Olympus 14-42 kit zoom fitted to a Panasonic GH1.

[soundimageplus]

Due to various spells of buying and selling I don't have a 14-45mm kit lens for my Panasonic G-series cameras. But I do have an Olympus 14-42. I have bought two in kits with both the the E-P1 and E-P2. I normally sell on these kit lenses as they are very cheap in the kits and can usually be sold on ebay for more than the cost price, thus helping offset the cost of the camera.
The one I have at the moment must have cost me about £30. I've tried it on the E-P2 and it performed well. I must admit I liked the results more than the 17mm f2.8 I bought with the E-P1.
I wondered what it would be like on my GH1, so took it out yesterday for a critical test, tripod and all.
I was very impressed and surprised at how good it was. Olympus have a good reputation for kit lenses (as do Panasonic of course) and this is no exception.
Its always struck me as an ugly little thing with its extending barrel reminding me of a pointless and shoot. But its a good little performer, and will probably be staying for a while.

There's an album of images shot with it here:-
https://www.mu-43.com/album.php?albumid=217

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[BillN]

I am trying to compare all my MF lenses, with the Pany 14 45 and now 20 1.7 that I have

All I will say at this time, because I am a great fan of Nikkor DSLR lenses and RF stuff - that I am really surprised how good the Pany stuff is (I would rather use the word different, than criticise the performance on M4/3 of any MF lens). MF lenses are different and sometime I prefer the image and sometimes I do not........but the Pany stuff feels far more comfortable on my G1

But really I am a novice and it is only as i see the comparison.

 

[soundimageplus]

I am trying to compare all my MF lenses, with the Pany 14 45 and now 20 1.7 that I have

All I will say at this time, because I am a great fan of Nikkor DSLR lenses and RF stuff - that I am really surprised how good the Pany stuff is (I would rather use the word different, than criticise the performance on M4/3 of any MF lens). MF lenses are different and sometime I prefer the image and sometimes I do not........but the Pany stuff feels far more comfortable on my G1

But really I am a novice and it is only as i see the comparison.

I'm very much of the opinion that adapted MF lenses are useful when there isn't any an Olympus or Panasonic equivalent.
At one time or another I've used all the m4/3 "native" lenses & with the exception of the Lumix 45-200 which I find a bit "ordinary" they are all pretty good.
The question is:- Is an adapted lens going to give you better results? In many cases the answer is no. There's a lot of dross out there & just because its old and funky looking doesn't mean its any good.
This Olympus kit lens is very good. Its sharp, its free of a lot of the problems that old lenses designed for film can produce.
I see no point in using adapted lenses just for the sake of it, unless you enjoy that.
Certainly with the introduction of the 20mm f1.7 and 45mm f2.8 things have moved on. These are stellar lenses, up there with the very best.
I use a lot of longer faster lenses. I have a Voigtlander 75mm F2.5 and a Nikon 85 f1.8D which are both incredible performers on m4/3. But in the wide to standard range the Olympus & Panasonic lens range is extremely good.
You can get faster lenses using adapters and MF but you won't always get better image quality.
Michael Reichmann, over at Luminous Landscape concluded that there wasn't a lot of point in buying Leica lenses to use on m4/3.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/m-43.shtml
Plus the recent David Clapp review of the GF1 talked about how good the 14-45 zoom is.
If you have the need, or desire to use a different lens then thats fine, apart from anything else its enormous fun, but its not going to guarantee better results. My little cheap and cheerful kit lens is anything but cheap and cheerful in terms of performance & its a testament to just how good "native" m4/3 is.

 

[jcdoss]

This post and the referenced LL article have me rethinking my early desire to acquire a bunch of MF lenses. I still think that MF Nikkors and Voigtlanders look pretty cool on these small cameras, though, and my Nikkor 50/1.8 works pretty well, but maybe you're right and I should stick with lenses made for the system.

 

[johnny9fingers]

This thread is exactly what I was looking for. I will be getting a GH1 in the near future and was wondering how my M Zuiko 14-42mm MKII lens would work as I don't have any Panny glass yet. Sounds like it will be just fine....