Reading mode: Light Dark

Anyone got a Panasonic 12-60 lens and a 14-140 MkII?

Go to last post
S

saudidave

Senior Member
Messages
2,710
Solutions
2
Reaction score
1,225
Location
Poynton, South Manchester, UK
I had a G7+14-140 and sold it when I got the TZ100. I regretted it and bought a G80+16-60 kit lens less than 3 months later. I'm now really glad I did what I did because the G80 is a quantum leap over the G7.

The 14-+140 was one of the best walkabouts I've ever owned and whilst I'm fairly happy with the 12-60, I do miss the extra reach and I'm thinking I may get another 14-140, albeit I'd have to sell the 12-60 if I did. They overlap so much that keeping both isn't something I could justify.

Has anyone got both lenses and can comment on how the IQ compares please? I've struggled to find a comparison on line

Dave
 
I have both lenses, and I think the 14-140 II (the one with f3.5-5.6) is sharper (but you really need to pixel peep to see). And with the new firmware, it supports Dual IS2 so, in theory better. But...

The 12-60 has "12" (so, 24 equivalent) therefore is far better for landscape (at least for me) and it is WR. Also, it is a lighter lens. So, even if they overlap, I can't sell any of them because I like both.

Since my 12-60 came as a kit and just cost $100 more, I keep it as a backup of my 14-140 in case it rains or I go to somewhere with sand or dust. And of course in case I will take a landscape shoot :)
 
plus one here,

I did considered to sell the 12-60mm wr but the money you get for it is not that much and it is WR and for a kit lens fairly good. (if you consider to buy the 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 well then it is only smaller and lighter so then it is obsolete.)

But as a wr backup for the G80 the cheapest way to gain(keep) wr body and lens.
 
I can prove it with some boring test shoots :D

Sorry that some of them got underexposed, did it quickly and I was shading the chart on some :(



12-60 at 17mm (trying to get the 18mm mark)
12-60 at 17mm (trying to get the 18mm mark)



14-140 at 17mm (trying to get the 18mm mark)
14-140 at 17mm (trying to get the 18mm mark)



12-60 at 23mm (trying to get the 25mm mark)
12-60 at 23mm (trying to get the 25mm mark)



14-140 at 24mm (trying to get the 25mm mark)
14-140 at 24mm (trying to get the 25mm mark)



12-60 at 50mm (nailed the 50mm mark)
12-60 at 50mm (nailed the 50mm mark)



14-140 at 46mm (missed the 50mm mark by a lot)
14-140 at 46mm (missed the 50mm mark by a lot)
 
I pretty much do the same, although the 12=60 has been my first experience with 12mm it has made me a lot more interested in getting a 7-14 or 8-18.
 
saudidave said:
I had a G7+14-140 and sold it when I got the TZ100. I regretted it and bought a G80+16-60 kit lens less than 3 months later. I'm now really glad I did what I did because the G80 is a quantum leap over the G7.

The 14-+140 was one of the best walkabouts I've ever owned and whilst I'm fairly happy with the 12-60, I do miss the extra reach and I'm thinking I may get another 14-140, albeit I'd have to sell the 12-60 if I did. They overlap so much that keeping both isn't something I could justify.

Has anyone got both lenses and can comment on how the IQ compares please? I've struggled to find a comparison on line

Dave
Click to expand...
Dave, it's a hard to choice to make. I don't have the 14-140 but I am thinking of getting one. I had the fz-1000 before the g85 and I do miss the extra range. I like the 12-60 though and it is sharp all around. I also have the 12-35 f2.8 OIS mark I so, it's kind of redundant in some FL. But those are 2 different lenses in my eyes. For all around, the 12-60 makes sense. I just got the 15mm f1.7 so my low light is covered. But that is a different lens. Since I tend to shoot events as well, the 15mm f1.7 and 12-35 f2.8 makes more use and sense. The 12-60 is nice for outdoors and all around personal use. So, I am thinking if I should get a 14-140.

I might keep the 12-60 as I may get a 2nd g85 for pro work.

I think you should get a 14-140. You are used to it, and having a 12-60 is a duplicate in your case, though you will indeed lose the 12mm. If that is important to you, you may have to get a wider FL, either a prime or a zoom (eg 7-14). But if it is not, then the path si really clear that the 14-140 is better for you.
 
