AF Performance of Pana 14 140 on EM1 Mark II vs AF of Oly 14-150 ?

[OlyView]

I've toyed with an Oly 14 150 on an EM1 Mk 2 and found the AF to be lacking occasionally (not frequent but not infrequent either; just enough to be noticeable). It sometimes gives up on the AF or hunts much more than other lenses.

So i wanted to check if anyone has tried the Pana 14 140 on an EM1 Mark II or any Oly body for that matter, and whether the AF experience was good? If someone has tried both on an Oly body that would be even more welcome feedback.

 

[glassoholic]

I've tried both lenses on an EM1.2... I can't say I've noticed any AF issues with either or any differences. But I've also not put them under the blowtorch with expectations like other lenses... they are my walkabout and fun times lenses. I settled for the Panny... much prefer the output... sharper and nicer rendering... although my first sample was horrible... probably decentred.

 

[108]

My 14-140 sometimes hunts for AF on my Em1 ( also 10 and 5 )

That happens even in good light, it's very annoying

I have no idea why , but it's usually between 50 and 100 mm fl .

I had no such problem with the Oly 14-150 ; I just got rid of it because I found the lens flat with poor micro contrast

These 10x zooms can be a real lottery

 

[_vlad]

My 14-140 sometimes hunts for AF on my Em1 ( also 10 and 5 )

That happens even in good light, it's very annoying

I have no idea why , but it's usually between 50 and 100 mm fl .

I had no such problem with the Oly 14-150 ; I just got rid of it because I found the lens flat with poor micro contrast

These 10x zooms can be a real lottery

Maybe it has something to do with lens itself. Occasionally it happens to me with G(X)9 for unknown reason.

 

[alcelc]

Could it be anything to do with the OSPDAF of EM1?

On the CDAF bodies (used it through GF3, GX1, GX7,bGX85 and G85) has perfect performance on AF (mainly use AFS) and has similar IQ to 12~35 & 14~45, can beat 12~32 and 45~150 marginally and a observable winner over 45~200. It is the lens which had changed my long biased viewcon superzoom lens.

--
Albert
** Please forgive my typo error.
** Please feel free to download my image and edit it as you like **

 

[tomhongkong]

I've toyed with an Oly 14 150 on an EM1 Mk 2 and found the AF to be lacking occasionally (not frequent but not infrequent either; just enough to be noticeable). It sometimes gives up on the AF or hunts much more than other lenses.

So i wanted to check if anyone has tried the Pana 14 140 on an EM1 Mark II or any Oly body for that matter, and whether the AF experience was good? If someone has tried both on an Oly body that would be even more welcome feedback.

I tried both 14-140 ii when first released and 14-150 ii on my EM1ii in good light conditions. (On the water regattas) I found that the 14-150 was slightly more positive and quicker in achieving focus, but nothing to worry about.

I first kept the 14-150, but recently changed my mind and swapped it for a 14-140 and slightly better IQ (particularly sharper in the corners)

Since then I have bought a 12-200 and although there may be slight IQ preferences for the 14-140 in the overlapping range, the 12-200 performance (at least my copy) at 200 is much better than 14-140 at 140 and crop. It generally has better colour and contrast on my Olympus bodies. I know it is bigger and more expensive and those factors may not work for you.

For the time being I keep both 14-140 for its compactness, and 12-200 for its overall performance (including extra range)

I also have more confidence in the water resistance of either the 14-150 or 12-200. I have no real evidence to support that just a general feeling that the lower level Panasonic lenses are not quite up to snuff with their WR. The Oly 12-200 is used on the water in a RIB photographing yacht racing, and it gets very wet!

tom

 

[Adam-T]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140 and 12-200 , I`ve not seen a single good copy of either, all had tilted or decentered optics or were simply soft and halated at the long end . never seen a dud 14-140 F3.5-5.6 in about 6 samples . so the AF thing is mute if you can`t get a top copy of the Oly ..

IMO Pan make by far the best consumer / kit lenses out there, there are only 2 real duds (the 14-42 X PZ and the 1st version of the normal 14-42 which shipped with the G2 and GF2) even the 1st 45-200 from 2008 is pretty good and the tiny plastic 35-100 is stellar .. the first Pan 14-140 the F4-5.6 isn`t fantastic but even that is better than a wonky out of alignment Oly 14-150

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[OlyView]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140 and 12-200 , I`ve not seen a single good copy of either, all had tilted or decentered optics or were simply soft and halated at the long end . never seen a dud 14-140 F3.5-5.6 in about 6 samples . so the AF thing is mute if you can`t get a top copy of the Oly ..

