Panasonic 14-42mm is inferior to 14-45mm

[RichA]

From Panasonic's lens catalog:

 

[minh0204]

The test on DPreview seems to confirm this. I have no idea why they have to swap a perfectly fine lens for an inferior one. Perhaps the new lens was designed with video in mind? Or is that simply a cost-cut homework poorly done by Panasonic?

 

[Jerry_R]

Video works OK with both. I had both lenses, I sold 14-42mm immediately. The difference is even bigger than on above charts...

My only explanation is Panasonic thinking like: Olympus worse u43 lenses sell, so why we are to produce better ones? If noone cares? Of course it is a mistake, no doubts...

 

[Vivek]

My only explanation is Panasonic thinking like: Olympus worse u43 lenses sell, so why we are to produce better ones? If noone cares?

Sounds plausible to me.

 

[DavidL]

I'd heard this was probable so I got a G1 with the 14-45 at knock down price while they were around. I also liked the blue body. Pathetic maybe, but it was cheaper and I just like the colour.
Looking forward to more concrete reviews of GH2 which may well become my carry around outfit. Recently spent a day working over Dartmoor with a Nikon with 14-24 and 70-200, at 63 it was a bit of a strain and I hitch hiked the last mile and a half back to the car. The fish and chips in the pub was wondrous.

 

[Jerry_R]

Mirrorless kit zooms comparison: http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f41/mirrorless-camera-standard-zoom-shootout-impressions-558/

My 14-42mm looked more like Samsung results in above test...

 

[CJS]

I'd heard this was probable so I got a G1 with the 14-45 at knock down price while they were around. I also liked the blue body. Pathetic maybe, but it was cheaper and I just like the colour.
Looking forward to more concrete reviews of GH2 which may well become my carry around outfit. Recently spent a day working over Dartmoor with a Nikon with 14-24 and 70-200, at 63 it was a bit of a strain and I hitch hiked the last mile and a half back to the car. The fish and chips in the pub was wondrous.

I have been laughed at on other sites when I say I'm finding my DSLR kit; Nikon D5000, 18-70, 70-300 a bit heavy after a while. I'm glad its not just me at 63 . . . :deadhorse: I feel like that dead horse some times these days . . . I'm getting very used to the G1 + 14-45mm lens :thumbup: After all, its only me I have to impress . . . I sneek the 45-200mm in sometimes as well . . . :toocool:

CJS

 

[jsf]

It is funny since I am also 63 and have Nikon gear, I am glad it isn't only me. My kit and gear and tripod weigh in at 14lbs. A day walking around and shooting and I feel it. I don't know how to make it any lighter. In the end I figure if I just lose 14lbs it should even out. Joe

 

[Streetshooter]

I had both lenses for about 2 hours. I still have the 14-45. It's probably one of the best kit lenses ever from any format.
The 14-42 is out in the world somewhere. I guess financially it's a cheaper investment for Panny to make the 14-42 but it's, well...
Anyway...the 14-45 will be a classic and collectable in time.

 

[Rich M]

I had both lenses for about 2 hours. I still have the 14-45. It's probably one of the best kit lenses ever from any format.
The 14-42 is out in the world somewhere. I guess financially it's a cheaper investment for Panny to make the 14-42 but it's, well...
Anyway...the 14-45 will be a classic and collectable in time.

I agree with you there, Don......it is hard to find ANYTHING wrong with that little baby.

R