Reading mode: Light Dark

14-140mm to sell or to keep?

Go to last post
Why oh why?!

The best complement I can give you is that your photos have given me second thoughts about ditching the lens!

Your points in regard to the relativity of expensive are salient.

In that context, it is the most expensive lens that I own. In other words, it represents less value than even my PL45.

I am looking at 12-35 & 35-100 as my answer, although the main article on DPR suggests they will be available later than originally rumoured (how's that? I am disappointed in a rumour for being exactly that).

Yes - they may require me to outlay more money, but they may represent greater value .

Before then, I am going to go through the exercise of taking the lens out on a few trips.
 
Except that it looks like you could pull it off - me not so much.
 
g_r_w said:
Why oh why?!

The best complement I can give you is that your photos have given me second thoughts about ditching the lens!
Click to expand...
Thanks.
g_r_w said:
Your points in regard to the relativity of expensive are salient.

In that context, it is the most expensive lens that I own. In other words, it represents less value than even my PL45.
Click to expand...
In that case it becomes a no-brainer.
g_r_w said:
I am looking at 12-35 & 35-100 as my answer, although the main article on DPR suggests they will be available later than originally rumoured (how's that? I am disappointed in a rumour for being exactly that).

Yes - they may require me to outlay more money, but they may represent greater value .
Click to expand...
Absoutely.
g_r_w said:
Before then, I am going to go through the exercise of taking the lens out on a few trips.
Click to expand...
I think this is a good idea. Like any lens it needs to be used to identify it's strengths and weaknesses. Whilst it is a pretty slow lens, I find in the right conditions it can do a great job and it's man strength for me is that I can concentrate on shooting rather than worrying about changing lenses. The main requirement is that you have enough light to work with.

--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
 
tedolf said:
Actually, I don't think it sells that well.

I don't have the data but that is what I glean by reading these forums-it is very expensive.
Click to expand...
I've been watching the Amazon listing for a while and I tend to agree. Prices are at the lowest now at 649 new. Used and kit separated new ones sometimes go for as low as 550. Unless priced close to that range, used ones stay listed for about 2 weeks or more.

Also check the price trend on camelcamelcamel.com

I wanted to get one and haven't got one yet. Still dreaming.
 
So much back and forth here.

The bottom line is that if you find a long zoom doesn't get much use, then you don't need it.

Others -- like myself would feel lost without a 100-300 (equiv.) lens. Photojournalists would be happy with a 35-50 (equiv.) lens.

It all depends on what you like to shoot. Its that simple.
So buy the lens or lenses that you would use most.

As for "prime" lenses... that's totally overblown in today's less than full-size sensor cameras, computer designed lenses and post processing sharpening world.

Try to keep focused on image and not equipment and you'll be a better photographer.

http://www.pbase.com/strat13/portfolio
 
Yeah - I tend to agree, its existence in many user's kits is probably for that reason - it was THE kit lens for the GH series.
 
Agree, which is where primes force you to take more care with your composition and think about your photography.

That is not to say that you can't have the same approach with zooms, it is just that they allow you the latitude to be lazy.

I think we tend to fail our equipment more often than our equipment fails us.
 
I was just looking at E-Bay. Most used 14-140's are pulling in $500.00 or more. New copies are selling for obscene amounts..

If the lens is not being used, I'd also recommend selling it....

--
Mike C
Denver, CO
 
Schira said:
tedolf said:
Actually, I don't think it sells that well.

I don't have the data but that is what I glean by reading these forums-it is very expensive.
Click to expand...
I've been watching the Amazon listing for a while and I tend to agree. Prices are at the lowest now at 649 new. Used and kit separated new ones sometimes go for as low as 550. Unless priced close to that range, used ones stay listed for about 2 weeks or more.

Also check the price trend on camelcamelcamel.com

I wanted to get one and haven't got one yet. Still dreaming.
Click to expand...
I watched the prices on this lens for a long time as well. I eventually just bought the GH2 kit when it hit $1000 more for the lens than for the body. The GH2 for $350 more than just the lens seemed too good to pass up.

Now that the GH2 + 14-140mm is "discontinued" (to be replaced with... well, who knows) I imagine the used prices of the 14-140mm will rise back up (at least once existing inventory is cleared).
 
I'm also considering the sale of my 14-140 lens. I picked up the 12, 25, and 45 prime set as soon as I got the GH2. I have a pocket full of expensive, fast lenses and I intend to use the heck out of them! I have to admit, there is a little fear of selling the 14-140 and missing it in some future unknown situation. Yeah, I guess I'm lens hoarding...

Anyway, this is the way I see it: something is about to happen to the 14-140. The GH2 + 14-140 kits have been discontinued. Rumors has it that the GH2 will be bundled with a new long lens. Perhaps X lenses. Things could play out to where the 14-140 becomes a rare and sought after lens. IMO, I'd wait it out. Take it out for a few test drives and see what happens in the next few weeks with the 14-140. Hopefully (for us) they don't come out with a new version of the 14-140!
 
You just have to get used to what it can and can't do. I used it on a recent ski trip and it was great to have the 10X. This pic was taken at 25mm, f/6.3 and ISO 640.



--



' Its not about having what you want. But rather, wanting what you have ' ( After you have it ;)
 
I love both the 20mm and the 14-140, for different purpose. I got the lens with a used body, and planned to sell it, but fell in love with it. The 14-140 is a perfect daytime walk-around lens for me. In normal daylight it's fast enough, and it covers most of what I shoot without having to take the time to change lenses and potentially miss a shot. It's also brilliantly sharp (as good or better than the 14-45 from test reports I've seen) for a zoom, especially a 10X zoom.

At the same time, it is a bit slow, so I've also got the 20mm for indoor use or when I want shallow DOF, and the 7-14 for true wide angle work. Those 3 lenses do almost everything I need.

But I wouldn't suggest that just because it works for me it's the right lens for everyone. You should use what works for you, not anyone else.
 
You really do have an ego the size of Montana, don't you? "Most photographers"? You really think you have the right to speak for "most" people? Get over yourself! Maybe see a psychiatrist and "shrink" that head of yours.
tedolf said:
g_r_w said:
Don't get me wrong, for a 10x zoom, it is about as good as it gets, but I never use it.
Click to expand...
A super zoom on a large sensor camera really doesn't make much sense for most stills photopgraphers.
tedolf said:
It is supposed to be great for video, funnily enough I have been taking way more videos with my PL45?!
Click to expand...
Don't do much video except for skiing, and the 40-150 is cheaper, faster, lighter and has better IQ.
tedolf said:
When I walk around, I'm inclined to go with primes than carry this thing. I am often worried about speed and to carry this around seems like dead weight.
Click to expand...
It is dead weight.

There are some photographers who legitimately can't change lenses easily-very dusty/sandy environments, in a canoe (sp?), etc. where changing lenses would be risky, etc.

Other than that, it really doesn't make much sense, and is very expensive.

I always say, if you want a super zoom camera, buy a super zoom!

The smaller sensor will really help with the extra DOF you need at 300-500mm equivalent focal lenghts.
tedolf said:
So to sell or to keep?
Click to expand...
Sell
tedolf said:
I have to give it one last chance, maybe take it out for a day, but...
Click to expand...
Sell
tedolf said:
Am I missing out on a great lens,
Click to expand...
No
tedolf said:
am I not giving it it's dues?
Click to expand...
No, you shouldn't have bought it in the first place.
tedolf said:
(I'm also looking towards fast zooms - please Pany don't let me down...)
Click to expand...
Forget fast zooms.

U 4/3 is a prime lens system.

TEdolph
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Thomas Kachadurian
The M43 problem - It too good to abandon
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
4K
DrHook59
DrHook59
faunagraphy
  • Question Question
G100 or camcorder? 14-140mm vs 45-175mm?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1K
realspeed
R
D
Panasonic 14-140 Mk i vs 45-150 vs 45-175
Replies
13
Views
2K
Arek Halusko
A
M
Lens reach vs. weight
2
Replies
22
Views
27
Mike Micro 43
M
I
  • Question Question
What are some targeted camera exercises / homework for better technique?
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
5K
Mike Davis
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top