Give us your impressions . 3/9/10 update: Please add your impressions to our new Olympus zoom lens reviews section!
The Zuiko 14-42 I think the Zuiko 14-42 'kit lens' is a winner. Why is it popular sport on many of the photo sites to bash the kit lenses from almost every manufacturer? Sure, the kit lense will not satisfy the pro but if it satisfies the amatuer/enthusiast (as in good quality and doesn't cost an arm and a leg) why always denegrate it? I take pictures for me. If someone would like to start a fund that I might tap into for future pro-lens acquistions, I won't complain. Until then, kit lenses are OK and the 14-42 is at the high end of 'kit' as far as I'm concerned.
The Zuiko 14-42 'Kit Lens' Here's a shot I took of a pencil on a bench at the beach. Can you read what's on the pencil?
its not a bad lens but the panny kit zoom is a little better and more robustly built , i sometimes use a half pound wide oly a -28 adapter on the front of the panny kit zoom and it works splendidly and give a nice wide and corner sharp contrasty image, unfortunately if you tried something like that with the oly kit zoom , you would get a lens error message, i guess the special construction to allow the lens to collapse weakens the construction somewhat , when i had the oly zoom i took some outstandingly sharp pictures with it , optically it is no slouch , but i traded it away for a 17 2.8 and finder which is my only af m4\3 prime to date
I like it very much. I don´t have the panasonic lens to compare but i like the collapsable design and the small size a lot. beside it´s small size and low weight it produces very sharp and contrasty images.
I haven't used this lens much. Ever since I got the camera, I have used adapted lenses instead of the kit lens.
I agree with those that say that for a "kit" lens it is at the higher end as far as IQ is concerned. I also wish it were faster, but then it would probably have been a bit larger/heavier/expensive and not viable as a "kit" lens. I don't feel it is "wobbly" - obviously there is going to be some play in the lens because of it's ability to retract - a feature I really like because it keeps the size small when not in use. And I am sure that when Olympus' engineers made the decision to make it retractable, they realized that some IQ would be sacrificed. Is it the greatest lens - nope. But until Olympus releases their "high end" m4/3 camera I don't think we will see any of their HG lenses (like the 14-54 or 12-60) released in m4/3 format. (Though I DROOL over the idea of a lens with the quality of either of those two - even assuming there will be an increase in size/weight/cost.) Steve
Overall.....excellent! Contary to tests like on DPR, I found the Oly kit lens as good as my Panny 14-45 even in the corners after extensive testing. Makes you wonder. If a thousand people go spreading around that the kit lens is rubbish based on DPR's findings and they happen to test a "not so optical perfect" copy of this lens.......then it makes for a lot of misinformation being spread about the place. So optically I have no problems with this lens. It is a pretty sharp lens. The real advantage (which can be also be it's achilles heel) is the lens size. The pain is the having to flick that switch to contract the lens when finished and pulling out the lens to begin with. This is an "extra step" for before and after use.....which takes a while to get used to. But the reward of doing so is the size. Not even my old E410 + kit lens would fit into a loose coat pocket. This combo does and that's the real pleasure.:smile:
Yes, it is an extra step, but the portability of it is one of the reasons I picked the EP1 over the GF1. If I had IS with this lens on the GF1, that may have swayed me more to the GF1. I also like the macro capability of this lens.
Interesting to read everyone's comments with some yeas and nays in the mix. It appears the yeas have it thus far. I am in the process of purchasing one of the two cameras and am pretty sure I'm going with the E-P2 and had planned on the 17mm lens but now I'm not so sure. Perhaps it's better to go with this one and then listen to myself debate about the more expensive but faster 20mm vs the 17mm. In the past I was never a telephoto shooter so I don't have much experience. I have the OM-1 50mm 1.4 and the 24mm 1.2.8 and I realize they'll need to be manually focussed... Decisions are tough for me when $$ is involved.
Looks as though it will use a 40.5mm filter according to this source:http://review.zdnet.com/product/digital-cameras/olympus-e-p2-with-14-42mm-lens/33870562 but would love to have it confirmed and know that it will take a screw mount. *OK, so now I have the lens and can read it - and it is a 40.5mm.
