Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

  1. #1
    lewis_levin
    Guest

    Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    First, late me say that this is the most delightful photography forum I've seen. What a bresh of fresh air to see people sharing really amazing photos and being supportive and respectful of each other--in fact, beyond respectful you seem delighted.

    So here is my question:

    I have a GF1 with the 14-45mm. Loving it. For some of my outdoor and street photography I need more range. Would you recommend the 14-140 or the 45-200? My criteria are image quality and auto-focus speed and image stabilization. For my purposes the 140 (x2) is plenty of range.

    Thanks,
    Lewis

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    89
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    Well... you have the 14-45, the next Zoom... 45 - 200. Now you have 14 - 200 or 4/2 term.. 28 - 400. You have the whole range covered. Next you need a couple of prime, a 20mm and a the 45(?) for Macro. U R set.

    Hope this helps...

    Robert.

  3. #3
    lewis_levin
    Guest

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    Thanks. I am not worried about some overlap in range covered. I am curious which tele provides the best image quality. Has anyone been able to compare (even just impressions) the 14-140 and the 45-200 for image quality?

    Tx.

  4. #4
    Member kwalsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    147
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    Hard call. I'm not sure there is a big difference in IS performance or AF speed and the IQ is probably pretty close (perhaps slight nod to the 45-200). The 14-140 is of course a nice one lens solution, but it is pricey being a 10x zoom and having advanced video features. The 45-200 is cheaper and will give you wider apertures over most of the focal range, but you have to carry an extra lens and change lenses.

    Ken

  5. #5
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    Seems like the 45-200mm would suit you better, unless you want an all-in-one solution or constant AF for video. It's inexpensive and has lower apertures across the same range. Check out the reviews of both on slrgear.com though.

  6. #6
    lewis_levin
    Guest

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    SLRGear seems to have gotten a weird sample of the 45-200 that was considerably off-center. That said, it seems that CA is pretty noticeable but controllable, while the 14-140 seems to have negligible CA. On the sharpness front, the 14-140 is a tiny bit better, but the credible performance of the 45-200 requires stopping down--so the advantage of being 1/2 to 1 stop faster is negated in practical use.

    I'm still left wondering here and wondering if any of you have practical experience--the real judge--with both lenses. Seems either is OK with the 14-140 being a bit more consistent.

    I'll look at some reviews of the G1 and GH1 that provide the 14-140 as a kit lens--that seems to be how most people are obtaining this lens.

    Thanks.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panasonic 14-140 or 45-200?

    Its funny but I would have thought that the 45-200 complented the base zoom quite well but frequently find that the lens just isn't convenient.

    In full-frame 35mm cameras, the longest lens I had was 200mm but most of the time got by with 35mm and 85mm lenses. In compact cameras, I maxed out at 134mm or thereabouts so I thought 200mm would be good.

    After living with the 45-200 to complement my Olympus 14-42, I simply find it inconvenient, neither being long enough or wide enough yet I am not a lover of long zooms.

    I would be inclinded to advise getting the 14-140 as you can use this as a single lens for travelling (other than in low light hand held stuff where the 20mm f/1.7 would come into play) and then complement it with something going to 300mm later on if yo need that reach.

    You are right that the 45-200 needs stopping down, expecially at 200mm. I find that the images are just not sharp enough when shot at full open aperture. In good light when the lens can be stopped down to f/8 or more, no real problem but f/5.6 leaves a lot to be desired.

    Edit - I haven't found CA to be an issue but I don't think the buld quality of the Panasonic lens matches my Olympus lens. While the Olympus 14-42 is obviously built to a price, it doesn't feel it nor behave like it. Even though the Panasonic 45-200 costs considerably more, and appears a pleasant enough lens, its performance and build quality such as the very lightly made mount don't ooze the quality I would have expected.
    Last edited by PeterB666; 24th October 2009 at 22:29. Reason: Add additional comment.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •