1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Oly 14-42IIR or Pan 14/2.5?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by msatlas, Feb 14, 2013.

  1. msatlas

    msatlas Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Feb 5, 2013
    Madison, WI
    I got an Olympus 14-42 II R in a kit with my E-PL5. I'm trying to decide whether to keep the 14-42, or sell it and get a Panasonic 14. The Oly 12 is really appealing except for price. I'd probably only end up spending another maybe 50 bucks to get a used P14 if I sold the 14-42.

    Since I have a Panasonic 20, I'm likely to use it for the normal FL range and switch to the 14-42 for wide shots. For longer FLs I have an Oly 40-150R.

    The main reason I'd keep the 14-42 is for video, since zoom and silent AF would both be useful. But...I don't shoot much video.

    The extra speed of the P14 would come in handy indoors. I might even be able to squeeze the P14, P20 and E-PL5 into my Manfrotto Nano VII pouch for bringing along when I don't want to bring my whole camera bag.

    So...thoughts on what I should do? Is the image quality of the P14 particularly better than the O14-42IIR on the wide end?
     
  2. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    All depends on your shooting style. I'm a zoom shooter, I'll admit it. Even with the great E-M5 I could not drop my FX stuff until there are more options for fast or mid fast zooms.

    So what is your style? For me I would keep the zoom. I'm looking to pick up a 14 for a really small, really light option. I would probably get the 20 if it were not for the price and I hear the 14 focuses faster. But since you have the 20 you have smaller/lighter covered.
     
  3. msatlas

    msatlas Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Feb 5, 2013
    Madison, WI
    I probably lean towards primes but I don't mind zooms. Mostly I prefer fast apertures and good IQ, and small size.

    I just switched to m43 from Pentax. I had a Tamron 17-50/2.8, Pentax 35/2, Pentax 50/1.4 and Pentax 70-210/4-5.6. My most commonly used lenses were the 35 and 50 as normal and portrait lenses, respectively. The 17-50 was pretty good, but the 35 and 50 were better so I just used the wide end of the 17-50.

    Basically my thoughts are...

    P20 = Pentax 35
    O45 = Pentax 50
    O40-150R = Pentax 70-210

    Pentax video was pretty terrible. It couldn't even do AF while shooting video. While the E-PL5 isn't exactly a 5DIII, it's definitely a video improvement for me. So that's why I'm thinking about keeping the 14-42. But it's not really a fast enough aperture for my liking. I got the kit because I figured the 14-42 only cost $50 over the body, and I could always sell it for more than $50.

    The P14 appeals to me because one of the main reasons I switched to m43 was so I could take my camera with me more often for nice snaps of friends & family, and I'm a line cook & food nerd so lots of food pics. Lots of indoors shots. So the P14 would give me a wider option than the P20 but still be reasonably fast.

    But...I'm kinda torn.
     
  4. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Eric
    Admittedly I don't have the new R version, just the collapsible 3-barrel 14-42mm that came with my E-PL1, but I find it fairly good wide open at f3.5. I didn't see enough of an improvement from an IQ perspective to warrant picking up the 14mm also, and I didn't want to be limited to just the 14mm focal length. That said, its small, focuses quickly and does let in a little more light than the kit zooms so if that is important to you, its definitely a lens to check out.
     
  5. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    If you use Lightroom go in and look at your use of the 17-50 and see if you used the 17 a lot. If so then the 12 or 14 are probably a good option. From what I've heard and read the 12 being the better of the 2. So I would say keep the 14-42 for the video unless $$ is an issue. Then I would think the 12 might be better if you used the 17mm end a lot as the 12 will be just a a little wider where the 14 a little less.

    But that IMHO and YMMV.
     
  6. msatlas

    msatlas Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Feb 5, 2013
    Madison, WI
    I'm actually not a huge fan of the 28mm equivalent FL, and prefer 24mm perspective. But the 12 is just so expensive that I can't really justify it. Mainly because I want to get an O45. For the price of the O12, I could get an O45, Samyang 7.5mm fisheye, and either keep the 14-42 or switch to P14 (since there's only a spread of like $50 there).
     
  7. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Well the I think you might have answered your own question. You will have the 14 from the zoom if you need it and it mirrors the 17-50 you had. Get the 45 and save for the 12. I had Nikon 10.5 and while it was fun I found I was de-fishing it more often than not.
     
  8. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    So basically what you're saying is that you would be using the 14-42mm for the 14mm focal length. Why would you want a slower, softer zoom lens to use at one focal length then, when you could have a sharper, faster prime in that same focal length? Go for the 14mm!

    If you were really serious about video you would value a manual focus prime over silent AF and zoom anyways. :)
     
  9. msatlas

    msatlas Mu-43 Regular

    52
    Feb 5, 2013
    Madison, WI
    I guess I should mention that I'm trying to fund the purchase of m43 gear with the proceeds from selling my Pentax gear. I've already sold off the 35, 50 and 70-210, and once the K-r body and Tamron 17-50 sell I'm expecting to net about $1300.

    So far I've spent $920 on the E-PL5, 14-42, 40-150, and 20. That leaves $380 before I start spending more money. Basically once I buy an O45. I guess I *could* save up to buy the 12 but I recently left a boring-but-well-paid IT career to have some fun and try my hand cooking in a french/belgian restaurant, so you can understand why I'm a little budget-conscious. :wink:

    I don't mind de-fishing, and actually some pictures I saw from the combo of the 7.5 and Fisheye Hemi are what convinced me it'd be an interesting choice. I I had the fisheye, then 14mm vs 12mm isn't as much of a concern because I'd be able to get wider as needed.
    You have good points. I'm not particularly serious about video but I guess the zoom with silent AF would suit camcorder type moments well. That's basically the tradeoff I'm thinking of vs. sharper, faster, smaller prime for a small bit more money.
     
  10. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Been there, done that. I left a not boring but very stressful well paid IT career to be a full time event photographer and house husband.
     
  11. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    I hung on to my zoom just to use it for video - but I rarely use it. I do like the 14mm because it's small, sharp and reasonably fast. It goes well with my 25 and 45. I prefer primes to zooms, but I still find myself hanging on to the kit zoom in case I ever decide to use it for video. :rolleyes:
     
  12. svtquattro

    svtquattro Mu-43 Veteran

    354
    Sep 24, 2012
    Vancouver, Canada
    The P14 does video just fine in S-AF+MF mode if you focus before you start recording and MF during video! I love the P14 due to the size vs quality issue. Its a gem especially on a PEN. No bulk, decent quality.

    Manual zoom sucks for video anyway esp with focus drift and a manual zoom ring.
     
  13. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    True, but there are times when you simply cannot "zoom with your feet".
     
  14. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    I like the 14 for it's size and I really only use tele zooms. I've read in many placers, however, that the newer kit zooms are essentially the same IQ as the 14, so I wouldn't sweat this one. The kit zoom make makes the camera less pocket-able but it still weighs nothing so it's hardly a burden.
     
  15. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    And... would you recommend it?
     
  16. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    At the time it made sense for me and my family. But now that one is in college and the other driving I will be going back in one way or another.
     
  17. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Thanks. Giving up my IT dayjob is one of the flights of fancy that I get from time to time - then I look at the mortgage account!

    BTW - see you're near to Boston. We lived in Ipswich for a few years in the late 90's. Fantastic part pf the world (although I guess it didn't seem that way during last week's snow storm!).
     
  18. Anthon

    Anthon Mu-43 Regular

    182
    Dec 8, 2012
    Spain
    I have both and the only difference I feel between them is the extra step from f3.5 to f2.5 from the P14, they have very similar IQ and focus speed



    Enviado desde mi GT-N7000 usando Tapatalk 2
     
  19. Mark0

    Mark0 Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Dec 23, 2011
    Near Venice, Italy
    Maybe you can consider loosing the 14-42 and getting a 12-50? They can be found in mint condition at a great price from people that got them in kit with the OM-D but don't have a use for it.
    You get the 12 focal lenght, near-macro and a powered zoom for the occasional video.