Review of redesigned Panasonic 14-140 f3.5-5.6 zoom lens

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by frank2, May 15, 2013.

  1. frank2

    frank2 Mu-43 Regular

    66
    Jul 29, 2011
    Columbus, Ohio
  2. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    I was hoping the new model was at least comparable to the old one. That seems to be the case, more or less. If this review holds up, I'll probably be picking it up late summer or into fall. It takes a 58mm filter, the same as the 12-35 and 35-100 (which are nicer, but sometimes you miss the shot when you have to reach into your bag), so I only need one set of filters for almost all my lenses.
     
  3. phrenic

    phrenic Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 13, 2010
    Hmm it's a shame that some of these re-designs aren't improving on performance necessarily. Like the numerous editions of the 14-42/14-42 PZ kit lenses..and isn't the recent panasonic telephotos supposed to be rather average?

    I hope we didn't see all the best designs with the old 14-45mm/20mm/7-14mm lenses!
     
  4. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    Stepping focus motor? I guess that makes it less usable for video? Not an interest of mine.

    Also, if it's really 1/3 the price of the Gen 1 lens, assuming they didn't slash their margins on this lens, what do you suppose they did to reduce the cost (other than changing the focus motor)?
     
  5. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    It's smaller, faster, cheaper, a bit sharper, and has better stabilization than its predecessor, which was already one of the better superzooms in any system. What else do you want them to do to?

    And the F2.8 zooms are fantastic. When using them, one gets the feeling that it's actually out-resolving the sensor most of the time. I can't speak for the 45-150, as I've never used it.
     
  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    The 45-175 PZ is good too. Works better with Olympus bodies with 5-axis IBIS though due to the OS issue.
     
  7. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    45-175 is an incredibly overlooked lens, with a bit of sharpening it can be pixel-perfect. Shutter shock is really just an issue with GX1, G3, GF3 or GF5, which are affected more than the larger or newer bodies.
     
  8. DeoreDX

    DeoreDX Mu-43 Veteran

    208
    Mar 13, 2013
    Alabama
    As an engineer I know what a stepper motor is, but I don't know how it would cause it to be less useful for video? I would think how useful the lens would be for video would depend on the motor controller wouldn't it? Being ignorant of the subject I don't know the answer but is there something inherently worse about a stepper motor and, I am assuming here, an open-loop control scheme that would make it worse than a non-stepper motor with a closed loop control scheme?
     
  9. Levster

    Levster Mu-43 Top Veteran

    The latest Canon "STM" lenses are specifically badged as being suitable for video. Those use stepper motors, which I imagine can be smoother and quieter than their USM variants. I'd guess stepper motors are fine for video!
     
  10. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    I'm not a video-in-my-still-camera person ;) but I would guess (emphasis on guess) that continuous focus adjustment is potentially more accurate in a video situation - in contrast to static/still photography, where it would matter less. Dunno. :)
     
  11. dwrk

    dwrk Mu-43 Regular

    69
    Aug 10, 2012
    looking forward to get this as the G6 kit

    pz ois issues aside...they seem to be getting better at designing sharper and more consistent lenses...the mtf looks good enough lets see if they deliver
     
  12. The claim of being one third the cost of the original seems a bit dubious, but who knows. Looks quite positive, but I'd hope that it would be as sharp as my copy of the original at wide to middling focal lengths.
     
  13. mistermark

    mistermark Mu-43 Regular

    105
    Oct 16, 2012
    I think the writer of the review made a slight error; in most markets, the new lens is about a third cheaper than it'sredecessor, rather than a third of its price (ie two thirds cheaper).

    It seems the edge and corner performance is improved, and the chronic vignetting at long focal lengths is gone. So it's better, but still no match for the best m43 zooms or primes; also, of course, sensors have improved since the first version of this lens was launched, so expectations have moved on.
     
  14. dwrk

    dwrk Mu-43 Regular

    69
    Aug 10, 2012
    what do y'all expect from a cheap 10x zoom?
     
  15. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    I've been happy with the performance of my original 14-140.. it has been an exceptionally useful (very versatile with very good IQ) lens for travel and when I don't want to carry more than one lens to cover a wide variety of imaging opportunities. It has made some very good images for me. The update sounds appealing, though.
     
  16. Nordiquefan

    Nordiquefan Mu-43 Regular

    77
    Mar 12, 2013
  17. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Sorry. I fixed it above now.
     
  18. Fmrvette

    Fmrvette This Space For Rent

    May 26, 2012
    Detroit, Michigan
    Jim
    Seems to be so, going by the retail price. The older f/4.0 is currently going for less on Amazon and B&H - although the new lens isn't in stock yet.

    Hopefully the release of the new lens will drive the price of the older lens down, if the inventory of the older lens is still strong when the new one comes in.

    I'm not real big on "all in one" lenses but if the price were right......

    Regards,

    Jim
     
  19. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    I liked my (original version) 14-140mm but finally sold it because I have the pair of fast zooms and didn't see myself using the superzoom much anymore. But there are times I miss that huge focal range, and the lens was really optically very decent when you bear in mind the general compromise it represents over a more purpose-built lens.

    I'm impressed they were able to improve on an already very good lens by making it faster, sharper, cheaper, smaller, and lighter. Not much more you could ask for in this type of lens I think.