Showcase Panasonic 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6

Discussion in 'Native Lens Sample Image Showcase' started by pcnyc, Sep 4, 2013.

  1. pcnyc

    pcnyc Mu-43 Regular

    198
    Sep 15, 2010
    A member asked for this thread of the new 14-140mm, and since I got a few pics to post, I'll start it.
     
  2. pcnyc

    pcnyc Mu-43 Regular

    198
    Sep 15, 2010
    I just took a bunch of pics with this in my recent vacation to San Francisco, CA and the island of Oahu, HI ; it's a very good lens and I really dig the compactness.

    All SOOC jpg with OM-D and re-sized for upload. The firework shot is cropped.

    EM540681_sm.JPG

    EM540694_sm.JPG

    EM540696_sm.JPG

    EM540729_sm.JPG

    EM540745_sm.JPG

    EM540855_sm.JPG

    EM541120_sm.JPG

    EM541218_sm.JPG

    Zoomed in at 140mm of the above:
    EM541220_sm.JPG

    EM542100_sm.JPG

    EM542103_sm.JPG

    EM542236_sm.JPG

    EM542792_sm.JPG

    EM542856_sm.JPG

    EM543129_sm.JPG

    EM543170_sm.JPG

    EM543229_sm.JPG

    Zoomed in at 140mm of the above:
    EM543232_sm.JPG

    these three shots are from the same spot, 14mm:
    EM543267_sm.JPG

    77mm:
    EM543257_sm.JPG

    140mm:
    EM543256_sm.JPG

    EM543688_sm.JPG

    EM544037_sm.JPG

    EM544039_sm.JPG

    That's a sea turtle in the middle taking a morning swim near the beach:
    EM544062_sm.JPG

    Zoomed in to the turtle:
    EM544059_sm.JPG

    EM544164_sm.JPG

    EM544176_sm.JPG

    EM544205_sm.JPG

    Thanks.
     
    • Like Like x 12
  3. psycho-squirrel

    psycho-squirrel Mu-43 Rookie

    23
    Dec 17, 2012
    Vancouver Canada
    Brian
    Thank a bunch, I can't wait to get this lens!
     
  4. eljay

    eljay Mu-43 Regular

    113
    Jul 8, 2013
    Same here. I'm getting one when it hits the local store shelves.

    Thanks for sharing the pictures!
     
  5. db96

    db96 Mu-43 Regular

    145
    Jun 10, 2012
    Central Indiana
    Got my copy yesterday. Took just a few back yard shot. These are jpeg with no editing. Had to use the dogs for test shots...they were not that thrilled!

    140mm f5.6 1/320 ISO320
    9693465092_6c126c6666_c.
    Arnold by SMcK Photo, on Flickr


    14mm f3.5 1/400 ISO160
    9690239175_2ee8d19fc1_c.
    plumeria by SMcK Photo, on Flickr

    65mm f5.3 1/125 ISO400
    [​IMG]
    Treat? by SMcK Photo, on Flickr


    61mm f5.2 1/125 ISO200
    9693415692_e61fbab792_c.
    Bored by SMcK Photo, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 4
  6. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    I've been very impressed with the previous version of this lens. Glad to see the new version is smaller, lighter, and apparently just as good optically. Nice.
     
  7. RoadTraveler

    RoadTraveler Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 23, 2012
    I agree and I'm tempted.
     
  8. db96

    db96 Mu-43 Regular

    145
    Jun 10, 2012
    Central Indiana

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 5
  9. stevenmh

    stevenmh Mu-43 Rookie

    23
    Jul 30, 2012
    Anyone else using this lens with a G5?

    I've typically used the 14-140 and 100-300 to take pics of our son playing in the yard, and any critters that come along while we're out there. I upgraded to the new 14-140 and have been feeling like a lot of shots are a bit softer and lacking fine detail compared to what I was used to. After seeing the outstanding pics in this thread, I was wondering if I had a soft copy and was considering trying another. However, after some controlled testing, it seems like the glass is fine and I'm getting shutter shock up to 1/320. By 1/400 it's gone. With all the trees and shade in our yard, most of the shots are slower than 1/400 and 400-800 ISO. That explains what's been going on. The 100-300 is a bit sharper than the new 14-140 at 100mm, but only noticeable viewing at 100%. The bigger difference is that the 100-300 isn't suffering from the shutter shock problem at the slower speeds. The 14-140 doesn't exhibit the shutter shock problem at 14mm and at that length the IQ is indistinguishable from my 14-45 at 100%. By the time I hit 45mm, though, the shutter shock is there.

