GF1 to OMD: keep Pana lenses?

I'm looking to upgrade my old trusty GF1 (with EVF) to Oly OM-D. I mainly want to do it because of built-in hi-res EVF, better ISO and sensor based anti-shake. I know it's silly but I also simply like how OM-D looks and feels.

For lens I have original 14-45 kit, 45-200 and 20 f1.7. Considering their class I like all the lens, even 14-45 kit, and in general was planning to get an OM-D body and keep all the Pana lens.

What pitfalls should I expect especially in terms of AF speed and CA/distortion auto correction?

Should I sell Pana 14-45 and get OM-D with an M.Zuiko 14-42 II kit? Btw, what's the difference between simply II and II R?

Thanks!

If you are going upgrade, see if you can sell the GF1 and 14-42 and use the proceeds to upgrade to the OMD with 12-50.  The difference from 12 to 14mm and from 42 to 50mm is significant....plus you get a weathersealed system should you find yourself in the situation and a macro like capability.

klopus wrote:

I'm looking to upgrade my old trusty GF1 (with EVF) to Oly OM-D. I mainly want to do it because of built-in hi-res EVF, better ISO and sensor based anti-shake. I know it's silly but I also simply like how OM-D looks and feels.

For lens I have original 14-42 kit, 45-200 and 20 f1.7. Considering their class I like all the lens, even 14-42 kit, and in general was planning to get an OM-D body and keep all the Pana lens.

What pitfalls should I expect especially in terms of AF speed and CA/distortion auto correction?

Should I sell Pana 14-42 and get OM-D with an M.Zuiko 14-42 II kit? Btw, what's the difference between simply II and II R?

***

You'd have to deal with CA (LR for one makes it simple) on all, IF CA is strong enough to distract (depending on what one is shooting in what conditions).   And the 20/1.7 can exhibit tonal banding in dark exposures at high ISOs - not everyone experiences this (I think because they don't push the lens as much as others might).   I forget when it's possible for it to kick in, but I wouldn't worry too much about it unless it starts haunting you.   Otherwise you're going to find overall you never had high ISOs so good in general.

Stick with what you have.   If you've been enjoying them you should continue to do so.

The 14-45 is better than any other lens of that range other than the 12-35mm. Keep it.

Distortion will still be corrected, but CA won't. It's not a big enough problem to worry about though.

Stick with what you've got, unless you're thinking of switching to primes.

Agreed. The 14-45 is one of the best zooms out there, sharper than the 12-50 and probably better quality control than the 14-42II (I tested a couple of them, all decentered and finally gave up).

The 20 1.7 is a fantastic lens. Keep it.

klopus wrote:

I'm looking to upgrade my old trusty GF1 (with EVF) to Oly OM-D. I mainly want to do it because of built-in hi-res EVF, better ISO and sensor based anti-shake. I know it's silly but I also simply like how OM-D looks and feels.

For lens I have original 14-45 kit, 45-200 and 20 f1.7. Considering their class I like all the lens, even 14-45 kit, and in general was planning to get an OM-D body and keep all the Pana lens.

What pitfalls should I expect especially in terms of AF speed and CA/distortion auto correction?

Should I sell Pana 14-45 and get OM-D with an M.Zuiko 14-42 II kit? Btw, what's the difference between simply II and II R?

Thanks!

You have good Panasonic Lumix lenses. specially the 14-45mm (that is still one of the best kit lens if not the best, I am not including the 12-35mm as a kit lens) and the 20mm, the 45-200mm is very good for the price.

I`d sell the 14-45 with the GF1 for a better price.

There really is very little separating any of the kit lenses.

The 12-50mm is a good choice to go with the 12-50mm.

Don't give up those lenses. They are very sharp and good value for money lenses especially the 14-42.  I kept both and the GF1 as back up body.

I had (have) exactly the same kit.  6 months ago I bought the OMD and added the Pana 7-14mm and the Olympus 45mm and I am really pleased with the results from all the lenses.  However, I find myself using the Pana 14-45mm most of the time as it's a great walk about lens, very sharp and fast enough most of the time.  I would keep all your Pana lenses if I were you, and the GF1 is still a great camera.

I am using a lot the 14-45 with my EM5 its a great kit lens.

When i am alone and i have all the time needed i usualy take the 12+25+45+75, But for family walks i most often only take the 14-45.

No CA problem, i dont need to go through lightroom to remove it to get my photos accepted in microstock.

For my next 2 weeks hike i plan to take the 14-45+75

I have no opinion about the 45-200, never owned one.

I sold the 20mm 1.7 , but it has been my favourite lens for a long time with my EP2.

One day i had a good occasion to buy a new 25mm at 2/3 the price, so i thought i could try it and resell it without loss, and i ended selling the 20mm.

I too went gf1->omd with those three lenses + 7-14mm. All three of them are great, no problems other than having to remove CA in LR.

The 14-45 was an impulse buy, I never really gotten into using it, so it probably will be sold some day.

I've taken a few decent shots of birds with the omd/45-200, but I'm always a bit frustrated with it never being quite a sharp as I'd like. It is much easier to use on the omd. I probably will sell it.

I'm thinking now I'm mostly happy with 7-14, 20, and 75mm. An odd setup perhaps, but suits the sorts of shots I want to take.

KEEP!  The Panny 14-45 (45, not 42) is one of the best in class.

Chas2 wrote:

If you are going upgrade, see if you can sell the GF1 and 14-42 and use the proceeds to upgrade to the OMD with 12-50.  The difference from 12 to 14mm and from 42 to 50mm is significant....plus you get a weathersealed system should you find yourself in the situation and a macro like capability.

Never mind.  I see I misread your OP.  I thought you said 14-42.  I have the 14-45 and it is a great lens.  Keep it.

Now about that GF1 with EVF.  At this point, keep it.  With the GX1 available for $300 or sometimes less, I think the market for the GF1 is down in the $150 range.  For that price, it might be good to have a second body.

I have those three lenses, they work fine with the e-m5, the only downside is having to sort the CA in post, which isn't that big a deal

I would wait for  new Panasonic offering which will either come up or announced soon.  GF1 is still a good camera.  I don't have one, but  my daughter owns 20, 45-200, PL45 macro, PL25. Photos coming out of them are great.

Keep the lenses that you have...especially the 14-45 and 20.  They will be fine with the new body.

klopus wrote:

I'm looking to upgrade my old trusty GF1 (with EVF) to Oly OM-D. I mainly want to do it because of built-in hi-res EVF, better ISO and sensor based anti-shake. I know it's silly but I also simply like how OM-D looks and feels.

For lens I have original 14-45 kit, 45-200 and 20 f1.7. Considering their class I like all the lens, even 14-45 kit, and in general was planning to get an OM-D body and keep all the Pana lens.

What pitfalls should I expect especially in terms of AF speed and CA/distortion auto correction?

Should I sell Pana 14-45 and get OM-D with an M.Zuiko 14-42 II kit? Btw, what's the difference between simply II and II R?

Thanks!

I'm not going to plow through all these replies so there's probably nothing new I'll say here, but here goes...

I upgraded from a Panny G3 to an E-M5 one month after ditching all my Nikon gear in favor of MFT, due to loss of strength (due to old age!). But I kept the three Panny lenses I had: the 7-14mm (in spite of the purple blotching problem), the 14-45, and the 45-200. I very seldom run into CA with the latter two lenses. I think the 14-45 is a gem of a lens and will probably never depart from it. I love it.

I also like the 45-200 and have kept it so far, even though I eventually bought the Olympus 40-150 (for only $99 -- couldn't pass that deal up) and have the new 75-300mm on order, those two lenses really making the 45-200 redundant. But its price has fallen so low I probably won't depart from that, either.

The only complaint I have about the 45-200 (if it is a complaint) is it's a big lens for MFT. (The Olympus 40-150 is a tiny little gem and is definitely worth its current price, double what I paid for it.) AF speed for the 14-45 and the 45-200 are not a problem at all on the OM-D.

No real need to sell the Pana 14-45 to get the M.Zuiko 14-42. I have the II R lens (got it as the kit lens when I bought the Olympus E-PM1 a couple days ago) and it's a beautiful looking lens and focuses down to 9", but you can't beat the sharpness of the Panny 14-45. The advantages of the M.Zuiko over the Panny are how close you can focus with the M.Zuiko, its styling, and its small size and weight. Not enough justification to replace the Panny in my opinion.

The only difference between the II and the II R is improved styling. The M.Zuiko 14-42 II R is a beautiful looking lens. But I wouldn't give up the almost unparalleled sharpness of the Panny 14-45. For a zoom lens, it's astonishing.