GH3 what lens for my new gh3?

another silly..as it said that for cinema is widely used 35 and 85..are these ff? so that means that in 4 3 is 17 and 42?
 
stefanocps said:
ok i see...still don't see difference in term of light between 14 42 standard and power. they have the same f. quality should be the same..?
Click to expand...

The optical quality is difference ( maybe not a huge difference ) but it's there. Where you will see the biggest difference with these 14-42mm/45mm kit lenses is Chromatic Abberation. ( the 14-45mm has low Chromatic Abberation, which will help to make fine details sharp )

stefanocps said:
there is a new parameter the f equivalent...so the 3.6 f on a 4/3 is supposed to be like 7.2 on ff and 4.68 on dx?
Click to expand...

This is reference to Depth of Field or DOF. I would not worry too much about DOF for your first camera lens, though you may want to buy faster prime lenses after the "kit" lens to be able to produce a shallow DOF image. The Olympus 45mm f/1.8 prime lens is a very nice lens to shoot interviews and medium close-ups.
 
i am tending to a soft multipourpose like 14 42 or 14 45 and the some prime, even adapted old one....so that they might cost less....of course if i would find a good price for 12 35..i will get..but for now it is definitely too much.....so you say that 14 45 is better than poewer 14 42 in terms of quality?the power has better stabilizer that is important and electrical zoom that may be no that important...
 
There is a new 3rd generation 14-42mm lens that might ship with the new G6 camera, which might turn out to be better, but right now I feel the 14-45mm lens is the best quality in for a low cost "kit" lens.
 
TheDingo said:
There is a new 3rd generation 14-42mm lens that might ship with the new G6 camera, which might turn out to be better, but right now I feel the 14-45mm lens is the best quality in for a low cost "kit" lens.
Click to expand...

is this one to come yet also?how long?..and a part of that , mate i want to thank you for all your kind help and support you giving me
 
BTW, if you are considering the 14-45, from what I can tell it has been discontinued. There are some left in various channels but they will go sooner rather than later. I just bought one to go with my 45-200 - wanted the new 14-140 but delivery dates seem to be constantly pushed back.

Don't you just :love4: Panasonic.....

Both lenses can be had for under $600 and they make a nice combo with a very healthy range.
 
stoneinapond said:
BTW, if you are considering the 14-45, from what I can tell it has been discontinued. There are some left in various channels but they will go sooner rather than later. I just bought one to go with my 45-200 - wanted the new 14-140 but delivery dates seem to be constantly pushed back.

Don't you just :love4: Panasonic.....

Both lenses can be had for under $600 and they make a nice combo with a very healthy range.
Click to expand...
you mean 14 45 and 45 200? anywway i don't bother at all for 2 hand lenses..i look for themactually
 
stefanocps said:
reading the specs luminosity of oly seems the same than lumix..do yuo confirm?
Click to expand...

Yes, the 12-50mm works perfectly on the GH3. The autofocus is as fast as I've experienced. Nice power zoom, and a macro setting.
Really a nice little knock around lens.
 
stefanocps said:
ah that is a bad point though, well i don't know how effective is stabilization in gh3, in nikon d5100..i almost don't notice
Click to expand...

I shoot it on a light PVC rig and I can hold it very steady through it's range.
I dont shoot any serious work just holding any camera in my hands, though some do.
Anyway, no IS makes this a really powerful and affordable unit.
 
ok..after much talkin seems i have the classical 2 choices .1 alla round 14 140 or combination fo 2 lens which could be 14 45 or 12 50 oly and 45/150 or 45/175 (the 45/200 seems the worste of the 3). for what i have read aroun most people seems to prefer the 14 140 for easy , to do not change, and that is beacuse of performances compared to the combination of 2 are very similar. for me it is the same. i'd like to have all i n one, so i don't need to change, but i would do if there is a real convenicence as i piut in 1 place as much qualiti as i can. so looks like these are cances 14 140 or 14/45 or 12/50oly PLUS 45/150 or 45/175. what do you think about? i believe oly works ell on pana though i read somewhere that pana perfrom better on pana and oly on oly, plus the ois matter of which i can't t figure anything
 
i'm kind of in the same boat. Personally, i think Oly 12-50 is better value for money. It's slightly slower than 14-140 but about two times cheaper. For 700 Euros 14-140 costs, i expect something like 14-50/3.5 or 4.0. Don't think it's good idea to spend that amount on an average perfomer in terms of f-stop.

Oly 12-50 has a power-zoom (which might be handy for video) and is dust/splash proof.

Things i don't know about Oly 12-50:
1) is it parfocal ?
2) does it extend during zooming, if yes - how much?
3) how loud is it during AF and power zoom?
 
Last edited:
I am in the same boat as you. About to purchase a GH3 and looking for a good lens that does not cost too much. Just wanted to know what everybody thinks of the 14-42mm vario X lens? It recently had a firmware update with the following enhancements:

Speed of AF, consecutive shooting performance of AFC is enhanced in use with DMC-GH3

Does this change anybody's view of this lens? Anybody with this lens can comment on how much better it is?
 
No specs or reviews really tell you the true advnatage of the 14-140 lens. When you do need to shoot without stopping and need a lens to auto focus, have great stabilization, maintain focus through the zoom range mostly and have a huge 10x zoom range the 14-140 is worth every penny.

I had the 14-42 and 45-200 and sold them to buy a 14-140. Best decision I could have made. 14-140 performs just as well if not a tiny bit better but is so much more useful and versatile of a lens. there is very little this lens cannot shoot except in the dark. Then again most zooms have this problem including those from Canon and Nikon.

Knowing I have a much better chance of not missing a shot can mean so much more than saving a couple hundred bucks. in fact if the lighting is good I would choose this lens over the f2.8 zooms anyday.
 
den59 said:
i'm kind of in the same boat. Personally, i think Oly 12-50 is better value for money. It's slightly slower than 14-140 but about two times cheaper. For 700 Euros 14-140 costs, i expect something like 14-50/3.5 or 4.0. Don't think it's good idea to spend that amount on an average perfomer in terms of f-stop.

Oly 12-50 has a power-zoom (which might be handy for video) and is dust/splash proof.

Things i don't know about Oly 12-50:
1) is it parfocal ?
2) does it extend during zooming, if yes - how much?
3) how loud is it during AF and power zoom?
Click to expand...

It's parfocal, it zooms internally and silently and doesn't rotate either (very slick) and has weather sealing.
AF is amazingly fast and quiet.
The GH3 displays the focal length when zooming.
It's amazingly small and light and it has really nice IQ - probably not so much for photography, but it's really an ideal run and gun, outdoor lens.

Nothing beats the Oly primes on the GH3, and I really bought this just to try it for $250, and I was really surprised by it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top