Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by xdayv, Dec 15, 2011.
kit lens over the panny 14-42 pancake lens at same price that goes with a GX1 kit?
I would. But then again I'm not as concerned about being able to carry the camera in my pocket as some people are.
I have to admit I haven't paid real close attention to test results for the x-lens, but my impression is that it's on par with the regualr 14-42, except that the OIS causes real problems at the long end (where you need it most). The 14-45 is noticeably sharper than than the old 14-42, especially at the edges, and OIS works fine.
But if having a small bundle that fits in a pocket is important, and you're willing to turn OIS off most of the time, then the X lens might be a better choice.
I would take the X lens. Both are said to deliver very good IQ. I'm not a fan of the slow speed, power-zoom, or focus-by-rocker-switch, but the slow speed is inherent in both lenses. Therefore, it wouldn't be my first pick of zooms, but if I'm going to pick a slow zoom like that then I'd want it to at least be portable. Otherwise, if you're going to bring a bigger lens anyways, then why not just bring along a compact fast zoom like the Zuiko 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 II instead? That would be my thought, anyways... I've never held onto an f/3.5-5.6 kit zoom though, so I'm not the best to ask.
I'd go w/ the pancake lens. The IQ difference isn't that much, and I'd much prefer the compactness of the pancake (it's why I gravitated toward m43 after all). I don't need to pocket it, but it's nice that it takes up less room in my bag.
The 14-45 is a stellar lens. Even wide open. I don't know about the pancake. But the 14-45 will not dissapoint, I am pretty sure of that...
I agree. And I prefer to use a zoom with a zoom ring that I can turn with my hand. The 14-45 is my most favorite of all Panasonic lenses - even above the 20, 14, and 45. It is sharp and well made.
I've only had the 14-45 for a short time, but I'm pretty impressed with it. The stabilization works great and it compares favorably to my Nikon 16-85, a $600 lens. As Gerald said above the 14-45 is still sharp wide open, which I can't say about the Nikon at 85mm. I too am interested in the pancake zoom, but canceled my order when I started reading about the issues with the stabilization. Until they get those problems fixed I'm sticking with the 14-45, even though I would value being able to carry a GF2/pancake zoom in a pocket.
I'm more than happy to swap my 14-45 for the X if anyone wants to.
The X looks like it would be pretty nice on a Panny GX/GF or Oly E-PL3/E-PM1. But on a G or GH body, which isn't going to get all that small anyway... 14-45 all the way.
The 14-45 is definitely the better lens, optically. Used, it goes for under $200.
That said, the convenience of the X 14-42 is that you have a kit that's 40% thinner. That's the difference between a camera that can fit comfortable in a coat pocket, and one that needs a bag. If it were my take-anywhere camera, I'd want that extra portability.
I've been seriously considering that lens to add to my kit, but holding off till after the new year, as rumors of a 12-35 and 35-100, possibly 2.8 apertures being released
Ned is the 14 54 a micro 4/3, or do you need an adapter does it af or manual focus.
Is the 14 42 & 45 larger than the 54 ?
i will certainly consider the 35-100 if it has a 2.8 or faster constant aperture.
The 14-54 f/2.8-3.5 ii is a 4/3 lens. It is fairly large, auto focuses a bit more slowly than the m4/3 lenses and requires a $100+ adapter to function correctly, further increasing the size and price. You can do much better for your money.
Separate names with a comma.