The EPL1 kit lens vs the 14-42 II R?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by D7k1, May 8, 2014.

  1. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Nov 18, 2013
    While I'm buying primes, I still would like to have a "reasonable" kit lens like my "L" 14-42. But I want the MSC focusing and the ability to use the MCON1, at the $99 price shipped at Cameta I just might get it for the quicker focus for video and the ability to use the MCON1. I tested my "L" at 14 against the Pany 14 and at 40 against the 40-150 and it was pretty close. Anyone actually own and compare the image quality of these two lenses? I see lots of references to R being better than the ED (both original and plastic mount version). I'm asking if folks think the R is significantly better optically than the "L". Thanks.
  2. penfan2010

    penfan2010 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 12, 2010
    NJ, USA
    I had the Mk1 Olympus 14-42 kit zoom that came with my E-P1; I now own the Mk II R version, and, subjectively (i.e., not via hard-core chart testing, just Mk 1 eyeballing), I have found the Mk II R to be much sharper overall. Much nicer build quality and design, too.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    I own the Oly 14-42 kit and I like the oddest thing about it: that it's large. Looks like a real lens vs what I bought to replace it: 12-32. I haven't used the 12-32 much but it seems to lack contrast, even vs the 14-42. The again that was an overcast day so you'll have to ask me about this at a later date.

    I was all set to buy the Panasonic 14-45 until I saw that the 14-42 was a better looking built IMO and could be had new for $150. I was even going to get silver and sell the 14-42. But I figured I'd just pay the premium for the 12-32 since there will be cases where I want a tiny lens. But in all me readings, I've found that the 12-42 II Panasonic is a very good kit lens.
    • Like Like x 1