one zoom kit or two?

Y

Yves D.

Guest
Hi everybody,

I'm a 48 years old french canadian photo enthousiast and a newbie in the m43 world.

I bought the Gf1/20 1.7 on the first available week. I really like this combo.
I sold all my Nikon gear except a 50 1.8 for the Gf1 so it will be easy to carry my camera almost every day with me.
My dilemma right now is: should i buy the 14-45 and the 45-200 for $750 approx. (can $) or buy the 14-140 for $1000? What do i gain or lose by going for the superzoom in iq?
Anybody here with the same dilemma?

Thanks
 

Brian Mosley

Administrator Emeritus
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
2,998
Hi Yves,

First of all, welcome to the forum! please post some images and impressions as you get going with your GF1 + 20mm f1.7

I'd stick with the 20mm f1.7 and add the Lumix 7-14 before adding the 14-45 and 45-200... the 14-140 is a bit bulky for the GF1.

Cheers

Brian
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
10,887
Location
Boston, MA (USA)
My dilemma right now is: should i buy the 14-45 and the 45-200 for $750 approx. (can $) or buy the 14-140 for $1000? What do i gain or lose by going for the superzoom in iq?
You give up very little in image quality by using the superzoom instead of the 14-45 and 45-200. The 14-140 very nicely matches the other two zooms in their respective ranges. What you give up are the following:

  • Ability to use a very small and light zoom (14-45 is much smaller and lighter than 14-140
  • 140-200mm range, which makes a difference in certain applications
  • Quality of image stabilization, which I find is somewhat better with the 45-200 than with the 14-150 (for still applications, not for video)
The 14-140 is a great all-around lens and fantastic for video. If you don't shoot ultrawide, the 14-140 and 20/1.7 could be all you need.

For me, the 7-14 and 20/1.7 - as Brian said - are the go to combo.
 
Y

Yves D.

Guest
Thanks

Thank you for those quick replies.
I was indeed afraid that the 14-140 might be bulky.
Since i wish to travel as light as i can, i might go for the 45-200. Mostly to take picture of my sons playing soccer or other outdoor activities.
The 14-140 also appeal to me because of the possibility to have one good lens
to do both stills and video without having to change lens. I dont want to carry both a camcorder and a dslr. I think i'm becoming lazy with age ;-)
The 7-14 is a lens i wish i can buy but is so expensive ($1500). Maybe i'll wait a little until i find one on the used market.
Next step: i bring my gf1 to the store to try both lens on it.
I will post some image soon.

Cheers
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
10,887
Location
Boston, MA (USA)
Thank you for those quick replies.
I was indeed afraid that the 14-140 might be bulky.
Since i wish to travel as light as i can, i might go for the 45-200.
The 45-200 is similarly bulky, but at least with the two lens kit you have the option of the light zoom.

The 14-140 also appeal to me because of the possibility to have one good lens
to do both stills and video without having to change lens.
That's the main reason I keep the 14-140 around. I would have sold it if not for video.

The 7-14 is a lens i wish i can buy but is so expensive ($1500). Maybe i'll wait a little until i find one on the used market.
It's tough on the used market now, because the new market is limited. In time, they will come down for sure, and the Oly 9-18 will be another option.
 

huai

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 24, 2013
Messages
77
You can replace the 45-200 with P45-150 or P45-175 to save quite a bit of bulk.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom