GH3 Alternative to the 14-140?

HotConductor said:
I'm with you, but with the 14-140 I don't have to lens swap. I have never used the 12-35 but I have a feeling I'd constantly be missing the zoom. With the 35-100 I feel like I'd be missing my wide shot.
Click to expand...

Then you've kind of answered your own question don't you think?

Plenty of good answers here before this one but, at the price, the 14-140 is an awfully good choice (because of the range and the fact that it is able to communicate with the camera).
Could it have been faster? Sure but then what would it have cost.
And okay, it's not great for repeatable focus or matte boxes but c'mon, to have a zoom that fulfills those requirements what might you expect to spend . . . hint (a lot!).
It's not parfocal, it's not this, it's not that . . . it's not a lot of things but it is what it is and while something of a "one trick pony" does what it does at a very reasonable cost (especially when you consider you can pick 'em up on eBat or from the nay-sayers for a song), <g>.

There are people that constantly criticize this lens but, from my perspective, as long as you don't expect it to be a cinema lens (which it's not), or behave like a prime, you'll have the capacity to get some amazing shots (for some people it's their "go to" lens).
 
@Mark Williams - Who was your comment directed at? If me, I do not own the FZ200.

@Thomas Smet - My concern is the image quality itself. The raw files posted on Personal View look softer than the HMC150. It also feels from the footage like there is no optical stabilization. I can film a concert handheld on the 14-140, be zoomed all the way, and get a closeup on a guitar that is useable. Maybe I just have steady hands but everything I can find on the FZ200 looks fuzzy, shaky and nowhere near the GH2. The lone example being the stuff on Panasonic's official youtube channel. It is such an inexpensive camera I am likely going to pick one up and see if those trends are just user error, or if the camera's image is just that way.

@dregenthal - I think you are right. I have made up my mind for now. Other lenses for other purposes, 14-140 as the champ lens that can handle almost anything. The other thing is I love invested in M43 knowing that I will buy a GH3 this month. The glass can be used across multiple cameras on big or small productions. The FZ200 could be a good B-cam or art tool with 120fps, but if the image isn't up to spec I can't use it on important gigs.
 
HotConductor said:
@Mark Williams - Who was your comment directed at? If me, I do not own the FZ200.

@Thomas Smet - My concern is the image quality itself. The raw files posted on Personal View look softer than the HMC150. It also feels from the footage like there is no optical stabilization. I can film a concert handheld on the 14-140, be zoomed all the way, and get a closeup on a guitar that is useable. Maybe I just have steady hands but everything I can find on the FZ200 looks fuzzy, shaky and nowhere near the GH2. The lone example being the stuff on Panasonic's official youtube channel. It is such an inexpensive camera I am likely going to pick one up and see if those trends are just user error, or if the camera's image is just that way.

@dregenthal - I think you are right. I have made up my mind for now. Other lenses for other purposes, 14-140 as the champ lens that can handle almost anything. The other thing is I love invested in M43 knowing that I will buy a GH3 this month. The glass can be used across multiple cameras on big or small productions. The FZ200 could be a good B-cam or art tool with 120fps, but if the image isn't up to spec I can't use it on important gigs.
Click to expand...

It actually has very good image stabilization. The problem with online video samples from a camera in this league is that the people tend to be on the consumer end and may not upload footage that does the camera justice. Yes it isn't going to be as good as the GH2, that is a given.

I recently saw a video where somebody shot low light side by side comparisons between the FZ200 and the GH2. Both cameras used f2.8 at first but then the user switched to the 14-42 lens near the end of the video. While the GH2 had better color and slightly better detail the FZ200 seemed much better in low light. especially when you compare it to slower lenses like the 14-42 or 14-140. Of course it smokes those lenses on the long end. As it turns out the person didn't match the shutter speed on both cameras and mistakingly thought the 60p on the FZ200 should use a shutter of 1/120th. This means it could have been even better in low light. We also don't know exactly what ISO was used in every shot but he never went over 1200 I guess.

http://vimeo.com/51603575

So it may not look as good but then again you gain a killer zoom lens that may actually resolve better quality than the GH2 in low light situations.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top