    I can post some pics demonstrating my findings this evening if anyone is interested. In the meantime, I'm just wondering if anyone else has experienced this problem with this lens. I already considered the 14-140 an outdoor only lens, I use the 14-45 or 25 inside. But it's a little disappointing that, at least with my G5, it's evidently limited to sunny outdoors when my old 14-140 was decent for shooting a moving target in the shade. Thanks in advance for your input.
     
  10. cocacola3500d

    cocacola3500d New to Mu-43

    3
    Sep 20, 2013
    great i like it :D :D
     
  11. davidedric

    davidedric Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Nov 24, 2013
    Cheshire, UK
    Dave
    Interesting. I got my copy last week and went through the same process. Need to do some more testing, getting the tripod out, but strongly suspect the same cause. I've read on other forums that shutter shock "is a myth" caused by "poor technique". I've been shooting for a long time, and camera shake is not a problem that I usually have - and I can't see why I should now. I even wondered if the OIS was working, but I can certainly hear it whirring away.

    One obvious option is to use the electronic shutter, even if there are flaws as very well described here: Any other comments on this phenomenon?

    Just checked the SLRgear review, which goes into the issue in some depth. They find it in a different set of speeds and focal lengths. Does seem to be body/lens specific.

    Dave
     
  12. davidedric

    davidedric Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Nov 24, 2013
    Cheshire, UK
    Dave
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker Mu-43 Regular

    119
    Aug 9, 2012
    Not exactly what I intended to shoot, but hey, the 14-140 does OK as a pseudo semi Macro lens. Below images shot on the OMD-EM5

    13563100323_06c51f3846_o.

    13563389864_498c129af3_o.

    13563391724_805cef896d_o.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  14. nang3

    nang3 Mu-43 Regular

    43
    Mar 15, 2013
    I recently picked up this lens and find it pretty good from about 14-100mm ish but then I cant seem to get anything sharp at 140mm no matter what I do.. even with the camera sitting on a table with @ 1/640 it is never sharp, ive tried full auto and full manual with manual focus and its pretty much the same result..
    Does anyone seem to have a noticeabley soft copy at the long end?

    this is a crop of the centre of an image I took this morning from around 8m from target, camera (EM-5) resting on a table, Power OIS disabled, IBIS enabled, 1/500, f/5.6, ISO 1250 Manual mode and manually focussed right on the spiky leaf point on the centre of the image
    Linky

    Changing to auto mode or different settings in M doesn't seem to make any difference really and the rest of the non cropped image is even blurrier away from centre.. is this normal for a 'compromise' telephoto type lens or does it seem too soft and blurry even taking that into account?

    Usually I cull all my holiday snaps by viewing all the OOC jpgs in Windows Photo Viewer first, deleting all the ones that look blurry or out of focus maximised on a 27" monitor as I find this generally eliminates the images that cannot really be improved PP ... almost none of the images I have taken at 120-140mm made it through the culling process while about 95% at lower FL's were fine.. I know its not anything approaching a scientific method but the results seem a bit biased to put it mildly
     
  15. mistermark

    mistermark Mu-43 Regular

    105
    Oct 16, 2012
    Is yours definitely the Mk2 lens (maximum aperture at the wide end 3.5)? I ask because the ropey 100mm+ performance you mention is widely recognised as a characteristic of the first version of this optic, while the second is much more consistent across the range.
     
  16. nang3

    nang3 Mu-43 Regular

    43
    Mar 15, 2013
    yes its defo the shorter lighter mkII with the 3.5 max aperture and not the older one... il try some more testing today, see if I can get something sharp at 140mm
     
  17. nang3

    nang3 Mu-43 Regular

    43
    Mar 15, 2013
    Well I figured out the problem I was having with this lens!! the lens is not faulty or soft, it was the friggen CirPol filter i had on it !!! check out the differences below.. on the left is with filter, right is without the filter!!!!

    crop_comparison.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  18. RoadTraveler

    RoadTraveler Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 23, 2012
  19. 50orsohours

    50orsohours Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 13, 2013
    Portland Oregon
    That is awesome, glad you figured it out.
     
  20. nang3

    nang3 Mu-43 Regular

    43
    Mar 15, 2013
    I still cant believe the difference, its a low to mid range Inca/Kenko filter so not total crap but nothing special either, certainly didn't think it would make such a difference!

    does anyone know the physics as to why it only seems to happen at longer focal lengths??