I have both, and I think the Lumix G 14-140mm II is probably slightly better optically. But the difference is probably not noticeable for real life use at all. Both are very good.

So get the one that is more suitable for you.

http://http//m43photo.blogspot.com/
 
Thanks all for your help and the answers were exactly what I expected to be honest!

Under normal circumstances I would have the wherewithal to just augment my kit with a 14-140 but I'm playing financial catch up at the moment. I'm self employed and took a much needed 2 week break in Texas, my first holiday in 7 years, then on my return a customer went bankrupt and I lost a months earnings. The net result has left me with a credit card bill that I anticipate will take 4-6 months to clear before I embark on frivolous spending on lenses that I want but don't, in reality, need!

I'll keep the 12-60 for now and probably augment it with a a 14-140 in the spring. The 12-60 is a great all rounder and I find 2x digital to be acceptable in decent light providing me with a total range of 24-240, only a little short of the 28-280 I had with the G7+14-140. I didn't find 2x digital to be acceptable with the G7.

Thanks again, Dave
 
Last edited:
I'm new to MFT and wonder, if splash/dust proof lenses are more useful to the original poster's needs, might the Olympus 14-150 be an alternative choice? Slightly longer reach, too.

I'm deciding between a G80 and Oly. 5Mk2 and which lenses to choose for my specific needs, hence my reply.
 
saudidave said:
I had a G7+14-140 and sold it when I got the TZ100. I regretted it and bought a G80+16-60 kit lens less than 3 months later. I'm now really glad I did what I did because the G80 is a quantum leap over the G7.

The 14-+140 was one of the best walkabouts I've ever owned and whilst I'm fairly happy with the 12-60, I do miss the extra reach and I'm thinking I may get another 14-140, albeit I'd have to sell the 12-60 if I did. They overlap so much that keeping both isn't something I could justify.

Has anyone got both lenses and can comment on how the IQ compares please? I've struggled to find a comparison on line

Dave
Click to expand...
I totally understand your dilemma. I went between the 12-60mm and the 14-140mm Mk2 kit combo too many times before picking the 12-60mm kit in the end together with a 45-150mm Panasonic zoom. Price-wise the whole package was actually about 40 EUR cheaper than the 14-140mm kit, but that was not the deciding reason. I used Nikon DSLR gear before buying this Panasonic gear.

According to the reviews that I read before making the final decision both lenses were so close IQ-wise that this wasn't the deciding factor. But 12-60mm is weather resistant, it is lighter&smaller and 12mm vs 14mm is a significant difference (I handled and tried both zooms). In fact, 12mm at the wide end was the tipping point for me. For me having 12mm instantly at my disposal is a lot more important and useful than having 140 mm would be.

12-60mm lens stays attached to my G80 more than 90% of the time, even though I always carry the 45-150mm with me as well, it is after all a small and light zoom. The other less than 10% of the time is shared by the 45-150mm and the Samyang 12mm F2 manual prime (for my night sky attempts).

Taking into consideration what and how I shoot (I am an amateur with no preference for any specific type of photography) I know I made the right decision.
 
Last edited:
saudidave said:
I had a G7+14-140 and sold it when I got the TZ100. I regretted it and bought a G80+16-60 kit lens less than 3 months later. I'm now really glad I did what I did because the G80 is a quantum leap over the G7.

The 14-+140 was one of the best walkabouts I've ever owned and whilst I'm fairly happy with the 12-60, I do miss the extra reach and I'm thinking I may get another 14-140, albeit I'd have to sell the 12-60 if I did. They overlap so much that keeping both isn't something I could justify.

Has anyone got both lenses and can comment on how the IQ compares please? I've struggled to find a comparison on line

Dave
Click to expand...
Unless you have something to fill the gap of the 12/13mm I would say a better upgrade is the 12-60 2.8-4, I take it you have the 12-60 3.5-5.6?

The 12-60 2.8-4 really has better close focus than what I recall on the 14-140 ii even with the extra 80mm! The 14-140 is over f4 by 25mm and f5 by 60mm so again slower and it can't focus as close either at any length.

I do eagerly await the 50-200 2.8-4 for fast mid tele from Pana to match it with as currently only the 40-150 2.8 olympus is the mid viable partner in my opinion for the 12-60 2.8-4 :( but as it doesn't support dfd on GH5 I am reluctant to get it for now. That combo is much more versatile than the 14-140 ii which I think you'll find rather creatively lacking.
 
saudidave said:
Thanks all for your help and the answers were exactly what I expected to be honest!

Under normal circumstances I would have the wherewithal to just augment my kit with a 14-140 but I'm playing financial catch up at the moment. I'm self employed and took a much needed 2 week break in Texas, my first holiday in 7 years, then on my return a customer went bankrupt and I lost a months earnings. The net result has left me with a credit card bill that I anticipate will take 4-6 months to clear before I embark on frivolous spending on lenses that I want but don't, in reality, need!

I'll keep the 12-60 for now and probably augment it with a a 14-140 in the spring. The 12-60 is a great all rounder and I find 2x digital to be acceptable in decent light providing me with a total range of 24-240, only a little short of the 28-280 I had with the G7+14-140. I didn't find 2x digital to be acceptable with the G7.

Thanks again, Dave
Click to expand...
I don't think you should have both. The 12-60 is good, but you will have a duplicate FL with only the 12mm as your advantage in the 12-60. If that 12mm is important to you, well, fine, keep it. But my guess is you will hardly use that lens, and you'd go for the 14-140 most of the time.

The other advantage of the 12-60 is weather sealing. If you tend to shoot in dusty and wet/humid conditions, that is an advantage for that lens.
 
Martyn Welch said:
I'm new to MFT and wonder, if splash/dust proof lenses are more useful to the original poster's needs, might the Olympus 14-150 be an alternative choice? Slightly longer reach, too.
Click to expand...
It depends on your shooting or type of photography. If I were shooting outside or in dessert places, or humid places with possibility of a rainfall, I'd get the kit with weather sealing. That will save you a lot of grief. I splashed water on that 12-60 and my g85 when I arrived home. Still working up to now.
Martyn Welch said:
I'm deciding between a G80 and Oly. 5Mk2 and which lenses to choose for my specific needs, hence my reply.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for the olympus. But for the G80/85, I can vouch for it. It is well built, and the weather sealing seems good. I like the features and the UI/menu system. The dual IS really works well. I can shoot 1/2 sec or even 1 sec with it with a high success rate. Knowing I have a weather sealed system makes things easier and worry free. Of course, it may not be important depending on what you shoot and where you are. But weather sealing does open a lot of doors. When we went touring and was on many beaches, I had to baby my sony nex-5t with the 16-50 and 55-210 lens. I couldn't just take out the camera or use it sparingly as our banca/boat scooted from island to island with the danger of sea water spraying on it. And once we hit shore, I also have to worry about sand getting the best of the equipment. So, even if we don't do these jaunts a lot, when we do, it's nice to know that we have gear that can take a bit of the harsh environment.

Of course, YMMV.
 
IQ difference negligible.

The 14 to 140 is my walk around for travel

12 to 60 when I need to carry less or the extranwide 2mm
 
caterpillar said:
saudidave said:
Thanks all for your help and the answers were exactly what I expected to be honest!

Under normal circumstances I would have the wherewithal to just augment my kit with a 14-140 but I'm playing financial catch up at the moment. I'm self employed and took a much needed 2 week break in Texas, my first holiday in 7 years, then on my return a customer went bankrupt and I lost a months earnings. The net result has left me with a credit card bill that I anticipate will take 4-6 months to clear before I embark on frivolous spending on lenses that I want but don't, in reality, need!

I'll keep the 12-60 for now and probably augment it with a a 14-140 in the spring. The 12-60 is a great all rounder and I find 2x digital to be acceptable in decent light providing me with a total range of 24-240, only a little short of the 28-280 I had with the G7+14-140. I didn't find 2x digital to be acceptable with the G7.

Thanks again, Dave
Click to expand...
I don't think you should have both. The 12-60 is good, but you will have a duplicate FL with only the 12mm as your advantage in the 12-60. If that 12mm is important to you, well, fine, keep it. But my guess is you will hardly use that lens, and you'd go for the 14-140 most of the time.

The other advantage of the 12-60 is weather sealing. If you tend to shoot in dusty and wet/humid conditions, that is an advantage for that lens.
Click to expand...
 
Advent1sam said:
saudidave said:
I had a G7+14-140 and sold it when I got the TZ100. I regretted it and bought a G80+16-60 kit lens less than 3 months later. I'm now really glad I did what I did because the G80 is a quantum leap over the G7.

The 14-+140 was one of the best walkabouts I've ever owned and whilst I'm fairly happy with the 12-60, I do miss the extra reach and I'm thinking I may get another 14-140, albeit I'd have to sell the 12-60 if I did. They overlap so much that keeping both isn't something I could justify.

Has anyone got both lenses and can comment on how the IQ compares please? I've struggled to find a comparison on line

Dave
Click to expand...
Unless you have something to fill the gap of the 12/13mm I would say a better upgrade is the 12-60 2.8-4, I take it you have the 12-60 3.5-5.6?

The 12-60 2.8-4 really has better close focus than what I recall on the 14-140 ii even with the extra 80mm! The 14-140 is over f4 by 25mm and f5 by 60mm so again slower and it can't focus as close either at any length.

I do eagerly await the 50-200 2.8-4 for fast mid tele from Pana to match it with as currently only the 40-150 2.8 olympus is the mid viable partner in my opinion for the 12-60 2.8-4 :( but as it doesn't support dfd on GH5 I am reluctant to get it for now. That combo is much more versatile than the 14-140 ii which I think you'll find rather creatively lacking.
Click to expand...
Sam

Thanks for the response but as my OP says, I'm too financially strapped at the moment to afford a 14-140 and a 12-60, let alone a PL 12-60!

My spare time available to pursue photography is very limited too, so for the moment the expensive gear will have to wait!

Dave
 
lescrane said:
IQ difference negligible.

The 14 to 140 is my walk around for travel

12 to 60 when I need to carry less or the extranwide 2mm
Click to expand...
Thanks Les,

The main purpose of my OP was to confirm that both lenses have very similar IQ. I had a G7 with the 14-140 & now have a G80 with the 12-60 so a true comparison wasn't possible.

When my finances improve I shall buy a 14-140 as the range is more useful to me and I'll possibly sell the 12-60 as the overlap is too great. I may get something wider to augment the 14-140 and for interior work. That would be the ideal combo for my useage

Dave
 
Last edited:
caterpillar said:
Martyn Welch said:
I'm new to MFT and wonder, if splash/dust proof lenses are more useful to the original poster's needs, might the Olympus 14-150 be an alternative choice? Slightly longer reach, too.
Click to expand...
It depends on your shooting or type of photography. If I were shooting outside or in dessert places, or humid places with possibility of a rainfall, I'd get the kit with weather sealing. That will save you a lot of grief. I splashed water on that 12-60 and my g85 when I arrived home. Still working up to now.
caterpillar said:
I'm deciding between a G80 and Oly. 5Mk2 and which lenses to choose for my specific needs, hence my reply.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for the olympus. But for the G80/85, I can vouch for it. It is well built, and the weather sealing seems good. I like the features and the UI/menu system. The dual IS really works well. I can shoot 1/2 sec or even 1 sec with it with a high success rate. Knowing I have a weather sealed system makes things easier and worry free. Of course, it may not be important depending on what you shoot and where you are. But weather sealing does open a lot of doors. When we went touring and was on many beaches, I had to baby my sony nex-5t with the 16-50 and 55-210 lens. I couldn't just take out the camera or use it sparingly as our banca/boat scooted from island to island with the danger of sea water spraying on it. And once we hit shore, I also have to worry about sand getting the best of the equipment. So, even if we don't do these jaunts a lot, when we do, it's nice to know that we have gear that can take a bit of the harsh environment.

Of course, YMMV.
Click to expand...
 
I have both and would not wish to part with either. They complement each other in an odd kind of way. The 12-60 comes into its own in crowded situations and internal architecture. The 14-140 takes care of the rest. I added a 0.7x wide converter. Which is a cheap and effective way to get those occasional wide shots.
 
Martyn Welch said:
I'm new to MFT and wonder, if splash/dust proof lenses are more useful to the original poster's needs, might the Olympus 14-150 be an alternative choice? Slightly longer reach, too.
Click to expand...
I don't have the Oly 14-150 so I can't test, but, it is a matter of trade off since you will win WR but you will loose Dual IS2 and DFD. I personally prefer the stabilization.
Martyn Welch said:
I'm deciding between a G80 and Oly. 5Mk2 and which lenses to choose for my specific needs, hence my reply.
Click to expand...
Never tested the Oly but I just love my G85 to death! If you go Oly, I would get the Oly lens, but if you go Pany I would get the Pany lens, just because IS, AF and lens correction compatibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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