Panasonic 14-140

[OlympusTog]

I've just bought this lens as a "walkaround" to go on my 2nd EM-1 body. I find the focal length range really good and IQ quite reasonable and very sharp throughout most of the range. The only downside I can see so far is quite severe chromatic abberation (purple fringing) especially around tree branches. This can be corrected in LR5 (and other software I suspect) but as yet, there's no lens profile in LR5 but there is a tick box and slider to remove the CA very effectively. Overall though a very good lens and much better built than the Olympus 14-150 which is quite plastically but optically not bad

 

[perry rhodan]

Thanks for posting this!

Have you experienced any blurr like:

Loading…

slrgear.com

Regards Perry

 

[Gunnlaugur Gudmundsson]

Got my 14-140 from Adorama today... first impression.. very happy ..

 

[OlympusTog]

Thanks for posting this!

Have you experienced any blurr like:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1611/cat/69

Regards Perry

So far not experienced blur as described in the above link but not sure if it's because I'm using it on an OM-D EM-1 which has IS in the body. CA is easily dealt with in LR5. All in all, I'm very pleased with it but would love either the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 or the Olympus 40-140 2.8 when it's released as I shoot weddings and would love the faster lenses for low light stuff, I also own the Olympus 12-40 2.8 which is razor sharp even at 2.8 - the Panasonic has an excellent write up and retails around £895 so I'll wait to see what price the Olympus comes in at

 

[TN Args]

Have you experienced any blur like:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1611/cat/69

Regards Perry

Why should he? That blur is a fault of the camera used in the test, an obsolete model Panasonic.

Very poor of slrgear.com to report this issue in their lens review. When dpreview tested the Olympus E-P5 camera and observed shutter-shock blur, they didn't blame the lens, they blamed the camera. Rightly so.

 

[OlympusTog]

I used this lens at a recent wedding and was very pleased with the results from it - it was my backup lens (main one was the Oly 12-40 F/2.8) I've posted one of the images from the wedding so judge for yourselves. The b/g blur was added in PSE11 post shot as the 5.6 on this lens is not the best for bluuring b/g's (unless really close to your subject)







--
Phil

 

[stevenmh]

Have you experienced any blur like:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1611/cat/69

Regards Perry

Why should he? That blur is a fault of the camera used in the test, an obsolete model Panasonic.

Very poor of slrgear.com to report this issue in their lens review. When dpreview tested the Olympus E-P5 camera and observed shutter-shock blur, they didn't blame the lens, they blamed the camera. Rightly so.

 

[TN Args]

No, you are trolling. SLRgear.com used a GX1. "We ran into an issue with this lens related to motion blur at certain shutter speeds on our GX1 test body. "

 

[Fredrik Glckner]

I think the second Version of the 14-140mm lens is fantastic. My review here:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2013/08/lumix-g-hd-14-140mm-f35-56-review.html

It is better than the previous Version in almost any conceivable way. The only way it is not better, is that it does not have a rubberized zoom ring.

 

[davidedric]

I have the lens on a g5 body, and like it very much indeed. I took it on a week's vacation earlier this year and didn't miss the dslr one bit (apart from not having an aching neck).

I have run carefully controlled shutter shock tests, with results very similar to the published ones. I know where it is and what to do about it

One happy user,

Dave

 

[Sean Nelson]

I think the second Version of the 14-140mm lens is fantastic. My review here:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2013/08/lumix-g-hd-14-140mm-f35-56-review.html

It is better than the previous Version in almost any conceivable way. The only way it is not better, is that it does not have a rubberized zoom ring.

I basically agree with this, but I'd add that in no way does the zoom ring feel substandard. In fact, my understanding is that the original version of the lens was subject to "tromboning" (having the heavy front part of the lens extend by itself when hanging down from your neck), and this has not been an issue on my copy of the new version of the lens. In fact, the lens is so light that with it mounted on my GH3 the camera doesn't point down when it's hanging on my neck strap - it actually points straight ahead.

 

[Fredrik Glckner]

In fact, the lens is so light that with it mounted on my GH3 the camera doesn't point down when it's hanging on my neck strap - it actually points straight ahead.

Yes, this is true. The 14-140mm v2 does not at all suffer from zoom creep, as long as you "park" it in 14mm.

I say "park" here, since the lens does not extend significantly until you zoom a bit beyond 14mm. So due to the physics of the zoom mechanism, you cannot pull the lens out if the zoom ring is set to 14mm. It is pretty much locked at 14mm. You can only pull it out if you first twist the lens to a bit beyond 14mm.

So zoom creep is no issue when you set it to 14mm.

The extending section of the lens feels very solid and safe.

http://m43photo.blogspot.com

 

[Sean Nelson]

In fact, the lens is so light that with it mounted on my GH3 the camera doesn't point down when it's hanging on my neck strap - it actually points straight ahead.

So zoom creep is no issue when you set it to 14mm.

As a test I just set mine to 50mm (extended about halfway), pointed it down, and then shook the camera vertically pretty much as hard as I could - the lens moved only a tiny amount. I don't think zoom creep is an issue with this lens no matter what focal length it's set to.

 

[Lindsay D]

I use the Panasonic 14-140II and I'm extremely happy with it. I use it for my personal photography and I think it's a great lens, sharp with good colour and contrast. I use it on Olympus bodies. In fact I was out with it just yesterday: http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/bluebell-railway-sussex-history/

 

[lambert4]

I use the Panasonic 14-140II and I'm extremely happy with it. I use it for my personal photography and I think it's a great lens, sharp with good colour and contrast. I use it on Olympus bodies. In fact I was out with it just yesterday: http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/bluebell-railway-sussex-history/

 

[Gunnlaugur Gudmundsson]

I use the Panasonic 14-140II and I'm extremely happy with it. I use it for my personal photography and I think it's a great lens, sharp with good colour and contrast. I use it on Olympus bodies. In fact I was out with it just yesterday: http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/bluebell-railway-sussex-history/

 

[GTOz]

Arg

I think your accusation of "trolling" is quite unfortunate. He appears to be faithfully reporting the SLRGear review. Did you read the whole review?

SLRGear use a GX1 on their M43 reviews - using the same camera for all lenses allows the most scientific look at image quality as it removes the potential impact of changing the camera. They detected a problem with "shutter-related blur". They investigated further, recognising that they were using an old camera, and used it on the current GM1 and GX7. They were unable to reproduce it with the electronic shutter, but did with the GX7 mechanical shutter. Looking at their pictures the GX7 "blur" looks less severe than the GX1.

The SLRGear review looks very fair, and stevenmh's report of it seems fair also. Not a hint of "trolling" or maliciousness anywhere.

I have a 14-140 II on order.

GT

 

[Aionos]

The only downside I can see so far is quite severe chromatic abberation (purple fringing) especially around tree branches.

This is to be anticipated shooting Panasonic glass on an Olympus body. Panasonic (as a general rule on m43) applies UV filter to the lens, whereas Olympus applies it to the body.

The Tiffen Haze 2A filter will fix your problem. This is not the fault of the lens.

 

[saudidave]

I've just bought this lens as a "walkaround" to go on my 2nd EM-1 body. I find the focal length range really good and IQ quite reasonable and very sharp throughout most of the range. The only downside I can see so far is quite severe chromatic abberation (purple fringing) especially around tree branches. This can be corrected in LR5 (and other software I suspect) but as yet, there's no lens profile in LR5 but there is a tick box and slider to remove the CA very effectively. Overall though a very good lens and much better built than the Olympus 14-150 which is quite plastically but optically not bad

--
Phil

I have the 14-140 MkII that I use on a G6 & I previously had a Mk1. The MkII is superior in every respect apart from the shuttershock issue, which I avoid by using the electronic shutter at affected settings.