Lumix 14-42mm kit lens VS. 14mm f/2.5 G

[cut2052]

FWIU, the 14mm f/2.5 would have:
- better image
- better in low light
- better DOF

My question is, besides the fact that the 14-42mm kit lens has the ability to zoom from a distance whereas the f/2.5 G is a fixed distance: would there be any other reason, besides the zoom, to use the kit lens over the f/2.5?

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14-42mm-Aspherical-OIS-Interchangeable/dp/B0043VE28I/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1307753195&sr=8-3

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14m...E29C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1307753169&sr=8-2


To clarify: if you already have a 14-42 kit lens that came with a GH camera/would there be a need for it after getting an f/2.5?

 

[Psynema]

honestly...no

Really like the kit lens, OIS and continuous AF is worth it. Sure it's slower, but if you want faster, 2.5 really isn't cutting it - save the cash on the 20mm 1.7, wait for the 12mm 2.0, or just get a manual lens

 

[cut2052]

honestly...no

Really like the kit lens, OIS and continuous AF is worth it. Sure it's slower, but if you want faster, 2.5 really isn't cutting it - save the cash on the 20mm 1.7, wait for the 12mm 2.0, or just get a manual lens

I understand what you're saying.

Thanks, will do.