Panasonic 35-100mm F4-5.6 v Panasonic 14-140mm f3.5-5.6

Never intend to hijack this thread. I participate into this topic about 14-140 MII was just wishing to offer further information to the op for his valuation. I am happy that op is having more interest on the tiny 35-100.

As I could recall, the most suspectable shutter speed range should be around 1/60" ~ 1/250" which is a range of most generally used.

Finally, SS is not limited to the long reach. How about this captured by GX1 + 14-140 MII?

If you would not satisfy with this lens, no one would force you to buy one. As said, I have a satisfy copy and I could present some evidence to prove this lens is a good one, at least mine is. Full stop, nothing more or nothing less. I never doubt on any unhappy users' technique or hidden agenda or otherwise. I respect their opinion absolutely and so thought of the possibility of sample variation. Would it be the best explanation for both side of users....

I wish we can end here.

Again, please have a look at the SLR gear description; you keep providing examples outside the troublesome window of shutter speeds they noted.  We are certainly not off topic--it's relevant to anyone looking into 14-140mm II, which includes the OP.

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

Again, please have a look at the SLR gear description; you keep providing examples outside the troublesome window of shutter speeds they noted. We are certainly not off topic--it's relevant to anyone looking into 14-140mm II, which includes the OP.

You mean the following comment?

Quote:

"Shutter-related Blur Problems
... this lens related to motion blur ... on our GX1 test body. When ..... Power O.I.S. disabled ...., ... noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. ..."

Unquote

Beforehand, it is not the usual trouble windows as I learnt from thread on this forum! I'm so aware of the general complaints and never realize it was reported like that! I must confess a little out of my comprehension.

When OIS had been turned off, the tester was indeed shooting with a small non IBIS body, with a not heavy (only 250g, roughly 2/3 of my 45-200) but extended zoom lens (affect the balance of combo) without any sort of stabilization!

I assume you might well aware that if we shoot without stabilization, we better follow the rule of safe shutter speed. A 50mm (eq to 100mm FF) would require at least 1/200" (I'm confidence to make it at 1/100"around) for a steady shoot. It is still not fool proof depending on the shooter and his physical condition (e,g, in a hurry), or using a camera having ergonomic issue. GX1 fits the bill and if the tester didn't put on the VF2 as I must have, I would also concern with steadiness of images even shoot with 14mm! Now the tester found blurred images for 50mm onward at 1/40"~ 1/50" (way slower than the theoretical safe speed). Anything unexpected? Don't overlook one thing, stabilization is not bullet proof.

I had participated into a few threads investigating SS of 14-140 MII (Becasue I just bought it at that time, I must follw the issue to see would I also be a victim). including our dear friend Vesku who lead a major complaint on the over sensitive OIS in video shooting of 14-140 MII (with full respect to his finding). But he always appreciates the excellence of this lens on still images!

Some reviews are good, some might be faulty because of a lot of untold reasons. Sometimes might not be related to the site, but of individual tester. They are not writing a Holy Bible, don't simple take every word they said.

alcelc wrote:

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

Again, please have a look at the SLR gear description; you keep providing examples outside the troublesome window of shutter speeds they noted. We are certainly not off topic--it's relevant to anyone looking into 14-140mm II, which includes the OP.

You mean the following comment?

Quote:

"Shutter-related Blur Problems
... this lens related to motion blur ... on our GX1 test body. When ..... Power O.I.S. disabled ...., ... noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. ..."

Unquote

Beforehand, it is not the usual trouble windows as I learnt from thread on this forum! I'm so aware of the general complaints and never realize it was reported like that! I must confess a little out of my comprehension.

When OIS had been turned off, the tester was indeed shooting with a small non IBIS body, with a not heavy (only 250g, roughly 2/3 of my 45-200) but extended zoom lens (affect the balance of combo) without any sort of stabilization!

I assume you might well aware that if we shoot without stabilization, we better follow the rule of safe shutter speed. A 50mm (eq to 100mm FF) would require at least 1/200" (I'm confidence to make it at 1/100"around) for a steady shoot. It is still not fool proof depending on the shooter and his physical condition (e,g, in a hurry), or using a camera having ergonomic issue. GX1 fits the bill and if the tester didn't put on the VF2 as I must have, I would also concern with steadiness of images even shoot with 14mm! Now the tester found blurred images for 50mm onward at 1/40"~ 1/50" (way slower than the theoretical safe speed). Anything unexpected? Don't overlook one thing, stabilization is not bullet proof.

I had participated into a few threads investigating SS of 14-140 MII (Becasue I just bought it at that time, I must follw the issue to see would I also be a victim). including our dear friend Vesku who lead a major complaint on the over sensitive OIS in video shooting of 14-140 MII (with full respect to his finding). But he always appreciates the excellence of this lens on still images!

Some reviews are good, some might be faulty because of a lot of untold reasons. Sometimes might not be related to the site, but of individual tester. They are not writing a Holy Bible, don't simple take every word they said

The full quote would be:

"We ran into an issue with this lens related to motion blur at certain shutter speeds on our GX1 test body. When we tested it with Power O.I.S. disabled and on our studio camera stand that weighs over 250 pounds, we found noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. Interestingly, while this blur went away at higher shutter speeds, we noticed that it was also largely eliminated when when we lowered the shutter speed to around 1/15 of a second."

The camera was therefore stabilized quite well.

They also found this issue to occur with GX7, which also has a mechanical shutter.

I'm really not trying to argue just to argue for fun, I'm just get a little frustrated when people try to provide proof but consistently either don't present the relevant findings or present selected evidence that doesn't show the full picture. I'm sure it's a good lens, and I'm not at all trying to talk it down--I'm actually interested in it, so I've been doing my research trying to figure out if I'll run into trouble.

HDcamfan wrote:

I am looking for a good general walk around lens for my EM1 and have narrowed my choice to these two. As far as I can see the 35-100 is smaller, lighter and possibly sharper but the 14-140 has a better range (obviously!).

I know so few people seem to use the new 35-100 but does anyone have any thoughts on which may be better for general use. I am think of using it for outside walk around family shots. My main concern with the 35-100 is the minimum focal distance (maybe a fraction too long for me?) and for the 14-140 it is the size!

I've just received my 35-100 and am quite impressed. It's the zoom tele I use when I travel, and it's been paired with my Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 for a travel combo that's really hard to beat. What amazes me time and time again is how this combo duplicates the same focal lengths I used when I traveled with my Canon full frame gear, i.e. 24-200 across two lenses, but at substantially reduced weight, size and certainly cost. I couldn't be happier. The 35-100 is an excellent lens from just about any standpoint. And it's so tiny!

Regarding the 14-140: I owned one when I had a Panasonic GH1. Nice lens. Convenient focal length range. But it doesn't compare with the 12-40 within the 12-40's range. The 35-100 is at least as good as the 14-140 within its range.

If the additional reach is important to you, then maybe the 14-140 is right for you. You'll be giving up some sharpness and detail, though ... particularly at the edges and corners.

It is the lens I leave on the camera, since I got it.

It is f/3.5 at 14mm but it rises quickly past f/4 as you zoom in, I could check my photos but just by my memory it seems to me that by 30 or 35mm you can't get below f/4.  That is not too surprising, I guess.

I've been very happy with its sharpness.  I did shoot one small video clip with it, I guess I didn't zoom much while shooting, I was happy with it.  I didn't turn off stabilization and I didn't see any problem - I was hand holding the camera.  So what a previous post said were issues with video could be true, but I didn't run into those issues.

alcelc wrote:

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

Again, please have a look at the SLR gear description; you keep providing examples outside the troublesome window of shutter speeds they noted. We are certainly not off topic--it's relevant to anyone looking into 14-140mm II, which includes the OP.

You mean the following comment?

Quote:

"Shutter-related Blur Problems
... this lens related to motion blur ... on our GX1 test body. When ..... Power O.I.S. disabled ...., ... noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. ..."

Unquote

Beforehand, it is not the usual trouble windows as I learnt from thread on this forum! I'm so aware of the general complaints and never realize it was reported like that! I must confess a little out of my comprehension.

When OIS had been turned off, the tester was indeed shooting with a small non IBIS body, with a not heavy (only 250g, roughly 2/3 of my 45-200) but extended zoom lens (affect the balance of combo) without any sort of stabilization!

I assume you might well aware that if we shoot without stabilization, we better follow the rule of safe shutter speed. A 50mm (eq to 100mm FF) would require at least 1/200" (I'm confidence to make it at 1/100"around) for a steady shoot. It is still not fool proof depending on the shooter and his physical condition (e,g, in a hurry), or using a camera having ergonomic issue. GX1 fits the bill and if the tester didn't put on the VF2 as I must have, I would also concern with steadiness of images even shoot with 14mm! Now the tester found blurred images for 50mm onward at 1/40"~ 1/50" (way slower than the theoretical safe speed). Anything unexpected? Don't overlook one thing, stabilization is not bullet proof.

I had participated into a few threads investigating SS of 14-140 MII (Becasue I just bought it at that time, I must follw the issue to see would I also be a victim). including our dear friend Vesku who lead a major complaint on the over sensitive OIS in video shooting of 14-140 MII (with full respect to his finding). But he always appreciates the excellence of this lens on still images!

Some reviews are good, some might be faulty because of a lot of untold reasons. Sometimes might not be related to the site, but of individual tester. They are not writing a Holy Bible, don't simple take every word they said

The full quote would be:

"We ran into an issue with this lens related to motion blur at certain shutter speeds on our GX1 test body. When we tested it with Power O.I.S. disabled and on our studio camera stand that weighs over 250 pounds, we found noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. Interestingly, while this blur went away at higher shutter speeds, we noticed that it was also largely eliminated when when we lowered the shutter speed to around 1/15 of a second."

The camera was therefore stabilized quite well.

They also found this issue to occur with GX7, which also has a mechanical shutter.

I'm really not trying to argue just to argue for fun, I'm just get a little frustrated when people try to provide proof but consistently either don't present the relevant findings or present selected evidence that doesn't show the full picture. I'm sure it's a good lens, and I'm not at all trying to talk it down--I'm actually interested in it, so I've been doing my research trying to figure out if I'll run into trouble.

To be fair, many of the newer (and lighter) zooms seem similarly affected to a certain extent... I imaging the exact shutter speed range will vary depending on the body/lens combo, trying to claim a particular exemplar isn't affected without a comparison using e-shutter/EFC seems like more trouble than it's worth tho.

HDcamfan wrote:

I am looking for a good general walk around lens for my EM1 and have narrowed my choice to these two. As far as I can see the 35-100 is smaller, lighter and possibly sharper but the 14-140 has a better range (obviously!).

I know so few people seem to use the new 35-100 but does anyone have any thoughts on which may be better for general use. I am think of using it for outside walk around family shots. My main concern with the 35-100 is the minimum focal distance (maybe a fraction too long for me?) and for the 14-140 it is the size!

I've just received my 35-100 and am quite impressed. It's the zoom tele I use when I travel, and it's been paired with my Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 for a travel combo that's really hard to beat. What amazes me time and time again is how this combo duplicates the same focal lengths I used when I traveled with my Canon full frame gear, i.e. 24-200 across two lenses, but at substantially reduced weight, size and certainly cost. I couldn't be happier. The 35-100 is an excellent lens from just about any standpoint. And it's so tiny!

Regarding the 14-140: I owned one when I had a Panasonic GH1. Nice lens. Convenient focal length range. But it doesn't compare with the 12-40 within the 12-40's range. The 35-100 is at least as good as the 14-140 within its range.

If the additional reach is important to you, then maybe the 14-140 is right for you. You'll be giving up some sharpness and detail, though ... particularly at the edges and corners.

There's two 14-140, sounds (based solely on timeline) like you're talking about the first one.

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

alcelc wrote:

OrdinarilyInordinate wrote:

Again, please have a look at the SLR gear description; you keep providing examples outside the troublesome window of shutter speeds they noted. We are certainly not off topic--it's relevant to anyone looking into 14-140mm II, which includes the OP.

You mean the following comment?

Quote:

"Shutter-related Blur Problems
... this lens related to motion blur ... on our GX1 test body. When ..... Power O.I.S. disabled ...., ... noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. ..."

Unquote

Beforehand, it is not the usual trouble windows as I learnt from thread on this forum! I'm so aware of the general complaints and never realize it was reported like that! I must confess a little out of my comprehension.

When OIS had been turned off, the tester was indeed shooting with a small non IBIS body, with a not heavy (only 250g, roughly 2/3 of my 45-200) but extended zoom lens (affect the balance of combo) without any sort of stabilization!

I assume you might well aware that if we shoot without stabilization, we better follow the rule of safe shutter speed. A 50mm (eq to 100mm FF) would require at least 1/200" (I'm confidence to make it at 1/100"around) for a steady shoot. It is still not fool proof depending on the shooter and his physical condition (e,g, in a hurry), or using a camera having ergonomic issue. GX1 fits the bill and if the tester didn't put on the VF2 as I must have, I would also concern with steadiness of images even shoot with 14mm! Now the tester found blurred images for 50mm onward at 1/40"~ 1/50" (way slower than the theoretical safe speed). Anything unexpected? Don't overlook one thing, stabilization is not bullet proof.

I had participated into a few threads investigating SS of 14-140 MII (Becasue I just bought it at that time, I must follw the issue to see would I also be a victim). including our dear friend Vesku who lead a major complaint on the over sensitive OIS in video shooting of 14-140 MII (with full respect to his finding). But he always appreciates the excellence of this lens on still images!

Some reviews are good, some might be faulty because of a lot of untold reasons. Sometimes might not be related to the site, but of individual tester. They are not writing a Holy Bible, don't simple take every word they said

The full quote would be:

"We ran into an issue with this lens related to motion blur at certain shutter speeds on our GX1 test body. When we tested it with Power O.I.S. disabled and on our studio camera stand that weighs over 250 pounds,

Oh yeah, sorry, may be of tired eye I though it was " ... GX1 mounted a lens that weights over 250 gram!!" I instantly thought it was referred to the 14-140 MII which is roughly 250+g.

we found noticeable motion blur at shutter speeds around 1/40 to 1/50 of a second at focal lengths of 50mm and longer. Interestingly, while this blur went away at higher shutter speeds, we noticed that it was also largely eliminated when when we lowered the shutter speed to around 1/15 of a second."

The camera was therefore stabilized quite well.

They also found this issue to occur with GX7, which also has a mechanical shutter.

I'm really not trying to argue just to argue for fun, I'm just get a little frustrated when people try to provide proof but consistently either don't present the relevant findings or present selected evidence that doesn't show the full picture. I'm sure it's a good lens, and I'm not at all trying to talk it down--I'm actually interested in it, so I've been doing my research trying to figure out if I'll run into trouble.

Let me withdraw my previous comment regarding "Non Stabilized gear and safe shutter speed" as well as "doubting on the integrity of the test report".

As a general consensus, if SS was found when shooting on a tripod, it would be a solid prove of SS. Again would it be a sample variation that I don't know. Since you can see, day to day real life usages of my copy doesn't give me blurry images nor so soft that I am not happy with.

I was rather shock to hear some other complaints that problem would be seen across the most general use shutter speed range from 1/60" ~ 1/250". If so, without electronic shutter this lens should have been recalled.

To be reasonable, if a lens has SS issue just for a very narrow range of shutter speed which could be avoided easily, what's the big deal. Just one more compromise of a compromise system. It is a golden rule that we must know our gear well to get the optimal performance. It includes the strength of our gear, as well as its short fall. Dof, tracking of fast moving subject, weaker high ISO are all M43's weakness. Now add 1/40"~1/50" for this particular lens... Just like we should know well the sweet spot of each of our lenses.

I would definitely test it again at 50mm onward within 1/40"~1/50". But need to see the recent over cast rainy day away from me.

I am not a fanboy. Like that Panny 14-42 MI, I wouldn't hesitate to rate it as a rubbish. As I don't have return policy in my country, if I get a bad product I would be the first one to shout out loud (like my disappointed Sony TX10). What I want to do is to offer a fair opinion in the prospective of a happy owner for this wonderful lens to has a chance.

Impulses wrote:

There's two 14-140, sounds (based solely on timeline) like you're talking about the first one.

Correct ...

I'm not familiar with the other lens, but I can say that the Olympus 12-40 is a fabulous walk-around lens, but won't do everything if you want longer reach.

The maximum aperture of f/2.8 means it will serve you well in low light, where a lens whose maximum aperture is only f/4 will not serve well.

Isabel

Dear OrdinarilyInordinate, as being promised in my last post to perform a test on GX1 + 14-140 M2 in according to the SS finding by SLRGear (from 50mm upward, OIS disable, mount on a tripod and shoot at 1/40" and 1/50"), I eventually found time to do it today.

In short, no blurry image was obtained. May be as other good members' opinion, using e-shutter might potentially improve the sharpness, but as all test samples were look sharp at 100% view, I am confidence that at least my combo has no SS issue.

14-140 MII mounted on GX1, OIS disable, Multi Metering, M mode Shutter Speed at 1/40" and 1/50" for the focal lengths of around 50mm, 70mm, 100mm and 140mm respectively. Used natural lighting, but as it was not ideal, ISO set at 400 (allowing a +2/3ev for all shots to compensate for the lighting condition), mount on a Manfrotto 785B tripod (0.98Kg weight, support up to 1Kg), shoot at self timer of 2 sec delay for full resolution JPEG. Target was a Test Chart to check AF back focus.

In order to reduce the uploading size, one of the OOC Jpeg sample was posted, others were resized to 1920 x 1440 @300dpi (without any enlargement nor reduction, theoretically a 100% view) to fit normal monitor display and for smaller file size.

The original OOC Jpeg image

The 8 resized test samples (46mm, 69mm, 97mm and 140mm at 1/40" and 1/50" respectively having f/stop set to en effect of +2/3ev to compensate for the lighting condition) were as below:

I wish you might also find my 14-140 MII, as a 10x superzoom, is not that bad at all.

Thank you for this effort

and they`re the ones the lens works best on for stills (the ones with 0-sec antishock) . Yup, the 14-140-II jitters on Video , it`ll add an interesting effect to the robotic Video of the EM5/1/10 - LOL

Hi, Isabel!

My Domke bag contains my EM1 with 12-32 mounted, with the 7.5 Bower FE on one side and the 35-100 F4-5.6 on the other.  The 12-32 gets the most use, but the others get plenty of exercise.  If I only used one lens it would probably be the 14-54 on the mmf3 adapter.  But I am enjoying going small and light.