1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Should I swap Olympus 14-42mm for Panasonic 14mm 2.5?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by zucchiniboy, Jun 21, 2011.

  1. zucchiniboy

    zucchiniboy Mu-43 Regular

    136
    Oct 13, 2010
    San Francisco
    I have the Olympus M. Zuiko 14-42mm lens, and was wondering if anyone switched from that to the Panasonic 14mm prime. I have the 20mm prime, and will likely get the upcoming 45mm/50mm from Olympus. On the wide end, aperture wise the 14-42 goes to 3.5, so there's not a huge gain with the prime at 2.5. I recognize the size advantage, but I'm wondering if anyone else has made this change and whether they thought it was worth it.

    I'd love the new supposed 12mm prime from Olympus, but it looks like it'll be out of my price range.

    Thanks!
     
  2. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2010
    Midwest
    Paul
    Keeping a kit lens generally makes sense, even if you don't use it often. Sometimes it is simply more convenient to have the zoom, and it is still relatively compact. Personally I would skip the 14mm, as you said it is not a significant gain in speed, and against at least the panasonic 14-42mm, barely beats it out.

    I would go ahead and wait for the portrait prime lens from Olympus, and save your pennies for the oly 12mm as well - if you want wide angle, that is an excellent prime length.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I have the 14-45 and the 20 and I sold off the 14 because the IQ was very similar @14 and I found I preferred the FOV of the 20. I find that I do miss having it some days. I wouldn't swap my 14-45 for one because the kit zoom is much MUCH more useful in a wider variety of circumstances.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. dyrmaker83

    dyrmaker83 Mu-43 Regular

    50
    Feb 19, 2011
    Washington, DC
    Mike
    I sold my E-PL2 14-42mm kit to buy the 14mm, and I sort of regret it. It would be nice to have a walk-around zoom sometimes. That being said, the 14mm is so tiny it makes the 20mm look big. At this point I wouldn't sell the 14mm unless I had both the kit lens and the new 12mm prime - which isn't happening anytime soon.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Jordan

    Jordan Mu-43 Regular

    88
    Jun 9, 2011
    Houston, TX
    I didn't sell my 14-42 kit but added the 14mm 2.5 to my kit for the indoor/ low light shots. I kept the kit lens because there will be situations like outdoor shots where using the kit lens will be better than using the prime. The reasons I went with a 14mm is because I wanted the smaller size, lower light capability and it was cheaper than the 20mm.
    Whether you should sell the 14-42 to get a 14mm, I'm not sure. I don't know if I would have bought the the 14mm if I already had the 20mm/1.7 in my bag..
    You may want to save your money a little longer and get the 12mm you really want.
     
  6. Hyubie

    Hyubie Unique like everyone else

    Oct 15, 2010
    Massachusetts
    Herbert
    Thanks everyone for the input - I myself am (or should I say "was") in this dilemma. I am unwilling to part with my kit lens because of the versatility and the very good images I get out of them, but I thought the 14mm, being a prime, would render better images (apart from its attractive size).

    Besides, Amin will be sending out an email soon for the 14mm contest, and my mailbox is waiting. :wink:
     
  7. zucchiniboy

    zucchiniboy Mu-43 Regular

    136
    Oct 13, 2010
    San Francisco
    Thanks everyone. You do have me thinking again about saving up for the 12mm, but I suppose we'll know even more concrete details next week!

    In the meantime, if I find a good price on a used 14mm (I see a bunch that used to be a part of a GF2 kit), I may still try it out...
     
  8. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I would get the 14mm prime. With your 20mm, you'll now have a better coverage of primes. Personally, the only consumer-grade kit zoom lens (kit prime lenses and pro-grade kit lenses are exceptions) I've ever saved from any camera is the m.Zuiko 14-42mm Mark II, which I saved only because of its MSC silent focus system. Even then, I still never pull it out even for video... why do I need silent focus when I have external audio? However, it's a good lens to have if I grab a second body to let somebody else shoot video for me while I take photos. Then I don't have to let them use any of my precious favorite lenses. ;)
     
  9. G1 User

    G1 User Mu-43 Veteran

    411
    Jul 20, 2010
    I have the O/14-42ED [MkII], and I have the P/20, I haven't used my P/20 for about 1 month.. I now use it for Low Light stuff and find the O/14-42ED quite sharp, and fine for all my outdoor stuff. It may not be an expensive Kit lens, but, it can be very versatile, and is quite sharp imo.
     
  10. chrism_scotland

    chrism_scotland Mu-43 Veteran

    483
    Jun 1, 2011
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Been wondering the same myself, I tried the 20mm and while its a lovely lens and I know that for night shots it will be I sent it back as I didn't think it that much better than the Olympus 17mm I got with the camera, I have no doubt I will pick one up again later!

    However I've been swithering between adding a 14mm prime or picking up a used 14-45, again a lot of reviews have suggested similar quality of the 14mm v 14-45 @14mm and while I do love the tiny size with the pancake lens I think the zoom might be quite handy.