The newer 14-140 Lumix OIS Zoom vs the 14-45 kit Zoom and 45-150 Zoom

Mohun

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
81
I have a relatively new GX7 and, GAS not withstanding, I don't plan "upgrading" any time soon. My very modest kit is the venerable but excellent IQ/operating value 14-45 OIS zoom (and it's functioned very well indeed as my general walk-around lens on two European holidays), and a new 15mm f/1.7 PL Summilux which so far has been splendid and is currently mounted on the GX7 as my default, i.e., "grab and go" lens.

From time to time on a few outings, particularly to the zoo and other mostly outdoor activities, I'd like a little bit longer (than the 14-45) lens option, definitely an OIS Lumix, but not one of the several costly options.

I've thought about the Lumix 45-150 which seems so far to be a good value for its IQ and price, but is not sold separately locally. I more and more prefer to buy locally than deal with the possible hassle that might be involved with any returns, shipping, etc even with a solid online retailer like B&H, from which I've purchased in the past and from which I continue to purchase smaller items like spare batteries an, especially, printer ink.

I'm wondering if a sensible option for me would be to sell or trade in my 14-45 and substitute the newer 14-140 zoom for both my basic zoom and a 45-150 OIS zoom, or would I suffer an overall IQ and/or operational step backward in the 14-45mm range if made such a change?
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,514
Location
USA
... I'm wondering if a sensible option for me would be to sell or trade in my 14-45 and substitute the newer 14-140 zoom ...?
That's what I did, though at the time the 2nd generation 14-140mm had not yet be introduced so I have a 1st gen.

I had both the 14-45mm and the 45-150mm and what I found (as primarily a tourist photographer) is that the 45mm crossover point is very awkward and necessitated a lot of lens changing. As you have found out, 90mm (35mm equivalent) is not long enough for many outside situations, especially wildlife and birds. It is also, however, too long for the majority of outside shots. So you end up changing lenses frequently and missing shots besides. I sold my pair of lenses for more money than I had to pay for the 14-140mm, so the economics worked too. I have never regretted the decision. Now I often shoot two bodies, one with the 9-18mm and one with the 14-140mm. A pretty good tourist arsenal I think! :)

Re the 1st vs. the 2nd generation, my understanding from reviews is that performance is not much difference. So what you are paying for is the lighter weight, something I have not yet considered to be worth the money. I am waiting to see what the Tamron 14-14mm look like. Its weight is similar to the 2nd gen Panny, so if it has noticeably better sharpness I may consider it. With the IBIS in my GX7s I am not too concerned about the missing OIS. YMMV, of course.
 

listers_nz

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Messages
313
Location
Christchurch, New Zealand
Real Name
Simon
I haven't used the 14-45mm so I can't comment on its image quality vs the 14-140mm. However, when I bought my GX1 it came with the 14-42mm PZ and I bought a secondhand 45-150mm. I didn't really like the PZ at all - I found the placement of the zoom switch awkward, so I sold both lenses and bought the 2nd generation 14-140mm. It works for me. The 14-140mm is only slightly bigger than the 45-150mm so its not like I'm carrying any more kit around anyway (unless I take the other lenses I have since added, but that is another story :wink:)
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
I had the 14-45mm and 14-140mm MkI concurrently and my reason for choosing to use the 14-45mm at any given time was for the size and weight saving, not sharpness. To be precise, the 14-45mm had sharper corners at 14mm only. My take on the 14-140mm MkII from reviews, etc is that it is, at worse, equal to the MkI optically.
 

rklepper

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
734
Location
Iowa, USA
Real Name
Robert
I have the 14-42 and I bought the 45-175 to go with it. It is a very capable kit under the right conditions.
 

spdavies

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
2,173
Location
Hawaii
Real Name
Stephen
I have both set-ups you are describing. The 14-140 is almost the same size as the 45-150.
It is larger than the 14-45 but not by a lot.
I always end up taking the 14-140.
It is sharp, light, not that large, and the convenience seals the deal.
I'm going to sell the other two lenses -
(although I hate to part with the 14-45 - it's a beautiful classic and, I believe, the first m4/3 zoom lens).
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,913
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I owned a 14-42 II and 45-150, but ended up selling both of them to fund a 14-140 II, and I haven't regretted it one bit. The lens isn't much bigger or heavier than the 45-150, but you never have to change lenses and risk missing a shot.

The 14-140 II is a fantastic lens, and I really can't fault it being a 10x, 3.5-5.6 zoom lens, the performance is quite good.
 

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,351
I only have the 14-140 Mk. 1, but for those times when I just want a grab-and-go camera for general shooting, I would never hesitate to pick the 1 lens solution instead of 2 kit zooms. The difference in quality between the 14-140 and the pair of alternative zooms will be trivial compared to the difference you'd get using a good prime lens. M4/3 has very nice superzooms, and it's a perfect opportunity to simplify your kit, in my opinion.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom