Pana 14/2.5 versus Oly 14-42 - experiences?

I'm sure this question has been asked and answered before, but I'm looking for real-world experiences from people who have tried and compared the Panasonic 14mm against the Olympus 14-42 (any of the versions - the original or the EZ).

I know the usual decisions come into play about zoom v. prime and the type of shooting you do, but leaving them aside, I'm curious about image quality and any aberrations/distortions that you would actually see in field use - not from a test bench.

I bought my EM-10 bundled with the 14-42 and 40-150(non-pro) late 2014. It was first m43 system.

I prefer shooting with prime lenses and the first two prime's were 14mmf2.5(version 1 used) and O25mmf1.8(new).

I did a fair amount of comparison between the 14-42 and P14mm - @14mm f3.5 vs f2.5 and @14mm f4.

And I concur with lensrental's findings - http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results/

Not only is the P14mm sharper at the two tested f-stop's but I like its color better - which is subjective I know.  However, I won't pay full retail ~$260 as I can get a P15f1.7mm int'l version for ~$100 more.

Two other reasons why I'm keeping my 14mm(I bought a 15mm a month ago):

1) pancake size - goes well with my GM1

2) I use a wide converter giving me a 10.6mmf2.5 and the combined size is still small enough

I don't use my 14-42 anymore but still shoot with the 40-150mm.

I looked at this specifically about three years ago. I had an E-PL3 with the 14-42 II and the Panny 14 as the main lenses.

They are both excellent lenses. I mostly used the 14 as my walk around lens with either the Oly 45 or the Oly 40-150 (4-5.6) in my pocket. The E-PL3 with the 14 was pretty much pocketable, you see -- even lighter and more compact than the 14-42.

I never had any complaints about either in terms of general lens performance, they were both excellent -- but one day, out of boredom and idle curiosity (or maybe someone making idiot claims on this forum), I tested the 14 against the 14-42 @ 14 by shooting my neighbor's picket fence across the road (at an angle to check the corners too) and concluded that for sharpness they were both excellent, virtually identical. The 14 might have had a little more contrast.

EDIT: After posting, I saw addlightness's post which appeared while I was working on mine. Check the lensrental link he gave. Whoa! Look at the results for the 14mm! Either my 14-42 II was an exceptionally good copy or my testing wasn't nearly stringent enough! Certainly there was nothing wrong with my 14 -- a lovely lens.

One or twice (literally, once or twice), the 14 caught me out with some flare from strong, dispersed light sources just outside the frame; I remember this because I was surprised by it -- the main memory of this is taking some shots on a big open shed with bright light coming in from one side. I don't remember the same thing with the 14-42 but I shot a lot less in varied circumstances with that. Both handled light sources within the frame very well -- but here, the 14 was better. Close it down a bit and you got those nice starry looking images.

Both focused fast and accurately -- but the 14 did have an edge there, it focused at warp speed in virtually any circumstances. I think it was the fastest focusing lens I have owned.

And, of course, with f2.5 the 14 had that bit more aperture for low light.

One thing both have that is not often acknowledged -- you can get the accessory lens to turn them into a 10-11mm UWA, with the Panny being a touch wider than the Oly (x0.7 vs x0.75). Think of that with the 14. Fit the Panny w/a accessory lens to it and you have an f2.5 10mm!!! Say what? A post or three on this forum has spoken of excellent results with it. I did not have that, but I did have the Oly w/a accessory lens for the 14-42 and it was fun, fun, fun all the way with a notably wider FoV.

Nowadays, I have sacrificed both for the Panny 12-32. Love that extra bit of width in the FoV and it is an excellent performing lens as well. My favorite walkabout lens on the GX7.

14-42@14 with w/a accessory lens fitted to make it an f3.5 11mm. There is some barrel distortion but it is very regular and easily fixed if need be (e.g. if you take architectual pix with edge lines near the edge of the frame). In a pic like this, I like the barrel distortion -- I think it adds to the pic.

14-42@14. pretty darned nice! Handling the sun to the lower right very well.

