Panasonic 14-45 vs 12-35

I can't find a comparison, and LensTip has not tested the 14-45. Apart from different FL and speed, how do the two lenses compare for sharpness and other factors?

thanks

F.

FrankS009 said:

I can't find a comparison, and LensTip has not tested the 14-45. Apart from different FL and speed, how do the two lenses compare for sharpness and other factors?

Click to expand...

I saw a comparison back when the 12-35 came out.

Regarding sharpness, the 14-45 is almost as good as the 12-35. Other optical factors are comparable also - i.e. not a huge difference. Basically, what you are paying for is the f2.8, the 12mm and weather-proofing.

The 14-45 has lower price, 10mm extra reach and is lighter.

Some say that the 14-42II is slightly better than the 14-45.

Allan

Thank you.I have the 14-45, and am trying to determine how much a step up the 12-35 would be aprat from the different in FL and speed.

F

--

"We shoot the things that move us in ways that will move others." David duChemin

FrankS009 said:

Thank you.I have the 14-45, and am trying to determine how much a step up the 12-35 would be aprat from the different in FL and speed.

Click to expand...

Not much ... and maybe not even noticeable. But f/2.8 is nice to have when needed and/or necessary.

I've had both and still have the 12-35. But I consider them considerably different lenses though their FLs overlap quite a bit. The fact that the 12-35 f2.8 starts at 12mm (24mm equivalent) makes significant difference-- at least to me-- and the fixed f2.8 is also very significant as well as the weather sealing. That said the 14-45 is quite a good consumer grade lens that is nice and sharp and is worth its price.

JL

several copies of the Panny 14-45. In fact, other than the speed (meaning lack of a low aperture number - i.e. 2.8), it is one stellar lens. It's a shame to really call this a kit lens because of the clarity of the optics. I'm definitely holding on to them. I have one on my GX1 and one on my G5. The other I periodically use on my E-M5 (when not using the 14-140 on it).

But another lens that has more recently knocked my socks off is the little Panny 12-32 zoom. I mean to say the clarity levels on this lensare unbelievable for the size and price. It's the lens I now keep on my E-PL7 and the resulting IQ levels are superb! The Panny 12-32 is built, IMO, much better than the older 14-45. Yeah, I wish the 12-32 had more of a telephoto zoom range, but it's certainly nice to have a quality 24 MM wide angle equivalent. Panny outdid themselves with this lens and I'm guessing that Leica may have had their hands in this somewhere.

But in getting back to the premise of your OP, yeah, having either the Panny 12-35 or Olympus 12-40 would be nice, but the 3 to 4 times increase in price is a real put-off to me (at the moment).

FrankS009 said:

I can't find a comparison, and LensTip has not tested the 14-45. Apart from different FL and speed, how do the two lenses compare for sharpness and other factors?

Click to expand...

Since 2009, my main standard zoom have been successively the Lumix 14-45mm, then the Lumix 12-35mm, and now the M.Zuiko 12-40mm.

I've used the first one for about two years. I was very happy with it.

When I've changed for the Lumix 12-35mm, that was for two reasons: more reach at the wide-end scale and the wider maximum aperture (in low light situation, the ISO was kept lower with the F/2,8 lens).

Effectively, after buying it, I've used my Lumix 7-14mm a lot less than before (the 12mm to 14mm focal length being available from the Lumix 12-35mm).

To be honest, I've not seen a dramatic improvement in IQ: the Lumix 14-45mm was very sharp and the Lumix 12-35mm was also very sharp.

I'm told that the Lumix 12-35mm is prone to flare but that hasn't been a problem for me, probably because it's very rare that the sun is in the frame of one of my pictures and when it's near, I'm ashamed to say that I like flare (up to a certain point of course).

Thanks for the benefit of your expreience. The 12-40mm is by all accounts a great lens, but it is not stabilized, and I use a Panasonic body. The GX7 has stabilization, perhaps it is an option after al.

F.

Useful to know.

F.

Thanks. I think the sharpest lenses are the best lens, not forgetting other factors; but

there may be an alternative way to get 12mm, for example the 7-14mm.

F.

Thanks. for your comment It is the fastest lens I have.

F.

I agree. Can't think of a less expensive way to get to 12mm with good IQ than yhe 12-32. Definitely a thought.

F.

Thanks for reminding me about ISO. Like you I don't think I would get rid of the 14-45, but use it in a different way perhaps.

F.

14-45 mm is very good lens. I do a lot of low light shooting and f2.8 is nicer than 3.5 to f5.6 for sure. Especially when shooting video in low light siutations 1600 ISo looks a lot better on a GH4 than 6400 ISO...

Also: 12 mm was not covered by my other lenses whereas 45 mm is (35-100 f2.8). But 12-14 mm in reallife means a lot more to me than 35 or 45 mm.

The lens is so good that I am considering selling of my 20 mm 1.7 and the 45 mm f1.8 Oly.
As the lens is stabilised it is also more versatile than Oly's equivalents which are not stabilised on most Panny bodies.

All thatsaid, I am not in love with the 12-35 mm. I noted a tiny scratch and felt I did not care so much. It happens when youuse things. My 35-100 f2.8 is the one I like the most. Subjectively I Guess, it feelslike that lens is sharper, gets me better pcs etc.

All I need is a 100-250 mm f2.8-f4 and a 1.4 TC and than I am done, if such a lens will get me the same feeling as the other two...

In my opinion the 14-45 (assuming a sharp copy) is more relevant now than it was on release with the G1.

The modern bodies handle high-ISO so well that the limited apertures of the 14-45 are no longer such a restriction as they were back in the day when even ISO 1600 was pushing it in nasty noise terms.

If I need a standard zoom (or want good video AF) the 14-45 comes out to play, I have no real use for the limited focal ranges of the bigger, better, but far more expensive F2.8 zooms.

(For bright apertures I already have excellent primes, and for wide I use the competent 9-18mm)

If the OP does not have bright primes, or does not have a wide, or requires weathersealing, then the 12-35F2.8 is probably a sensible purchase.

FrankS009 said:

I can't find a comparison, and LensTip has not tested the 14-45. Apart from different FL and speed, how do the two lenses compare for sharpness and other factors?

Click to expand...

I've had a couple of copies of the 14-45, and it is definitely the best of the 'kit' lenses. But even though it's a fully serviceable lens, to me it doesn't surpass the kit realm. It's very light, but not all that compact. It does have a real bayonet hood, but it loosens quickly the overall build isn't that great. And it does have good sharpness, but results do vary from one copy to the next and the overall color reproduction is only average.

The 12-35, even though it may not outclass the 14-45 in terms of outright resolution, does in nearly every other respect. The build is much better. The effectiveness of the OIS is vastly better. And though larger in diameter and heavier, it's still a marvel of miniaturization.

Downsides to the 12-35 are few, but merit mention. How quickly the hood's locking detent looses its bite was excusable on the vastly cheaper 14-45, but is downright annoying on the expensive and otherwise solid 12-35. And the flare is much more pronounced than on the 14-45, sometimes ruining shots indoors under harsh artificial lighting. And of course it is a costly affair compared to the 14-45.

But you cannot dismiss the focal length difference. 12mm on the short end is a lot wider than 14, and it allows for more dramatic composition and is a serious advantage for the 12-35. In my opinion the killer OIS is another, and the better color reproduction is a big third. I also enjoy using it much more because of its solid build and silky focus and zoom.

I gave away my second copy of the 14-45 (mounted to a G1), but I'll probably have the 12-35 forever. The 12-35 extracts a much higher price, but the rewards are there.

12mm at work: