GH3 GH3 video lens

[stoneinapond]

McI thought I needed less then 14.

I'm not sure I fully understand "less than". Do you mean wider? If that is the case you are going the wrong way from where you want to be.

There are several interview framing conventions. There is the full face, half body shot, full body, and then as mbob states, the environmental shot that can include more of the space or the interviewer and interviewee. In that order you either move the camera from in close to further away, or from a fixed position you would zoom from a long focal length down to a wide length. Not that you would necessarily use these lengths but for illustration purposes with the zoom lens, you would go from 140mm down to 14mm.

 

[Bruce Foreman]

Bruce, thank you! This is a no brainer; I'll contact him. But I just wanted to have good zoom for outdoors as well Guess that's greed for now and I have to make tough choices.

This is NOT part of a "tough choice". At the price he's asking (for a lens) it's almost "pocket change". When I got back into photography four years after I retired from pro work, I bought the original Canon digital Rebel (300D) with an early Canon version of this lens. I used it exclusively for the next 4 years before I started buying other lenses. For right now this guy's 14=42 will let you learn much about what you want, need, can do, and more all with a good "general purpose" lens.

At that price it won't last at all. I'm one of those who "snaps up" deals like this just to have a lens on a spare body instead of a body cap, and I'd be all over this one except I just got one.

Question:

If I had to choose one prime, which? 14mm/f.2.5 or 20mm/f.1.7? (Assuming I am also buying the 14-140 or 14-42) and my work mainly interviews as a starters.

If budget means use some restraint, the Lumix 20mm f1.7 would be my choice. It's small enough it doesn't call attention to itself and is an excellent performer, what I'd call slightly wide "normal". If budget would allow a bit more at under $500 the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f1.4 is an outstanding performer. I have both, I chose to hang onto the 20mm when I got the 25mm and I use both.

My advice is "snag" that 14-42 FAST while it's available and start shooting with the GH, learn it and what you can from that lens. THEN start looking at options from a more personally informed viewpoint.

 

[stoneinapond]

My advice is "snag" that 14-42 FAST while it's available and start shooting with the GH, learn it and what you can from that lens. THEN start looking at options from a more personally informed viewpoint.

This is the best advice...IMO

:thumbup:

 

[sky17]

I'm not sure I fully understand "less than". Do you mean wider? If that is the case you are going the wrong way from where you want to be.

There are several interview framing conventions. There is the full face, half body shot, full body, and then as mbob states, the environmental shot that can include more of the space or the interviewer and interviewee. In that order you either move the camera from in close to further away, or from a fixed position you would zoom from a long focal length down to a wide length. Not that you would necessarily use these lengths but for illustration purposes with the zoom lens, you would go from 140mm down to 14mm.

Stoneinabond, Thank. Yes, I meant wider. I might be wrong but that is just guessing what was bothering me with the 14-140. Anyways, thanks for the options you mentioned about interview framing styles. I don't have a "must" do method. That is why I wanted some flexibility. I tend to like, though, the environmental. I remember now, in testing the 14-140, I could not get a satisfying env. with the widest at 14. I had to move further to the back in a relatively small room.

So is there a wider lens (prime probably) that you would recommend for this situation. Is the pancake still an option given what I encountered?

 

[sky17]

This is NOT part of a "tough choice". At the price he's asking (for a lens) it's almost "pocket change".

At that price it won't last at all. I'm one of those who "snaps up" deals like this just to have a lens on a spare body instead of a body cap, and I'd be all over this one except I just got one.

If budget means use some restraint, the Lumix 20mm f1.7 would be my choice. It's small enough it doesn't call attention to itself and is an excellent performer, what I'd call slightly wide "normal". If budget would allow a bit more at under $500 the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f1.4 is an outstanding performer. I have both, I chose to hang onto the 20mm when I got the 25mm and I use both.

My advice is "snag" that 14-42 FAST while it's available and start shooting with the GH, learn it and what you can from that lens. THEN start looking at options from a more personally informed viewpoint.

