Questions on original 14-45mm Kit Lens

[OceanView]

I have a question, I am new to the m43rds world and have been investigating lenses since last week when I bought the GF1 (still in transit).
I bought the kit with the 20mm pancake lens but am now considering the 14-45 or 14-140mm.

Why is the original 14-45mm discontinued? or is it?
And is it much better than the new 14-42mm?

I was looking on eBay and saw this item
Panasonic LUMIX G VARIO 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH MEGA - eBay (item 380248901811 end time Sep-04-10 22:00:26 PDT)

Is this the m43 lens or 43 lens? Hard for me to tell as I am too new to this.

Thanks in advance.

 

[photoSmart42]

Why is the original 14-45mm discontinued? or is it?
And is it much better than the new 14-42mm?

Not sure if the 14-45 is officially discontinued, but the new G-series cameras are coming out with the 14-42 as the kit lens. Based on DPR and other testing of the two lenses, the 14-45 seems sharper than the 14-42. It's also more convenient to use if you tend to switch your OIS on and off often, but it's also heavier than the 14-42.

I was looking on eBay and saw this item
Panasonic LUMIX G VARIO 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH MEGA - eBay (item 380248901811 end time Sep-04-10 22:00:26 PDT)

Is this the m43 lens or 43 lens? Hard for me to tell as I am too new to this.

That's the correct one. The 4/3 lenses are labeled Lumix D, while the m4/3 lenses are Lumix G.

 

[OceanView]

Not sure if the 14-45 is officially discontinued, but the new G-series cameras are coming out with the 14-42 as the kit lens. Based on DPR and other testing of the two lenses, the 14-45 seems sharper than the 14-42. It's also more convenient to use if you tend to switch your OIS on and off often, but it's also heavier than the 14-42.



That's the correct one. The 4/3 lenses are labeled Lumix D, while the m4/3 lenses are Lumix G.

I don't mind heavier as long as the quality is noticeably better.
Thanks for the quick lesson in D and G classification. :smile:

 

[chuckgoolsbee]

Timely question as I was shooting with both the 14-45 and the 20mm tonight. The 20 is SO MUCH better than the 14-45 in terms of sharpness and speed. I've found that I shoot almost exclusively with the 20mm and the 7-14 zoom, and end up leaving the original kit zoom in the bag more often than not.

 

[OceanView]

Timely question as I was shooting with both the 14-45 and the 20mm tonight. The 20 is SO MUCH better than the 14-45 in terms of sharpness and speed. I've found that I shoot almost exclusively with the 20mm and the 7-14 zoom, and end up leaving the original kit zoom in the bag more often than not.

7-14 is on my list too.
Just have to wait to get the funds saved up.

Do you think you would use the 14-140mm more if you had that focal length instead of the kit lens? or maybe your style of shooting is more wide than long?

Nice gallery by the way.

 

[Grant]

I have a GF1 with both the 14-45 and the 20 mm lenses.

THe 20 mm is the lens that makes this camera shine it is an exceptional lens by any standards. My only complaint is that, at about three times the cost of a Nikkor 50 mm f 1.8, it is a bit pricy. Even with that gripe I am stunningly happy to have it. It is my lens of choice.

The 14-45mm is an expensive kit lens and that is faint praise. The lens by nature is slow. Surprisingly, wide open, it is very sharp. Equally surprising, while not horrible, is it is soft stopped down. This is not my lens of choice and know now what I do I am not sure I should have bought it. Don't get me wrong it is a good lens but if it is the only lens I had with my GF1 then the camera would just be another one of the kids on the block, although a pretty robust kid.

The 14-45 mm and the 14-42 mm are both being marketed. I am not sure of the logic between selling two very similar lenses but I suspect Panasonic does. If you go to their international site they have some very in depth information on both these lenses. They are optically almost identical with the 14-45 mm being a little crisper off axes and the 14-42 mm having the edge on axis. Neither one of these advantages are deal breakers. For me the deal breaks was that the 14-45 mm is a bit more robust as it has a metal mount.

 

[Linh]

wow, this thing has dropped in price since I got it only a few months ago. I only had one offer trying to sell mine and it was around this price.

but I don't think they are both being marketed anymore, I was under the impressing the 14-45 was being phased out for the 14-42?

