cbettis Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 <p>Just bought a used Oly E-P2 body. Thoughts on the Oly 14-42 versus the Panasonic 14-42? I have been told that the focusing speed with the Pany on the P2 is faster. Anecdotal?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 <p>There's been lots of discussion on the micro 4/3 forum, as they seem to have more micro 4/3 users than we do on PN.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r.t. dowling Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 <p>Try this:</p> <p>http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00a6r4</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariel_s1 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 <p>Try to stay away from the original Olympus 14-42mm. Get yourself the version II, or the newer R version (which actually is mechanically identical to the version II). Or, get yourself the Panasonic. Amazon is selling the lens for $140 right now.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r.t. dowling Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 <p>I've got the original 14-42 and so far I'm impressed with it, but I haven't used the other 14-42 lenses so I have no frame of reference.</p> <p>Photozone (a great resource) did thorough reviews of the original Olympus 14-42 and the Panasonic 14-42, as well as the Panasonic 14-45 which looks like it might be better than the 14-42. Worth checking out:</p> <p>http://www.photozone.de/m43</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meissner Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 <p>While some say the Panasonic 14-45mm is a better lens than the Olympus, one of the things that drew me to micro 4/3rds in the first place is the smallness of the lenses, particularly when folded up. The Panasonic lenses are rather big, and lose this advantage.</p> <p>The 14-42mm that came with the E-P2 is the original version. The newer 14-42mm mark II or mark II-R will focus faster. In addition, you can get fisheye, wide angle, and macro adapters fairly cheaply that fit on the end of the 14-42mm mark II. While a dedicated lens will give you better quality, if you only need wide angle or macro occasionally, it is much cheaper to go with the adapters. There used to be talk that the original 14-42mm had a wobble at certain shutter speeds. Recent firmware modifications have made it had less often, but I suspect the real fix was in the second generation of the lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariel_s1 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 <p>Michael, from my viewpoint, m4/3 cameras are already too large to fit in my pocket. Plus, since it's an interchangeable-lens system, I often have multiple lenses with me. If all I wanted is a pocketable, small as possible serious camera with only a midrange zoom capability, I'd just pick up an XZ-1, G12, X10, LX5, etc. A few millimeters or ounces shaved off here or there doesn't help me any. It's still an overall relatively small system, and that's good enough for me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now