Is there ANYTHING better about the 14-42 lens, say over the 14-45 ???

C

ChipThome

Well-known member
I have heard the 14-42 kit lens is actually pretty decent. I have read the comparisons and almost everyone states the 14-45 is better built, sharper etc. I am wondering seeing how the 14-42 is newer, is there ANYTHING it does better than the 14-45 ??? Quieter ??? Faster AF maybe ??? Anything ???
 
lpowell you made my night !!!! :-)

I came back and glanced down the main page and there's lpowell posted to my thread !!! I am thinking "WOW, now I am REALLY going to get some serious insight into these different optics !!!"

And what do I find........ it weighs less. :-) :-) :-)

Even if that is all that is better about it, thanks for bringing a smile to my face !!!!
 
seven.b said:
It's cheaper
Click to expand...

You guys are killing me here !!!! :-) :-) :-)

Here's the deal. I have several new unhackable GH1s and looking for lenses so everything has at least one on it. The price spread appears to be approx. $100 between them, which kinda makes a 14-45 a no brainer until you start talking a group of them, as I am looking at.

I have one of the 14-45 and two of the 14-42s. I am at a decision to take them all one way or the other and all the older reviews I read said go with the pricier one. I can see that UNLESS, there is some more redeeming attribute for video with the 14-42 that warrants keeping it on instead of the more generally praised 14-45.

So is there anything, or is this a "well it doesn't suck" caliber of lens ???
 
I compared the two lenses side by side, and concluded that AF speed and noise were close to identical.
 
The 14-45 is out of production, AFAIK. If you have a chance to get, pick one up. You will always be able to get a 14-42.
 
TheDingo said:
Set to 35mm the 14-42 lens resolves about 750 lines/mm over most of the image area.

Set to 35mm the 14-45 lens resolves about 1200+ lines/mm over most of the image area.

Which would you choose?
Click to expand...

Dingo...the other night there was a still image review of the two I saw where they put both lenses through their paces on the same cam set up, just chnaging lenses. The image quality I saw of those stills probably matches these numbers to a T. That review was there in my thought process and part of why I started this thread. I could see the still quality but thought "there HAS to be SOMETHING better about this lens anyway, isn't there ???"
 
TheDingo said:
Set to 35mm the 14-42 lens resolves about 750 lines/mm over most of the image area.

Set to 35mm the 14-45 lens resolves about 1200+ lines/mm over most of the image area.

Which would you choose?
Click to expand...

Clearly the 14-45 is a better lens. It is also more expensive.

Personally, I wouldn't normally choose either. I like to work with primes. The only reason I have the 14-42 is that as a kit lens it cost $100 more than a body only GH2. And for certain rough and ready work, and where I have to travel really light, I find the lens acceptable image wise.
 
+1 on 14-42.

I saw really cool videos taken by m43 ois lenses. Mostly fast moving on both subjects "and" camera men. Really there's no time to do manual focusing in that case. Plus heavy color correction and lots of special fx. Some talented people can create awesome videos with the "slow" m43 lenses.
 
TheDingo said:
Set to 35mm the 14-42 lens resolves about 750 lines/mm over most of the image area.

Set to 35mm the 14-45 lens resolves about 1200+ lines/mm over most of the image area.

Which would you choose?
Click to expand...

I don't doubt these figures for a second. However, consider that when we are dealing with Full HD video, we are looking at 1080x 1920 in total. You do the maths. A lens's resolving power barely comes into it.

Surely more relevant to choosing a lens for HD are issues such as (in my personal order of importance) 1.) How fast the lens is, 2.) How bad the chromatic aberration is (particularly wide open), 3.) out of focus characteristics, or bokeh, 4.) contrast characteristics (some prefer high for out of camera niceness, others prefer low for most post-correction options) 5.) colour balance (never found a lens I actually disliked on his front)

OK, so sharpness, or resolving power probably does fall into that list somewhere, but it's not at the top of the priorities list, for HD video at least - stills is another matter. Having said that, there's no way I would buy the 14-42mm, but the 14-45mm is a bargain, for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top