IMO Pan make by far the best consumer / kit lenses out there, there are only 2 real duds (the 14-42 X PZ and the 1st version of the normal 14-42 which shipped with the G2 and GF2) even the 1st 45-200 from 2008 is pretty good and the tiny plastic 35-100 is stellar .. the first Pan 14-140 the F4-5.6 isn`t fantastic but even that is better than a wonky out of alignment Oly 14-150

Quite grateful to everyone for the feedback. This is probably the first time I’ve seen a favourable mention of the 45 200. On multiple threads it’s been said that the 45-175 is the sharpest and the 45-200 is not that great.
I’ve tried searching for sample images, and while I can find plenty from the 14 140 and 40 150 R and 14 150, images made with the 45 200 are somewhat scarce.

 

[alcelc]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140

Might I clarify that you mean the Panny 14~140 f/3.5-5.6 mk-I/mk-II or the Olympus 14~150 f/4~5.6?

and 12-200 , I`ve not seen a single good copy of either, all had tilted or decentered optics or were simply soft and halated at the long end . never seen a dud 14-140 F3.5-5.6 in about 6 samples . so the AF thing is mute if you can`t get a top copy of the Oly ..

IMO Pan make by far the best consumer / kit lenses out there, there are only 2 real duds (the 14-42 X PZ and the 1st version of the normal 14-42 which shipped with the G2 and GF2) even the 1st 45-200 from 2008 is pretty good and the tiny plastic 35-100 is stellar .. the first Pan 14-140 the F4-5.6 isn`t fantastic but even that is better than a wonky out of alignment Oly 14-150

 

[Marriott]

Hi. I had this lens in 2010-11 when we lived in Wellington, NZ. Here are some taken with the 14-200 using the old 12mp G2.









These have all been cropped, so there is further degradation. Still, I've made prints from them that look OK to me for the memories.

 

[alcelc]

45~200 is not a very had lens, as long as if we can stop it down to f/7.1~8.

Thinking of the required shutter speed needed for a 400mm EFL, f/7.1~8 could mean the lighting environment this lens required.

It is also a known shutter shock sufferer as well.

So if the above could be taken care of, it could still produce usable image, might not good as some best lenses of the system, but usable.

Because of those limitations, I replaced mine with the 45~150 f/4-5.6 which can produce better IQ on wide open.

 

[Adam-T]

Quite grateful to everyone for the feedback. This is probably the first time I’ve seen a favourable mention of the 45 200. On multiple threads it’s been said that the 45-175 is the sharpest and the 45-200 is not that great.

Put the 45-200 on a modern Pan with EFCS and / or the soft shutter and you`ll see it`s OK for such an old M43 lens - the issue at the time was that the G1 suffered such jarring shutter shock,. that the 45-200 and orig 100-300 (which had OIS that made things worse) it was rarey seen - evem the much loved 14-45 was shock city on the G1/G2 and GX1

 

[Adam-T]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140

Might I clarify that you mean the Panny 14~140 f/3.5-5.6 mk-I/mk-II or the Olympus 14~150 f/4~5.6?

Sorry - Oly 14-150 ...

I`ve never seen a dud Pan 14-140 of any revision , even the ancient F4-5.6s I tried were bang on centering wise even if its a "Meh" lens (I forgive Its lack of optical excellence because it was designed for video for use on the GH1) . just my experience anyway

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[OlyView]

Quite grateful to everyone for the feedback. This is probably the first time I’ve seen a favourable mention of the 45 200. On multiple threads it’s been said that the 45-175 is the sharpest and the 45-200 is not that great.

Put the 45-200 on a modern Pan with EFCS and / or the soft shutter and you`ll see it`s OK for such an old M43 lens - the issue at the time was that the G1 suffered such jarring shutter shock,. that the 45-200 and orig 100-300 (which had OIS that made things worse) it was rarey seen - evem the much loved 14-45 was shock city on the G1/G2 and GX1

Thanks again! I will be trying the 14 140 and the 45 200 both on the em 1 mark ii some time soon. Both lenses are close in price (14 140 is slightly higher). I’m leaning towards the 14 140 based on the FL range which is great for walkabout. That’s contingent upon AF working reasonably fine and I hopefully no purple fringing on the Oly body.

 

[glassoholic]

Quite grateful to everyone for the feedback. This is probably the first time I’ve seen a favourable mention of the 45 200. On multiple threads it’s been said that the 45-175 is the sharpest and the 45-200 is not that great.

