Small Gem Kit lens for M 4/3

There have been a number of Panasonic 14-xx kit lenses, from the original 14-45 which debuted with the G1, through the GH1`s 14-150 Mk1 which was better at Video than stills and the motor zoom pancake to the cheapened 14-42 Mk1/MK1a and now this - the 14-42-HD , usually called the MkII (though not on the actual lens) , whereas the 14-45 and first 14-42s looked very similar (the 14-42 is a bit bigger, had a smaller front element and no OIS switch) the Mk2-HD is a far smaller optic , though no where near as compact as the PZ pancake .

Optically the 14-45 was always rated the best, I wasn`t particularily knocked out with the lens (had 3 samples) and thought it merely "competent" rather than stellar, it got its reputation because at the time the competition was pretty poor (18-55 NEX and NX) and the Oly`s optically excellent 14-42 suffered the wobbles . this "legacy" was compounded by the 14-45 being replaced with an inferior 14-42 model which wasn`t as dreadful as the NEX 18-55 but a good bit behind the 14-45 edge to edge and Oly were still making shutters which made their 14-42 wobble . The 14-45 hasn`t been in production for quite a while from what I can tell though remaining stock has held up . Thankfully they`ve made a decent 14-42 in this new shiny HD version .

This small light lens is very good even wideopen , I`d say matching the 14-45 at 14mm F3.5 and beating it at full zoom, CA seems better too , stopped down the lens seems to have better microcontrast than the 14-45 had . it doesn`t carry the "X Vario" Tag the powerzoom Pancake does but optically it`s more "X" than the pancake by quit a margin, it`s not as good for fine detail or corner performance as my stellar copy of the 14mm Prime at corresponding apertures but still damn good even wideopen (the 14mm is pretty much perfect at F4 corner to corner), this sample isn`t decentered which is nice to see.. AF is fast and sure (tested on G3) . I like the compactness and the Aluminium-alike finish ..

this lens can be picked up for around £100 split from a kit or used which is expensive for a plastic mount kit lens but it`s worth the money optically and unlike its immediate predecessors (the 14-42 MK1 and facelift MK1A) you`d be happy to use it as a main lens even on higher end body like a GH4 or OMD , this is what the old 14-45 was praised for and I`d say this lens replaces and improves on that ..

Thumbs up - makes it into my Hundred Quid Hits ......... 5 Stars ???. Yep, its relative for the price, find another standard M43 zoom available new which offers what this does for the cash . the Oly 14-42R-II maybe but reports of soft long end dull that one

As I said, I seldom see a discussion of this hidden gem, so your review was especially welcome and confirms many of my positive observations about it.

Thanks a lot !! . I typed quite a detailed reply and lost it all - Typical

I love the new smaller Panasonic 14-42 (II) with silent AF.  But I'm also quite annoy that Panasonic decide to bundle G6 with older 14-42 (I) in USA instead of the newer 14-42 (II).

007peter wrote:

I love the new smaller Panasonic 14-42 (II) with silent AF. But I'm also quite annoy that Panasonic decide to bundle G6 with older 14-42 (I) in USA instead of the newer 14-42 (II).

That's not my experience.  I picked up my G6 in March from B&H and it came with the 14-42 (II).  Checking B&H again just now it still shows as shipping with the II.

How about the 12-32? Isn't it sharp?

I don't like the lens. The fact that you have to turn the camera on then rotate the lens to extend it to shoot is one step too many. What a waste of time. Its slow at f3.5 on its widest setting. Not exactly made for night shots or interiors or creating shallow depth of field. So other than its small size and zoom capability its rather useless. And frankly as one can clearly read on the forum there are many people unhappy with the build quality and the fact the lens falls apart easily. I sold mine on ebay for $383. I would pay about $100 for it so I made out like a bandit. Put the money towards the PL15mm which is a gem. I give it 2 stars out of 5.

AdamT wrote:

There have been a number of Panasonic 14-xx kit lenses, from the original 14-45 which debuted with the G1, through the GH1`s 14-150 Mk1 which was better at Video than stills and the motor zoom pancake to the cheapened 14-42 Mk1/MK1a and now this - the 14-42-HD , usually called the MkII (though not on the actual lens) , whereas the 14-45 and first 14-42s looked very similar (the 14-42 is a bit bigger, had a smaller front element and no OIS switch) the Mk2-HD is a far smaller optic , though no where near as compact as the PZ pancake .

Optically the 14-45 was always rated the best, I wasn`t particularily knocked out with the lens (had 3 samples) and thought it merely "competent" rather than stellar, it got its reputation because at the time the competition was pretty poor (18-55 NEX and NX) and the Oly`s optically excellent 14-42 suffered the wobbles . this "legacy" was compounded by the 14-45 being replaced with an inferior 14-42 model which wasn`t as dreadful as the NEX 18-55 but a good bit behind the 14-45 edge to edge and Oly were still making shutters which made their 14-42 wobble . The 14-45 hasn`t been in production for quite a while from what I can tell though remaining stock has held up . Thankfully they`ve made a decent 14-42 in this new shiny HD version .

This small light lens is very good even wideopen , I`d say matching the 14-45 at 14mm F3.5 and beating it at full zoom, CA seems better too , stopped down the lens seems to have better microcontrast than the 14-45 had . it doesn`t carry the "X Vario" Tag the powerzoom Pancake does but optically it`s more "X" than the pancake by quit a margin, it`s not as good for fine detail or corner performance as my stellar copy of the 14mm Prime at corresponding apertures but still damn good even wideopen (the 14mm is pretty much perfect at F4 corner to corner), this sample isn`t decentered which is nice to see.. AF is fast and sure (tested on G3) . I like the compactness and the Aluminium-alike finish ..

this lens can be picked up for around £100 split from a kit or used which is expensive for a plastic mount kit lens but it`s worth the money optically and unlike its immediate predecessors (the 14-42 MK1 and facelift MK1A) you`d be happy to use it as a main lens even on higher end body like a GH4 or OMD , this is what the old 14-45 was praised for and I`d say this lens replaces and improves on that ..

Thumbs up - makes it into my Hundred Quid Hits ......... 5 Stars ???. Yep, its relative for the price, find another standard M43 zoom available new which offers what this does for the cash . the Oly 14-42R-II maybe but reports of soft long end dull that one

tomtom50 wrote:

How about the 12-32? Isn't it sharp?

it may be but there`s heavy sample variation (seems as bad as Fuji compacts for decentered sample ratios from review samples and reports here) and the build is pretty feeble.. it has a decent rep for a 12-xx pancake optically if you get a good one but the 14-42-HD is simply very good indeed and seemdly consistent and reasonably well made, quite a lot cheaper too.

I don't like the lens. The fact that you have to turn the camera on then rotate the lens to extend it to shoot is one step too many.

Errrr, wrong lens - this one does `t need extending , its the 12-32 and the Olys which need that

What a waste of time. Its slow at f3.5 on its widest setting.

what do you expect for £100 - F2.8-4 ?, a used Fuji 18-55 F2.8-4 goes for 3X the price, Yep, I`d like a cheaper than Pro 14-50 F2.8-4 at £300 for M43 too but it ain`t happenin'

Not exactly made for night shots or interiors or creating shallow depth of field.

no, that's why primes and Pro zooms were invented, you sound like the guy who complained that the Audi A1 was useless on the track because it wouldn`t do a standing quarter in 6 seconds or hit 180Mph - that`s what the R8 is for .

So other than its small size and zoom capability its rather useless. And frankly as one can clearly read on the forum there are many people unhappy with the build quality and the fact the lens falls apart easily.

Nope, that`s the 12-32 again - we`re discussing the 14-42-HD here

I'm with you, Adam, on your opinion. I recently won an eBay auction on this lens for 88 euros, new. It arrived 5 days later here in Latvia.

I've had the 14-45 since I bought a G1 in 2010 and liked it. So, my first impulse was to compare them and find out just exactly what I had. The 14-45 always had a very nice even focus across the entire plane at all apertures and lengths. I though it would be hard to beat. Well, the 14-42 II has better micro contrast in the center and is just as good at the edges. Only at 42 wide open is there a slight softening in the far upper left corner which is visible at 100%.

The only thing I can say against it is that it's not 2.8. So what? At that price I feel quite content.

Count me in as a believer in this little beauty. I love that it barely extends and is half the weight of the 14-45. It rides like a feather on my G6 and a GX7.

Sorry, but you simply don't get what this lens was made for. It's not for shallow DOF and bokeh. But photography is not about shallow DOF and bokeh. It is an area of photography, but honestly, the best photos I've seen so far have wide DOF and mostly everything in focus. Yes, this lens is not for low light, however, this is also just an area of photography.

In good light, on a trip, this lens has its potential. Today I am going to go to a short trip to a beautiful place in the near. All the trip will be in daylight. What I intend to shot is the sight. I don't need shallow DOF, quite the contrary. I am going to shot at f8 to have everything in focus. And I want the subjects and hopefully my creative compositions make the photos.

I have very good primes, but as I experienced, on a trip like above it is inconvenient to change them as requested. Sure you can do creative photos with sticking to just one focal length, but that's an other discussion. So this basic lens has its place. It is small, very good balanced on my old but good GF2. It is also well made: I still remember to my first kit lens on my Canon 300D, and it was ugly and big and did the same, just with worse optical quality.

eastvillager wrote:

I don't like the lens. The fact that you have to turn the camera on then rotate the lens to extend it to shoot is one step too many. What a waste of time. Its slow at f3.5 on its widest setting. Not exactly made for night shots or interiors or creating shallow depth of field. So other than its small size and zoom capability its rather useless. And frankly as one can clearly read on the forum there are many people unhappy with the build quality and the fact the lens falls apart easily. I sold mine on ebay for $383. I would pay about $100 for it so I made out like a bandit. Put the money towards the PL15mm which is a gem. I give it 2 stars out of 5.

AdamT wrote:

There have been a number of Panasonic 14-xx kit lenses, from the original 14-45 which debuted with the G1, through the GH1`s 14-150 Mk1 which was better at Video than stills and the motor zoom pancake to the cheapened 14-42 Mk1/MK1a and now this - the 14-42-HD , usually called the MkII (though not on the actual lens) , whereas the 14-45 and first 14-42s looked very similar (the 14-42 is a bit bigger, had a smaller front element and no OIS switch) the Mk2-HD is a far smaller optic , though no where near as compact as the PZ pancake .

Optically the 14-45 was always rated the best, I wasn`t particularily knocked out with the lens (had 3 samples) and thought it merely "competent" rather than stellar, it got its reputation because at the time the competition was pretty poor (18-55 NEX and NX) and the Oly`s optically excellent 14-42 suffered the wobbles . this "legacy" was compounded by the 14-45 being replaced with an inferior 14-42 model which wasn`t as dreadful as the NEX 18-55 but a good bit behind the 14-45 edge to edge and Oly were still making shutters which made their 14-42 wobble . The 14-45 hasn`t been in production for quite a while from what I can tell though remaining stock has held up . Thankfully they`ve made a decent 14-42 in this new shiny HD version .

This small light lens is very good even wideopen , I`d say matching the 14-45 at 14mm F3.5 and beating it at full zoom, CA seems better too , stopped down the lens seems to have better microcontrast than the 14-45 had . it doesn`t carry the "X Vario" Tag the powerzoom Pancake does but optically it`s more "X" than the pancake by quit a margin, it`s not as good for fine detail or corner performance as my stellar copy of the 14mm Prime at corresponding apertures but still damn good even wideopen (the 14mm is pretty much perfect at F4 corner to corner), this sample isn`t decentered which is nice to see.. AF is fast and sure (tested on G3) . I like the compactness and the Aluminium-alike finish ..

this lens can be picked up for around £100 split from a kit or used which is expensive for a plastic mount kit lens but it`s worth the money optically and unlike its immediate predecessors (the 14-42 MK1 and facelift MK1A) you`d be happy to use it as a main lens even on higher end body like a GH4 or OMD , this is what the old 14-45 was praised for and I`d say this lens replaces and improves on that ..

Thumbs up - makes it into my Hundred Quid Hits ......... 5 Stars ???. Yep, its relative for the price, find another standard M43 zoom available new which offers what this does for the cash . the Oly 14-42R-II maybe but reports of soft long end dull that one

My EM5 came back today so after a meeting I thought I`d put it through its paces with the 14-42HD on ........

the lens is the perfect size for the cam - the pancake zooms IMO are too small (the primes are ok as you don`t have to zoom them) and the 12-50 a bit ungainly , this lens is pefect handling wise ..... of course on this cam , IBIS disables the lens stabilizer but as the lens only has Mega-OIS (not Power OIS), is only 42mm at the long end anyway and the EM5 has the best IBIS it`s not an issue .

Image quality wise, it doesn`t stifle the cams lovely colour or soften the amazing sharpness like lesser kit zooms , the Bokeh is amazing for a plastic kit lens, I`ve yet to see the traditional ultra-nervous background mess these kind of lenses put out .

Samples - the lens isn`t made for closeups (it doesn`t get very close and has a funny filter size rather than 49 or 52mm) but at least it`s sharp at it`s not very close range which many aren`t, it`s not perfect, there`s some cyan fringing on extreme contrasts (delibertately didn`t remove it here to show) but only at 100% and its easily removed ..

these are 100% Crops , click original for full size rather than just the image here

Both 100% Crops at 42mm wideopen in RAW

When I got the GH4 I gave my GF2 to my dad. I didn't give him any lenses, though. I told him to get the 14-42 because it was cheap, and would let him cover a pretty good zoom range without having to switch lenses. When I went home recently he had the lens, so I tried it out.

I was very surprised, First of all, it is ridiculously small. Compared to my 12-35, this thing is really really tiny. It's so small that it looks out of place on the GH4. It's probably amazing on a GM1.

The other thing that surprised me was the telescoping. I'm used to lenses that get longer when you zoom in, and shorter when you zoom out. But this lens bounces back out when you go to the wide angles. There's obviously an optical reason for that, which I am unfamiliar with. I guess it also doesn't really matter. It's just interesting.

Lastly, of course there is the performance. I have the 45-150, and this performs very similarly.The autofocus was really fast. Obviously it wasn't as sharp as more expensive alternatives, but it's a fraction of the price. Considering how cheap it was, I was still extremely impressed. If you go with this you can save a ton of money, weight, and space in exchange for just a slight loss of image quality.

The other thing that surprised me was the telescoping. I'm used to lenses that get longer when you zoom in, and shorter when you zoom out. But this lens bounces back out when you go to the wide angles

Some DSLR kit lenses do this (such as the canon 18-55) too

Lastly, of course there is the performance. I have the 45-150, and this performs very similarly.The autofocus was really fast. Obviously it wasn't as sharp as more expensive alternatives, but it's a fraction of the price. Considering how cheap it was, I was still extremely impressed. If you go with this you can save a ton of money, weight, and space in exchange for just a slight loss of image quality.

Yup, it`s not perfect but it does the competent kit lens thing better than previous ones including the 14-45 and any of the Olys . I like that it`s the pefect size for the EM5 and 10 and wouldn`t be too out of place on a GM1 .

ABCMO wrote:

Adam, it's good to hear from another enthusiastic user of this lens. I don't see much discussion of it, which a friend who put me on to it thinks is because it is only packaged as part of kits in North America. Indeed, I purchased mine for $208 in January from a Japanese vendor on Amazon. Amazingly, after I completed the purchase process on Amazon, the lens was delivered to my door here in Columbia, Missouri in about eight days! The package even included a small amount of hard candy, presumably as a thank you for purchasing the lens. A Japanese business custom? I should note that mine has a metal base. I had read that there were two versions of this lens: one with a plastic base that I think was the one included in the kits, and the other was one with a metal base that was sold as a free-standing lens. And the material used in the base is apparently the only difference between the two lenses.

I got the plastic mount version and no problem with it after 1 1/2 years.

I use the lens on my E-M5, and to my eye it looks to be exactly the size that a lens should look like on this camera. As you note, although it isn't a pancake, it is still small and light. And something I really like is that the most it extends anywhere in its range is one quarter of an inch (about 5 or 6mm). I originally used the Oly 14-42R II that came with the camera, but something that always irritated me was the message to unlock the lens, something I invariably forgot to do. That doesn't happen with this lens. It's on when you turn on the camera. And as far as sharpness goes, it is very sharp. I found your comparison to the legendary Pany 14-45 especially interesting--and encouraging. I've often been tempted by the Oly 12-40, but its size and weight just seem to defeat the size advantages of m43 cameras. To me, the size of the Pany 14-42 MII is perfect, and I suspect the image quality in good light would be hard to distinguish from the 12-40 in a 13 x 19 print. And for one-fifth the price!

My thoughts exactly.

I also got the Panny 45-175mm because it doesn't change length when zooming.

As I said, I seldom see a discussion of this hidden gem, so your review was especially welcome and confirms many of my positive observations about it.

Al

It's always fun to find someone who has chosen a couple of the same lenses as ourselves. The 40-175 is a nice consumer lens that consistently delivers the goods. No shutter shock for me, especially with the quiet shutter I use most of the time. I never want a tromboning dust vacuum again.

ABCMO wrote:

... I had read that there were two versions of this lens: one with a plastic base that I think was the one included in the kits, and the other was one with a metal base that was sold as a free-standing lens. And the material used in the base is apparently the only difference between the two lenses.

...

Al

My new GX7 with 14-42 kit lens (H-FS1442A - plastic mount) seems to have a lens mount that is not exactly "tight". The lens rocks (up/down or left/right etc.) sufficiently to get a thin piece of paper in the mount between the camera and the lens.

I have never had a camera with such looseness before. The dealer thinks it is "wrong" (but the demo model in the shop was not exactly "tight" either) and is trying to get a replacement.

Anyone else had this issue? Might it be an issue with the plastic mount being a little "variable" in tightness?

David

I have the same lens (a II with plastic mount) bought with another Panasonic camera, that I've now used with a gx7.  Have not observed anything similar to what you described.  The combination works fine.  The lens clicks in snuggly, as it should.

I've seen other lenses, on other cameras, that seemed almost like too tight a fit, and in one instance had an old lens (metal mount Canon, by the way) that I think was slightly warped, as it did not attach smoothly at all and, although it was an extremely tight fit, sometimes seemed to lose good contact electronically.  I'd certainly be concerned about the contacts, and longevity, with the situation you're seeing.

A dealer should have other lenses on hand, and it should not take much experimentation to determine if the problem is the mount on the camera or the mount on the kit lens.  Sounds like something needs adjusted or replaced.