:

    Classic: cheaper, better ergonomics for zooming and focusing, doesn't suck battery power to zoom.
    PZ: a miracle of compactness.

    Since for me the main point in m4/3 is portability, I've sold the classic lens and kept the X one :smile:

    Also, I confirm that while having the 14-42 on I actually never swapped to the 14/2.5, while it happened frequently to the 20/1.7.
    But maybe I'm just too lazy at changing lenses :biggrin:
    Anyway, I think that my final native lenses setup will be PZ 14-42 and 20/1.7.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. cz9h3d

    cz9h3d Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 18, 2012
    SE Michigan
    Real Name:
    You all have convinced me.... I'm going to replace my 14mm and 14-42 with the PZ 14-42. I find I use the 14mm 90% of the time due to its size, but it would be nice to have the zoom in the same form factor. I thought about keeping the 14mm, but its sale is what will help offset the 14-42PZ.

    Am I correct to assume the OIS of the 14-42PZ help offset the change from F2.5 to F3.5?

    As a total newbie, I'll want a telephoto lens in the future to better capture my kids at activities (when I'm in the audience). There doesn't seem to be much size difference between the PZ 45-175 and the 45-200mm (90mm vs. 100mm in length - allthough the PZ zoom is all internal). What is my big advantage to paying more for the PZ, other than a powerzoom for video (which I'm not sure I care about)?
    • Like Like x 1
  8. 13Promet

    13Promet Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 11, 2011
    As for camera shaking, approximately yes.
    As for moving subject or DoF control, OIS doesn't help at all.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. PickleB

    PickleB Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 15, 2012
    UK - J6 on the M25
    Have you tried using the lenses? I've just got my 45-175 PZ and like it a lot, but I don't think I'll be using the power zoom function as I'm so used to a zoom ring on my DSLRs. You can probably get used to a W/T switch on the lens, but it doesn't float my boat. And the 14-42 PZ doesn't have a zoom ring.

    Then, do you want the f2.5 the 14mm offers? I think I do, so I'm currently looking for one.

    As for there being little difference between the 14mm and your 20mm, I think about it in terms of their 35mm equivalents. I'm pretty sure I can use wide aperture lenses at both 28mm and 40mm equivalent. In fact I own a 28mm f2.8 and a 59mm f1.4 for my DSLRs and I use them both.

    Overall, if you can cope with the form factor of the original 14-42, that's the one I'd go with ... but then I haven't tried the new 14-42 PZ. So that's why I'd suggest you try them both in a shop.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    The advantages of the 14/2.5 are the slightly smaller size, and the extra stop of speed. The speed isn't as big an advantage as it seems because the 14/2.5 lacks stabilization, so for stationary subjects, the X will actually be better in low light.

    I'd go for the PZ kit. Less lens changes, more portability.

    • Like Like x 1
  11. Sawfish

    Sawfish Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 11, 2011
    Thank you all, for your kind advise. I took some time to get the dough for the camera, and in the meantime I got concerned over the issues with the PZ lens. And as the GX1 with the old 14-42 was offered at a reputed dealer at a fair price, I bought this kit along with the 20mm prime. Now I just have to wait for the parcel to be delivered :dance2:

    P. Nielsen
  12. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Beware of some 14-42X issues

    Be aware there are some issues with the new 14-42X lens, I got mine with the GX1 (upgrade from GF1) and regret it as I am having issues with sharpness even though shutter speed always exceeds focal length used - these issues are well documented and mine will now be going back.

    I still have my original 14-45 metal mount lens that easily outperforms the 14-42X in terms of IQ so will keep that!

    The GX1 is superb and a very worthy upgrade from the GF1 and I find the combo with GX1+20mm superb for good quality images.



  13. scotttnz

    scotttnz Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 16, 2012
    I bought the PZ with my GX1 to use as my general purpose, small enough to take anywhere lens. So far I am very happy with it, especially at the wide end. I have thought about getting the 14mm prime because it is cheap, but I really don't think I would use it.
    I got the 20mm for when I need the extra speed or reduced DOF, and will get a telezoom, and probably the 45 1.8. If someone makes a ultrawide (prime or zoom) for a more reasonable price I'll get one of those too.