Put the 45-200 on a modern Pan with EFCS and / or the soft shutter and you`ll see it`s OK for such an old M43 lens - the issue at the time was that the G1 suffered such jarring shutter shock,. that the 45-200 and orig 100-300 (which had OIS that made things worse) it was rarey seen - evem the much loved 14-45 was shock city on the G1/G2 and GX1

Thanks again! I will be trying the 14 140 and the 45 200 both on the em 1 mark ii some time soon. Both lenses are close in price (14 140 is slightly higher). I’m leaning towards the 14 140 based on the FL range which is great for walkabout. That’s contingent upon AF working reasonably fine and I hopefully no purple fringing on the Oly body.

Other than the Pana 7-14mm, there is no "purple fringing" issues. And lateral chromatic aberrations, or colour fringing, is a totally different thing. Before the Olympus EM1.1, Oly didn't compensate for lateral chromatic aberrations in camera for JPG. Pana and Oly lenses, today, have similar output on modern bodies, and each other.

 

[Adam-T]

Thanks again! I will be trying the 14 140 and the 45 200 both on the em 1 mark ii some time soon. Both lenses are close in price (14 140 is slightly higher). I’m leaning towards the 14 140 based on the FL range which is great for walkabout. That’s contingent upon AF working reasonably fine and I hopefully no purple fringing on the Oly body.

I`d definitely take the 14-140 over the 45200 , its such a useful lens, it performed just fine on the EM1-II I had ..

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[Adrian Harris]

Quite grateful to everyone for the feedback. This is probably the first time I’ve seen a favourable mention of the 45 200. On multiple threads it’s been said that the 45-175 is the sharpest and the 45-200 is not that great.

Put the 45-200 on a modern Pan with EFCS and / or the soft shutter and you`ll see it`s OK for such an old M43 lens - the issue at the time was that the G1 suffered such jarring shutter shock,. that the 45-200 and orig 100-300 (which had OIS that made things worse) it was rarey seen - evem the much loved 14-45 was shock city on the G1/G2 and GX1

 

[Adrian Harris]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140

Might I clarify that you mean the Panny 14~140 f/3.5-5.6 mk-I/mk-II or the Olympus 14~150 f/4~5.6?

Sorry - Oly 14-150 ...

I`ve never seen a dud Pan 14-140 of any revision , even the ancient F4-5.6s I tried were bang on centering wise even if its a "Meh" lens (I forgive Its lack of optical excellence because it was designed for video for use on the GH1) . just my experience anyway

 

[_vlad]

These are just my findings but my experience of Olympus consumer zooms is to avoid them like the plague apart from the plastic fantastic 40-140 F4-5.6 -- sample variation plays a massive part especially with the 14-140

Might I clarify that you mean the Panny 14~140 f/3.5-5.6 mk-I/mk-II or the Olympus 14~150 f/4~5.6?

Sorry - Oly 14-150 ...

I`ve never seen a dud Pan 14-140 of any revision , even the ancient F4-5.6s I tried were bang on centering wise even if its a "Meh" lens (I forgive Its lack of optical excellence because it was designed for video for use on the GH1) . just my experience anyway

I was unfortunate to own a Panasonic 14-140 mk1. Its ridiculously heavy and I couldn't get a sharp shot with it over 100mm at all on any camera. It was superb at the wide end though. The next plastic version of the 14-140 is in a different league. Although it feels plasticky it really delivers.

Agree on MK1. However I found that this was some kind of softness not the blurriness (or muddiness?) cannot find the proper word - which made it possible to correct in post (to some extent). Another problem - it was only OIS (not so impressive) and not compatible with Dual IS of later bodies.

 

[Adam-T]

My 14-45 never suffered shutter shock on the G1 and to this day that combination produced some of the sharpest images ever. However its not up to the standard of olympus Pro glass.

I found it to be an issue, at first I thought it was simply a comically overrated lens , this was the days when shutter shock was not mentioned outside the EP1 and its kit lens' wobbly front element, but when I discovered it only was at SS area shutter speeds of around 80th to 160th (which also are the most common speeds in the UK for outdoor walkabout use) I realised the lens was optically good - the 2 gen later 14-42_II HD Is a better lens optically IMO across the frame end to end given a good copy and its OIS doesn`t increase shock , in fact it helps against it, even the GX7 can run Mech shutter with no issues in that range

The 45-200 really was a shocker though.

so was the 100-300 , they really do perform better on modern pans or ones with the 1/2 a shutter like the GM5