Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH Power OIS Hands-on Preview: Digital Photography Review

Operation

The power zoom design makes using the PZ 14-42mm very much like working with a compact camera. Indeed, when used with the GF3 it gives the most compact-like user experience of any mirrorless ILC to date. In fact we'd go so far as to say that the GF3 itself suddenly makes far more sense when paired up with it; for example the flash shadowing problem we noted in our review of the camera, that's seen when shooting at the wide end of the conventional 14-42mm kit zoom, is eliminated with the much-smaller PZ lens.

The positioning of the zoom and focus levers works well when holding the camera in landscape format, but our initial impression is that they're a little more awkward to operate when shooting in portrait orientation (conventional zoom rings, of course, work equally well either way round). Naturally, this isn't a problem when shooting video.

The control levers are both multi-speed in operation, i.e. the speed of the zoom or focusing movement depends on how far you pull them away from their centered position. In other words, with a small movement of the lever the lens zooms or focuses slowly, and with a large movement, quickly. This is a sensible way for Panasonic to address the usual criticism of power zoom lenses that they make critical composition difficult, but we'll wait for a production sample of the lens before assessing how well it really works in practice.

During video recording, you can still zoom the lens but it's limited to its slowest speed. This both helps minimise operational noise (the motor is barely audible on your soundtrack), and makes movies more pleasant to watch, as rapid zooming rarely works well.

Videos of the PZ 14-42mm in operation

In the videos below, we demonstrate the lens's operation. This particular sample is a pre-production unit running non-finalised firmware (the camera displays V0.0) - Panasonic has asked us not to publish stills or movies recorded using the lens, but we can show videos illustrating how it works. From these you can get some idea of the speed of startup, the multi-speed zooming, and the operational noise (which is extremely low). Note that Panasonic says it's still working on optimizing the zoom operation.

In this video the sequence of actions is: Power on, fast zoom in, fast zoom out, slow zoom in, slow zoom out, power off. Recorded using a Panasonic DMC-GH2 with Lumix G 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 lens, sound courtesy of the GH2's built-in mic (the cameras were about 60cm / 2 ft apart). If you turn the volume right up, you can just about make out the PZ lens's operational noise.



This video shows a similar sequence of events: Power on, autofocus, fast zoom in, fast zoom out, slow zoom in. Again recorded using the Panasonic GH2, this time with an adapted Olympus OM 50mm F3.5 macro; sound via inbuilt mic. (This video is purely to show the difference in speed between the fast and slow zoom speeds, no other conclusion can be drawn from it.)

Comments

Total comments: 163

Judging from my own experience and that of others on these lists this is indeed a problematic lens, and the company's (lack of) response raises broader concerns about its commitment to this market segment. I, too, had noted softness at mid-shutter speeds and documented it in a series of tests. After sending lens (and GX-1 body) with the files to the Panasonic facility in Texas, I got them back a couple of weeks later with the advice that the lens "Checks OK" and that I should use different ISOs to get sharp pictures. I have been shooting for pleasure and profit since the 1970s and owned many fine lenses that were manufactured, marketed and supported as tools, and the Lumix bodies work pretty well with them. But I am not spending any more money with the company.

0 upvotes

Sounds like the performance and IQ of this lens is pretty poor. Shame it would have been great to have a zoom that flat.

0 upvotes

I bought the lens for three weeks (Germany) in set with a pana G3 cam. I own already a Canon G6. I compared aprox 100 pictures I've took with both cameras in same conditions. The conclusion was horrible. The pictures with the old Canon G6 were better or much better as the pictures took with the new Pana G3 + 14-42 x. I didn't make other tests or other researces. I gave the lens back and I lost some money. I was pretty frustrated. As compensation I bought the 25 / 1,4. This was the beginning of a new life. I think Panasonic has a home-made problem to clear and has to find another signification for the "x".

0 upvotes

I have just bought the Lumix GX1 with 14-42 PZ and 45-175mm lenses. I conducted a test after initially disappointing results from the 14-42. The PZ 14-42 is poor even at the wide end and extremely poor at the 42mm end. I tried it on my Olympus E-P1 (which I was hoping to replace with the GX) and it works much better, but not great. I then tried my Olympus 14-42mm lens on the GX1, and it worked very well indeed despite the lack of IS. There is a clear problem with the PZ 14-42 on the GX1. Mine is going back to the shop tomorrow to exchange for the standard 14-42. For further info, the panasonic 45-175mm works very well on the GX1, but I'd advise against buying the PZ 14-45mm. In fact if you have an Olympus e_p1 or any Olympus, I'd suggest keeping it for a while yet or waiting for the OM D

0 upvotes

The Panasonic 14-42 PZ has a probleme on the stabilisation. It is a little soft at 42mm between speeds 1/60 and 1/200 second even with the last version of firmware (1.1). Curiously, it is more sharp at lower speed (for exemple at 1/4 second) !!! Don't buy this lens for the moment, wait the new firmware.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

PROBLEM with the compact 14-42 mm lens from Panasonic creating a 2nd picture in 1 shot.
Here is the link to read, very credible comments:
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14-42mm-F3-5-5-6-Digital-Cameras/product-reviews/B005J5TZVG/ref=sr_1_2_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Did someone on here experience the same?

I have not read all comments on this Blog site, so I may have missed it and my apologies if that happened.

0 upvotes

When Panasonic GX1 was reviewed with this lens, they found it to be fuzzy at the high zoom extension. Has anybody else noticed this?

0 upvotes

I think I'll be picking up this lens to go with my upcoming Olympus OM-D EM-5.

I think this lens and that camera will make a very nice travel camera setup.

0 upvotes

Thinking exactly the same.

0 upvotes

"However the concept [motorized zoom] failed to gain widespread acceptance amongst enthusiast photographers, mainly because motorized zoom controls have historically been unable to match the speed, directness, and precision of composition offered by conventional mechanical zoom controls."

So this is another piece of equipment with video inspired features that are inappropriate and inconvenient for still photographers.

Are the camcorder companies (actually the camcorder divisions of the same companies) just rolling over and allowing the video business to be stolen by these weird hybrids? Aren't there any high performance dedicated video cameras that don't cost $20,000?

I can see the future now: eventually still cameras will be so crapped up with video junk that the manufacturers will introduce "video-free" versions at a higher price.

2 upvotes

How about (in this case) people who want a zoom that's the same physical size as a pancake lens?

3 upvotes

Personally, For the balance, pancake lens is only good for mobility. I used a Pentax 40mm pancake lens before and I just noticed that is too thin... Even for one-hand shooter, most of mirrorless camera's body is very compact so hard to handle by one hand. :D

0 upvotes

"Even for one-hand shooter, most of mirrorless camera's body is very compact so hard to handle by one hand."

Kind of find that hard to believe, unless you have the hands of a gorilla. I've been using a Panasonic G1, GF1, and G3 with great results. The pancake lenses couldn't be small enough!

0 upvotes

I travel a lot and I have to travel light. I won't take a camera that won't fit in a jacket pocket. The NEXs are wonderful, but with the glass they are just too big. I might upgrade my Canon S95 to a micro 4/3rds with this lens instead of moving to the S100, or I might not. But if Sony made a similar lens, I would buy an NEX-5N with that glass in a heartbeat.

0 upvotes

Hey Panasonic, how about adding an external zoom controller for video work. Even a motorized zoom is a little hard to control without shaking the camera...

It seems that with the addition of a motorized zoom, it should be possible to add a wired or wireless control without a huge development effort.

1 upvote

Yesterday I read a brief "consumer-style" review on Amazon concerning this PZ X lens. The reviewer gave it a single star claiming its OIS does not work (makes the image fuzzy) at a particular zooming point. He got another copy of the lens and updated the Panasonic software on his GF3 body but the problem persists.
Amazon dropped the price on the GF3 / 14-42 X kit by $100. Also, preorder for FX1 / 14-42 X kit is no longer available for preorder.
Now, the real question is how good is this lens optically? I could not find a technical review (DPR has but a preview) but if it is good it still could be used by the Olympus 4:3 crowd (because of IBIS).

0 upvotes

Well, the GF3 / 14-42 X kit is up by $50 today (to around $700) and the FX1 / 14-42 X kit is being offered for preorders once again.
"Glitch in the Matrix?"

0 upvotes

for 4/3 cameras, wait 3 months and get one for half price.

2 upvotes

Panasonic is still (feb. 2012) shipping copies of this lens that are extremly soft at all settings if a shutterspeed betwen about 1/30 sec. and 1/300 sec. is used. The problem is the samme if stabilisation isn´t activated. It doesn´t matter if the lens is mounted on a Pana body or an Oly.
I don´t think that DPR will perform a full review, before they have got an explanation from Panasonic.

1 upvote

It will be interesting how the slow lens/bigger sensor works vis-a-vis the LX5 with smaller sensor and faster glass.

The bigger sensor will allow less noise at high iso but you will need higher iso given the slower lens.

I suspect that the GX1/Gx glass will be a bit better combo than the LX5. And hopefully we will see an x version of the smaller faster primes pretty quickly.

I plan to find out.

0 upvotes

simple and straight forward,
that when translated into 35mm full-frame equiv.,
LX5 has a lens of 24-90mm f/9.2-15.2, and
GXPZ will be 28-82mm f/6.9-11,
so GXPZ is the winner by near a stop,
slightly larger than between 4/3 and APS-C cameras.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

No... aperture does not "translate" like that. f/3.5-5.6 is equally bright in every format.

1 upvote

Zkz5 is right. It does not affect light quantity. But, it does affect DOF and his brother: Bokeh!

0 upvotes

yabokkie, it's only true for DOF calculation, but does not affect how bright the lens is, f1.4 is same bright on m3/4, APS-C or FF.

0 upvotes

I am as well hoping my GH2/14-42 lens combo will be a step up from my beloved LX5 ... I am about to find out, I will post again after the lens gets here

0 upvotes

Do any vendors have this lens in stock yet? If not, does anyone know when it is supposed to be in stock?

0 upvotes

hrmm...I'm new to this whole photography thing. I've inherited my sister's old GF-1 with the 20mm pancake lens. So I'm looking for a zoom lens. Can anyone confirm if the new version of the Panasonic 14-42mm works with the GF-1?

0 upvotes

yes it does work it this lens but. better to update your software for your camera to have better control of the lens.
I suggest you take your camera to the retail store and try it out first. link below for software

http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/download/fts/index.html

0 upvotes

That's great to hear. Will definitely take it with me to the store. Regarding the software update...(sorry to be a bother)...but which updates would I download?

Thanks for your reply! :)

0 upvotes

Great,. Smaller carrying bag.

0 upvotes

Does this lens has constant aperture?

0 upvotes

no,it's f3.5-F5.6. but is step less, means when the zoom move aperture change without you knowing or hearing it, smooth from large to small aperture.

1 upvote

Panasonic wouldn't want to make a lens like this for Sony's Nex5n, would they?

Should do it just out of compassion for us poor Sony users who have either clunky lenses or a pancake that's not very good :(

1 upvote

that's the advantage of the MTF sensor it's smaller. I did not get the nex 5N for that reason. the largest aperture prime they have is F 2.8 with pan. the 20mm F 1.7 make up lighting and lower the iso for IQ.
funny that sony came up with the smallest body and throw in all chunky lens , they make it worse, with one hand, the kit lens feel like it's going to fall off.

1 upvote

in Leica and Zeiss brands (which means less quality but they are actually same as good as any from Japanese makers) Pana 25/1.4 and Sony 24/1.8 will translate into 49/2.7 and 37/2.8 (35mm full-frame equiv.), so they are almost same as fast lenses.

0 upvotes

I think the f/ stays the same; because it's a function of the given focal length (at wide; if zoom), over (divided by) the max settable aperture *area*(not diameter) there. In other words, while the effective focal length (in 35mm terms) is x2 (crop factor), for 4/3rds sensors, the actual sensor, is also smaller; in concert, with the actual (not 35mm terms) focal length. So, the aperture (as f/) is the same; even when looking at the focal length, in 35mm terms. Now, your Bokeh will be different, for a different sensor, and matching lens mount, but that's another thing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

like it or not, bokeh is linked to translated/equivalent f-stop which also decides the picture quality (S/N ratio). they always changes the same way and amount without exception. there is no way you can break the link. that's why the equivalent f-stop is so powerful and straight forward a tool to understand your camera.

1 upvote

Actually, it's not a direct translation. There's no math I've found that accurately describes what can be discovered with testing. It is definitely a little less than the focal length conversion. How much, I can't say for sure. But there's definitely not a stop difference in DOF between 130mm/f2.8 on DX and 200mm/2.8 on FX.

0 upvotes

I like how the new X series lens is lighter and smaller, but hate it for no focus ring. It's a love and hate thing to me.

2 upvotes

by adding they have to make the len bigger. the full purpose is compact. if you like focusing manually go with the older lens and loose the compactness, they 45-175mm have the focusing ring due to larger larger lens.

1 upvote

I would also want a focus ring on a PZ lens. but I need it most in low light, not a situation I would want to use a 4/3 camera.

0 upvotes

JimHancock said:
>Panasonic doesn't have a micro 4/3 lens worth owning, besides being
>painfully slow, especially the zoom lenses, what possible use is a power
>zoom on a lens that doesn't have a constant aperture?

Jim, you are asking the impossible here. You can't expect a constant aperture f/2.8 zoom lens with pro quality optics at a consumer price. If this is the type of lens you need, you should be looking at Canon or Nikon full frame DSLRs and pro lenses, and $$$$.

If Micro Four Thirds isn't for you, then it isn't for you.

2 upvotes

Panasonic doesn't have a micro 4/3 lens worth owning, besides being painfully slow, especially the zoom lenses, what possible use is a power zoom on a lens that doesn't have a constant aperture? I bought the af-100, the video camera with the large sensor so you can have a nice shallow depth of field, but you aren't going to have it at f freakin 5.6! what a bunch of idiots, those panasonic boys. There is one lens that works on that camera, one that takes advantage of the other features of the camera.... and it's a F4-5.6! .... just give us an f-2.8 zoom, that stays 2.8 throughout the zoom, please.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

They have four m43 primes that are all 2.8 or faster. 14, 20, 25, and 45. The 14-140 is a great all around 10X still and video shooter, the 7-14 is a well respected UWA lens, and they have two fast zooms on the horizon. What is the problem exactly? That doesn't even cover the newer Olympus 12 and 45 primes, any other Olympus lens, any 43 lens that you could use with an adapter, or any manual focus lens that you could also use.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

@ button, they are always a whiner out there that has something to complaint no matter what the company products

0 upvotes

> just give us an f-2.8 zoom
f/2.8 zoom is quit dark on 4/3. it's the same as if you are asking for an f/5.6 zome on 35mm ff. that said, an f/2.8 dark zoom will make it smaller (just think of an f/5.6 zoom for 35mm ff, they should be about the same size and weight), and small size, not the image quality, is what 4/3 is about.

1 upvote

yabokkie has no idea what he's talking about. f/2.8 is the same brightness regardless of sensor size.

1 upvote

I really just wish it manually zoomed..

0 upvotes

I'm glad to see they're coming out with a better IQ, smaller and cheaper lens than the original 14-45mm lens.

DaveO

2 upvotes

I don't think it's cheaper than the original 14-45. It's just that you can't find many 14-45 these days.
And I don't know if the IQ really is better.

0 upvotes

Using a Panny lens on an Olympus camera begs a question, do BOTH IS systems (the lens and the body) engage and work together or do they end up fighting each other unless you turn one of them off?

0 upvotes

You should only use one IS system at a time, otherwise they will argue with each other......

2 upvotes

if i say this lens is ugly i make a compliment...

1 upvote

the body is ugly too. well-matched.

2 upvotes

the body is ugly too. well-matched.

1 upvote

Mas que nada me gusta el tama~o de la lente, pero no se que el ruido durante el proceso a enfocar esta bien por video o no. What do you think?

0 upvotes

Justo cuando pensé que ya todo se había hecho!
Bien por Panasonic, ganando mercado y avanzando entre sus competidores
al principio era un tanto esceptico con Micro 4/3, pero al probarlo y ver los resultados promete un buen futuro a este formato, adiciones como este lente lo hacen mas atractivo
enhorabuena Panasonic, ideas for life : )

1 upvote

I like it, looks really cool hope it take good quality pictures.The cool thing with this lens on your camera is it will fit in a front pocket on a shirt .......

0 upvotes

compact zoom lens, very interested..

1 upvote

fyi....pics of the new lens mounted on the g3 (and gf3)

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/panasonic_14-42mm_x_lens_hands-on_photos/

0 upvotes

any of those taken with the lens? or just of the lens?

0 upvotes

I'm very interested. This lens can replace any M43 kit zoom for a camera as pocketable as one with a pancake at an affordable price. It may become my E-PL2's first Panny lens.

2 upvotes

How's this for an option: B&H is buying the old 14-42 kit lens for $75. The kit lens gets average reviews. But
this new PZ 14-42mm X lens gives you a small sized lens that promises excellent IQ compared to the old one, with power zoom to boot. I have a G3 and have been using the 14-140mm with unexpectedly good results. It only gets better with the new X lens. Betcha I'm not the only one to be selling the old 14-42 while I can. There will come a point where B&H and others won't want any more of the old ones at any price. Then you're stuck with it.

2 upvotes

The system is all about giving options for all types of shooter. IMO this is a fabulous option. I bought the GH1 (and then a GF1 on sale) so I could still take good photos: but could also take it out with my new-born son without annoying the wife with a load of kit. OK, if I'm off to photo something: I wouldn't take this.... (currently loving my 50mm Sigma OM macro lens!) but if I was off to the park I'd put this on, chuck the GF1 in the bag (I hope it will fit in the leather retro case for the GF1/20mm lens) and if I need it I've got it. In fact give me a small hard case for this and I'd take this and the 20mm out as my 'just in case' camera kit. I'm sure that will give you better pics than the wife's point-and-shoot......

2 upvotes

power zoom and power focus are crap esp power focus.

They cannot match with the precision from mechanical focus.

powerzoom is another story, if you don't mind with precision, PZ is ok. However, PF is unacceptable.

Long ago when I first bought my first AF SLR, the minolta 3xi was on my top list. however, when I tried power focus. I just put it down. Unacceptable.

However, if you mean to use AF all the time, i think this lens is great (for its size).

2 upvotes

Then don't buy this lens. Why should every camera or lens, or every product for that matter, suit your own specific needs??? There must be options, options make life better. Pass on this, plenty of lenses with manual controls to suit you already. This lens just makes M43 a better system.

14 upvotes

This lens has just been announced. Do you have access to pre-production samples as DPReview does? Or are your comments based on other lenses of much earlier vintage, as you suggest?

0 upvotes

Just to rephrase a bit...

...Digital cameras are crap, especially digital cameras with not full frame sensor. They cannot match the image quality of film cameras. Long ago (in 1999) I bought my first 1.5M pixel digital camera. However, when I tried to shoot I just put it down. Unacceptable.
;)

5 upvotes

> However, if you mean to use AF all the time, i think this lens is great (for its size).

Somebody still uses MF "all the time"???

Man, get real. I'm pretty sure you yourself use AF most of the time.

0 upvotes

So much for the stories about how "it cannot be done because of physical laws, optical laws, blah-blah-blah..." that we have been offered all these years. And now, the next step in the de-idiotization of the masses: small lens/large aperture. I actually have some (C-mount) zoom lenses that are 1.8/24-85 that are minuscule and weigh next to nothing. Of course "it cannot be done because of physical laws, optical laws, blah-blah-blah..."

2 upvotes

As long as we're concerned with de-idiotization, it is worthwhile considering c-mount lenses cover a frame that is ONE THIRD the size of the 4/3 sensor, and have a shorter flange distance.

0 upvotes

Same old blah-blah-blah. Come next year, it's suddenly there, all the old blah-blah-blah is deleted and new one started all over again, much like in the Groundhog Day movie!

2 upvotes

This can not be done is still true. This lens is of crap quality.

This is F3.5 lens , too slow.
There are no controls like manual focus , aperture ring etc on the lens. If someone wants to beat physics try a F2.0 lens with manual focus + aperture ring on it.

This is just a point and shoot lens sold separately. A lot of point and shoots have zoom lenses this small. Nothing special about it.

1 upvote

I hope this camera is really good at higher ISO's, 400 and up. With glass this slow you will be shooting with small apertures, higher ISO's and slow shutter speeds a lot. It just appears that SMALL is THEE most important goal with these designs. I don't know maybe I'm wrong but I thought image quality was THEE most important goal of any camera. I want to see the prints with this lens and the m4/3 Panny's & Oly's at ISO 400 and up. If the camera does well at higher ISO's then Panny has itself a real winner.
I get the feeling that m4/3 manufacturers are painting themselves into a corner trying to go smaller and smaller. You've got smallish sensors which struggle somewhat at higher ISO's and they're trying to put small, slow lenses on them that require exceptional performance from the sensor.
I vaguely remember, way back when, small rangefinder cameras with full frame 35mm film in them. Hey maybe digital manufacturers could do that too. I must be genius coming up that one.

0 upvotes

Haven't you read the reviews here about the m43 camera's? The GH2 and the G3 are having really great results at high iso.

0 upvotes

You actually are wrong. Image quality is not the most important goal with all cameras. If it were, we would all be shooting large format from very heavy but stable tripods exclusively. But there is no absolute most important, but only a series of compromises and trade offs we all need to make to try to be happy with our gear. As individuals we require different things. Some want ultimate sharpness, some want huge apertures or perfect bokeh, others compact size or lenses optimized for video or a wide zoom range and so on. There is no best for everyone, and while this my not appeal to you or I, it is just what some have been waiting for.

4 upvotes

m4/3 struggles at base iso let alone high iso. It's not that good especially compared to any aps sensor.

0 upvotes

This lens is as "slow" as the standard kit zoom, but smaller and of higher glass quality.
If you need a brighter lens, you need to choose another one.

Besides, image quality is NOT the first criterion for every lens and system. If it was, more than 90% of all lenses would not be on the market.

0 upvotes

@Robert:

I have a plain old 4/3 camera, with a sensor more primitive than the m4/3 ones.

I have made poster prints from it that look fantastic, even one at ISO 800; although there is grain visible in the latter, it is not intrusive and does not detract from the shot. It most definitely does not "struggle at base ISO", even though it's not as good as the better APS-C sensors.

0 upvotes

Great, M4/3 is starting to make sense.

2 upvotes

Small is better, uhmm maybe for kids with tiny hands, i like to grab strongly my camera with both hands and feel his weight when i shoot clear sharpeness photos, not a toy like this..! and the prices? nah this is a joke.
A lens 3.5-5.6 28-84 mm ? this is worse then the basic lenses offered with a slr camera body.
This is nice cameras and lenses for uh... outdoor family photos at beach..!

0 upvotes

Yes, this is nice cameras and lenses for outdoor family photos at beach. Is this supposed to be a bad thing ? Am I missing something ?

3 upvotes

"A lens 3.5-5.6 28-84 mm ? this is worse then the basic lenses offered with a slr camera body." No ... it is not worse, it is the same range as 18-55 on APS-C - they are both 3x zooms starting at about 28mm-equivalent. The depth of field is slightly larger on the m43 sensor, but that's about it.

0 upvotes

Some people like the bulk and weight of a Hummer when they get behind the wheel. That doesn't make it necessary, just something that suits their taste/self-image. Others are so big that a Mini Cooper just won't work - no headroom, no leg room, break your back stooping to get into the car. If you'd like to drive a subcompact but can't fit, feel free to complain. If you prefer a Hummer under any circumstances, why enter the discussion? Shrink a Hummer, or blow up a Mini Cooper, and you lose what makes the vehicle special. Neither is a substitute for the other, and it's not a one-size-fits-all world.

New topic: Is a Minox right for you? Discuss!

2 upvotes

I'm impressed! When I bought my GH2 I had a feeling that m4/3 was going to be a great system...now I am sure that it will. This has put the competition miles behind.

As an amateur moving to GH2, the feature I missed most about my superzoom was the power zoom for video. I know that serious videographers rarely zoom at all, but most of us do, and zooming by ring never seems to go smoothly for me.

I'll definitely be keeping my 20 mm/1.7 for low light.

3 upvotes

I see this lens being a big hit with the AF100. Power zoom really is nice to have in a lot of video applications.

0 upvotes

Interesting but I wonder about the lack of a lenshood and I'm not completely convinced on the ergonomics, think maybe there should have been a focusing ring instead of lever. It might be OK though with the focus-by-wire which already slightly disconnects the fingers from the process. Zoom control looks reasonably good from the video.

It will be interesting to see how this compares optically to the current 14-42 and earlier 14-45.

Now they should bring something that starts from 12mm like a 12-55, maybe f3.5-4.5?

2 upvotes

I'm not sure about the switch-based focus by wire, but the ring-based focus by wire on standard 4/3 lenses works just fine.

1 upvote

Agree, I would rather a ring but most of the time I would rely on the camera AF - small price to pay for the small size. On that point, why are som many complaining about the slowness of the lens when it is so damn small?

1 upvote

The vimeo videos only show up when the url for this page starts with www, not when it starts with forums.

0 upvotes

Interesting idea, but... They spend all that R&D and decide to go with switches instead of traditional rings to control the zoom and focus. Pentax used rings on the FA*28-70 F 2.8 and their other powerzoom lenses years ago. Using switches means you have to hold the camera a certain way to activate the zoom or focus, rings are what we are all used to on lense, Wake up Pannasonic, I like your tech, but spen more time on the user interface next time.

1 upvote

Compare the size of the Pentax to this lens....

0 upvotes

Are you saying they sacrificed ergonomics for the sake of size, I'm not sure what your saying. DO you like hte rocker switches? The Pentax is an f2.8 full-frame lens this is a crop factor 2 lens on a mirroless camera, size cannot be compared. Panny manages to get a focus ring on the little 20mm f1.7 pancake (see the picture above), all this ring has to do is drive a 4 contact micro switch instead of the rocker switch they opted for. They could have just made it a bit larger around instead of the 2 camel humps where the current switches are. I just hope its optically comptent. As one reveiwer noted, the switch locations are awkward when shooting portraits.

0 upvotes

all those complaints on the ergonomics of this lens are just plain silly...
Please tell me how it can be easier to handle, using your thumb and index finger, two rings on a barrel that is half inch thick? do you want an aperture ring too?

0 upvotes

I like that it is configurable variable speed, though...

0 upvotes

"Panny manages to get a focus ring on the little 20mm f1.7 pancake..." does that 20mm lens zoom also? Oh, it's not a zoom? Did you compare a 14-42mm zoom lens to a 20mm prime? " They spend all that R&D..." and all the could do was shrink a zoom lens down to the size of a pancake prime-what a waste!

0 upvotes

Oh, and joke on those people that bought GF3 with the old 14-42.

0 upvotes

How do you manual focus with a switch?

2 upvotes

Instead of turning faster or slower, you push harder or softer. It's the same thing. Try to open your mind.

And it's completely silence, good news for HD movies.

1 upvote

I think this lens will go to outperform the old 14-42mm, good lens and nano coating

1 upvote

I think this lens will go to outperform the old 14-42mm, good lens and nano coating

1 upvote

Definitely. Because the old Panasonic 14-42mm kit lens is the most crappy lens among micro 4/3 system.

0 upvotes

I think the majority of posters completely miss the point of this lens: it allows to zoom during taking a hand-held video without pushing and twisting the lens. The small size is just a cherry on top, made possible by the absence of the zoom and focus rings.

Micro 4/3 is a great system for video, and the GH line has some of the best video-capable photo cameras out there. There are many compelling lenses for still photos, including many native fast primes, but the video market has only two special lenses: the critically acclaimed 14-140, and the silly 3D lens. I am not into video, but I agree that it's about time they released something special for the video aficionados.

4 upvotes

While this certainly does seem like a nice lens for people who need the smallest possible profile when carrying a cameras, I think the lens we need most isn't even on the drawing board yet.

Either Panasonic or Sony needs to make a faster normal zoom lens. Something like the 4/3 12-60mm or 14-54mm lens, but in a M4/3 mount and scaled down accordingly.

And if they believe there will ever be a pro grade M4/3 camera, then make that lens weather sealed, so it will be ready for it.

2 upvotes

I agree, the lack of fast zooms turn me off re m43. I could undersatnd Nikon reserving the better optical for the dslrs at this point, but Panny doesn't really have such a line and Oly is clearly on the way out there as well.

A 12-40 f/2.8 would be really nice.

1 upvote

Not sure if you saw but equivs of 240-70 and 70-200 have been announced.

0 upvotes

A 12-50mm 2.5 or 2.8 will be great

3 upvotes

I think a 1-600mm 1.0 about the size of the 20mm 1.7 would be nice and it should be free and I wish I were taller and thinner and while we're complaining about the latest innovation I don't like the color, oh and Olympus pen will flop because people love SUVs... makes about as much sense as some of the posters here.

1 upvote

I think this lens will really appeal to the mFT's video shooters more so than photographers. The zoom lever is variable control, so depending on how far you move it will determine how quickly it zooms in/out. That's important for nice controlled smooth zooms when shooting video.

A "pancake" zoom is very exciting in itself too though.

2 upvotes

Total comments: 163