Bruce, thanks. I really did send him the day you recommended the link and waiting his reply. Seems it is sold. Plus I am in Canada and with mail fees I can get similar used one here. I'm keeping an eye on sale while researching here and talking to you guys. Thanks for the advice on "snagging" such items; it is "pocket money" indeed. What I mean by "tough" is that I wanted to buy once and minimize the need to accumulate glass with time even if it is cheap. Hard not to do trials, though.

I will take the advice even if the lens was sold. There are others. For now I think I have my last 2 questions. Have you used the 14mm prime? And, is there a relatively close equivalent to the Canon 18-135? I seen a friend using it for her interviews and was so flexible and good results.

 

[Bruce Foreman]

I remember now, in testing the 14-140, I could not get a satisfying env. with the widest at 14. I had to move further to the back in a relatively small room.

You were trying to test in a pretty confined space, maybe more limited than some of the locations you'd be actually working in. To get "more" in than the 14mm wide gave you, you would be using optics that would begin to introduce more "wide angle distortion" than you might want to deal with in that kind of setting.

On the GH series, 14mm is the equivalent of full frame 28mm wide which may be as wide as you want to go.

So is there a wider lens (prime probably) that you would recommend for this situation. Is the pancake still an option given what I encountered?

The Olympus M.Zuiko 12mm f2 is widely favored, a tad wider than the 14mm it is a 35mm full frame equiv of a 24mm wide angle, which stops just short of being "fish eye". It would be fantastic for scenic interiors, picturesque but crowded city environments, but may or may not be suitable for many interview settings. I would love to have one but will have to save up for awhile to afford it. $799 in the US (I believe) but worth every penny. I'd use it on an interview if I had no other solution but would prefer a location I could use the 14mm in.

I will take the advice even if the lens was sold. There are others. For now I think I have my last 2 questions. Have you used the 14mm prime? And, is there a relatively close equivalent to the Canon 18-135? I seen a friend using it for her interviews and was so flexible and good results.

I have the Lumix 14mm prime, and I use it. With it's compact size, excellent image quality, and reasonably fast aperture for a wide angle, it fits in a corner of a small bag and adds almost no weight. I wouldn't even sell it to raise part of the price of the Oly 12mm described above.

As to the equivalent of the Canon 18-135mm, the Lumix 14-140 you've looked at is just that and goes it even better as it's probably sharper.

 

[sky17]

You were trying to test in a pretty confined space, maybe more limited than some of the locations you'd be actually working in. To get "more" in than the 14mm wide gave you, you would be using optics that would begin to introduce more "wide angle distortion" than you might want to deal with in that kind of setting.

On the GH series, 14mm is the equivalent of full frame 28mm wide which may be as wide as you want to go.



The Olympus M.Zuiko 12mm f2 is widely favored, a tad wider than the 14mm it is a 35mm full frame equiv of a 24mm wide angle, which stops just short of being "fish eye". It would be fantastic for scenic interiors, picturesque but crowded city environments, but may or may not be suitable for many interview settings. I would love to have one but will have to save up for awhile to afford it. $799 in the US (I believe) but worth every penny. I'd use it on an interview if I had no other solution but would prefer a location I could use the 14mm in.




I have the Lumix 14mm prime, and I use it. With it's compact size, excellent image quality, and reasonably fast aperture for a wide angle, it fits in a corner of a small bag and adds almost no weight. I wouldn't even sell it to raise part of the price of the Oly 12mm described above.

As to the equivalent of the Canon 18-135mm, the Lumix 14-140 you've looked at is just that and goes it even better as it's probably sharper.

Bruce, I can't thank you enough. I have now a lot of info to digest and act on and compare. I hope I'll have an update soon as to what I eventually end up buying.

Edit: currently looking at a deal on the Oly Zuiko 12-60mm for around $600.
Edit2: Declined offer it was not perfect condition and expensive.