one zoom kit or two?

[Yves D.]

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

 

[Amin Sabet]

I'm at work now, but will post a response later today...

Just wanted to say hi and welcome to mu-43!

 

[Brian Mosley]

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]

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.

 

[Yves D.]

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]

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.

 

[cosinaphile]

in ny the panny 7-14 is $1099 the oly is regular4\3 and $1500


both are grossly overpriced

 

[huai]

You can replace the 45-200 with P45-150 or P45-175 to save quite a bit of bulk.