The 14 using its f2.5 to best effect. Practically dark, but it focused at warp speed on the singer's face. I then used a slow shutter speed to deliberately blur the background with movement to provide liveliness to the pic, which otherwise would have been just a straight flash shot of the singer.

The 14mm at work. Instant focus. One of he best pix of this genre I have ever taken, I think.

These were the first two lenses I had along with the Lumix 45-200mm on my E-PL2, I took the three of them to the grand canyon and surrounding areas shortly after getting the kit.

Of the "keeper" images none came from the 14-42mm (I believe it was the R version). I just found the images out of it to be flat. The images from the 14-42mm weren't unsharp at all but just didn't have the color pop of the 14mm f2.5.

Obviously the 14-42 has more utility but in the end it just didn't do it for me, I replaced it several years ago with the 4/3 Olympus 14-54mm mk II which focused pretty well on even the E-PL2 and focuses a treat on my E-M1. I compared it to the other two at 14mm in a well let indoor setting and found not much difference in sharpness with a slight edge to the 14mm f2.5 but not much.

In my opinion the 14mm f2.5 is one of the most under appreciated lenses especially considering the cost of a used or grey market one from ebay. In lieu of a hood I used a step up ring on it so I could use filters that fit my other lenses.

Of all the lenses I have owned over the years in between then and now I kept the 14mm f2.5 the longest, only selling it recently this year to repay my credit card after jumping on a refurbished 7-14mm PRO during the president's day sale. I regret letting it go and imagine I will buy another at some point.

Thanks to each of you! That's very interesting.

I use the 14 2.5 most of the time when I 'm walking around.

It has good sharpness, for a pancake, it has a good pop and its small enough to allow me to hide the camera between my hands.

Changing focal lengths confuses me so I prefer a prime.

Don't get me wrong, when I work I use the 14-150 but for walking around it's a good and cheap prime with a lot of compromisings.

atomgr wrote:

I use the 14 2.5 most of the time when I 'm walking around.

It has good sharpness, for a pancake, it has a good pop and its small enough to allow me to hide the camera between my hands.

Changing focal lengths confuses me so I prefer a prime.

Don't get me wrong, when I work I use the 14-150 but for walking around it's a good and cheap prime with a lot of compromisings.

Thanks. I started out with the 14-42 EZ for the pocketability, but soon realised the compromises - which seemed to be most noticeable at certain apertures and speeds, hence my interest in the 14. That plus the fact it's a lot cheaper than the Oly 12 and fits my pocket better.

I had the Pana 14/2.5 (it replaced the Panasonic 20/1.7 which was a better lens optically but the AF on my Olympus bodies was too slow for me) and really liked it. Probably would still have it if I did not replace it with the Olympus 17mm/1.8, which obviously is not a pancake but IMHO is a much better lens.

I have had several Olympus 14-42 lenses (currently the EZ) and while I did not do a lot of direct comparison shots between the Pana 14 and the Olympus lenses, I never felt there was a noticeable difference in either color or contrast between them. I really liked the Pana 14mm and probably it would still be my pancake of choice when I want to go small (current body is the EM10-II), but as I said I replaced it when I got the 17/1.8.

I should mention that I have bought (grey market via ebay for like $135) and very much like the Lumix 12-32mm kit lens from the GM1/GM5, it sits on my E-PL2 and provides a nice pocket-able combo. I find it better than the Olympus kit lenses.

I had the 14mm, bought the 12-32mm and promptly sold the 14mm as the zoom was just as good at 14mm and almost as compact.

I've had 2 14-42, the R version is very good - not as good as my Pany 12-35 but good enough for stock images. I have the ver. 1 of the Pany 14 and use it mostly with the WA adapter for a 21mm effective focal length lens  = very sharp. I think my 14 is better than my 14-42 but not quite as good as my 12-35mm. When I travel or go down town I take my EP5/14 with converter, and a Sigma 30mm (both my smaller than my 12-35mm). But when I travel to other places I take my 14-42/40-150 great performance and so cheap I can leave them in my hotel room. If I had to choose I'd take the 14/30 combo over the 14-42mm R II.