 

[dko22]

I'm looking forward to comparing the 20 against the 14-45 shortly. Have to say, I'm pretty impressed with my copy of the 14-45 though it is a bit uneven towards the corners -- I guess that's often where kit lenses fail. By the way I paid £220 for the 20 new (unboxed) so I don't find that too unreasonable if it's as good as folk say

 

[Streetshooter]

I have both of the kit zooms.
I always test my lenses at every f-stop with studio flash.
The 14-45 is probably the best KIT lens ever by any standard. The 14-42 is ok but I sold it already. 2 days and it's gone. The 20 is my main lens and speaks loudly for itself.

 

[john1027]

Ocieanview,

I agree with what Grant & Don have written and have had both. Given the choice, I would buy the 14-45 if for no other reason the build quality. You need to take a look at your own shooting needs regarding the 14-140. Depending on your assessment, it can give you the ability to combine your needs into one lens, but it is a heavy lens and some don't like it on the GF1 all the time. If you only occasionally need the extra reach, I would go with the 14-45 and take a look at the 45-200mm. It is lighter and not that much bigger collapsed than the 14-140 and you can get some excellent results especially in the middle range. Another advantage of the 14-140 if you don't mind the bulk/weight is that it is a great travel/vacation combination coupled with the 20mm. All of these lenses have image threads here so you can see for yourself.

 

[OceanView]

Thanks everyone! Lots of great info!

I usually spend a lot of time investigating lenses but the bottom line is I usually buy them and try them out for a few weeks to see if they conform to my style of shooting and if the output meets my standards.

I'm not sure if I will prefer the 14-45 over the 14-140 as I have not used either.
I usually don't shoot long but since many have mentioned that the 14-140 is a great travel lens, that is what peaked my interest.
I may end up with both and will have to decide at a later time.
I'm gonna wait a month or so until after any new lens announcements then purchase a new lens. Hopefully prices will drop further

 

[back alley]

i found it hard to hand hold the long end of my 14-140...i got used to the small size and weight easily enough but kept forgetting how long of a reach it had and how it magnified the shake. these small camera bodies make it hard (for me) to handhold long lenses.

the 14-45 was a gem and i foolishly sold mine when i got the 20...looking back it would have been nice to have both.

 

[dhazeghi]

I think the 14-45 will be a collector's item if they discontinue it. It's significantly sharper than the newer lens, and better built. Sharp, fast focus, works great on both Olympus and Panasonic bodies (has OIS switch). What's not to like (okay, the price is a bit more than ideal)?!

 

[kiynook]

wow...if you get the 7-14, 14-140 and the 20 doesn't that mean you are covered for travel and street photography?? Not sure 14-140 will make good portraiture...

 

[Warren T.]

I have both the 20mm and the 14-45mm. The 20mm is very, very good, but I am also very impressed by my example of the 14-45mm. It is amazingly sharp, compact, and extremely quiet when focusing. And because it is so compact, I often find that it adds some versatility over the 20mm because it's a zoom with 14mm on the wide end. I think the OIS on/off switch is very convenient to use to conserve battery power when shooting in situations that do not require IS. The lens mount is metal (vs. plastic for the newer 14-42mm). I am planning to add the 45-200mm to my stable of native m4/3 lenses. I thought about the 14-140mm, but decided against it because of its cost and bulk.

--Warren

 

[colonel]

I had the 14-42mm with the G2, it was horrible, terrible image quality, gritty un-smooth zoom... blahh... Due to the lack of native lenses i bought the 14-14mm and it is a world apart. Image quality is great, smooth zoom, build etc... i would prefer a 14-140mm, but it is just to slow to justify the money.. i am hoping panasonic will add a faster zoom soon...

on a side note, the only thing i have noticed with the 14-45mm is that the focus ring is quite stiff.. smooth but stiff... anyone else noticed this?

 

[andyw]

If you can get hold of the 14-45mm then do so. I find it's a cracking lens. I did a test with the 20mm f1.7 and 14-45 at 20mm both at f3.5 and it was hard to tell the difference. I have seen some STUNNING images from the 14-45.

Here's a quickie at 100% crop

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

 

[Streetshooter]

Andy ,
Yer right. It's a real cracker.
It always amazes me when I fall to the dark side and....
(pixel peep).....

 

[andyw]

Pixel peeping is a nasty infliction which I have bad!!!!!

[Stands up from his chair] My name is Andy and I'm a Pixel Peeper! he he

 

[Streetshooter]

(stands up)
My name is shooter... I'm not a pixel peeper but I have been known to indulge...