The Panasonic 14-42II kit lens is as sharp as the 20mm f1.7 II

A little while ago I replaced my dreadful Panasonic 14-42 lens with the newer version of the kit lens (14-42 ii). I am very happy with it, but I needed a faster lens for indoor shooting and I recently bought the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II prime lens. I really like this lens so far, it looks good on my camera, sharp and compact.

However today I compared the sharpness of the lens with my 14-42 II kit lens.

I included my test shots below:

Shot with the Panasonic 14-42 II at 20mm

Shot with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II

I don't see any difference in sharpness in the center of the image between the two lens. This makes me happy because my kit lens is as sharp as a prime lens

On the other hand I am a little bummed out, because I tought I will now have more sharper images, as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is regarded as one of the sharpest lens in the system.

I just wanted to share, to show that the Panasonic kit lenses can be very sharp and great images can be taken with them.

SzBencej wrote:

A little while ago I replaced my dreadful Panasonic 14-42 lens with the newer version of the kit lens (14-42 ii). I am very happy with it, but I needed a faster lens for indoor shooting and I recently bought the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II prime lens. I really like this lens so far, it looks good on my camera, sharp and compact.

However today I compared the sharpness of the lens with my 14-42 II kit lens.

I included my test shots below:

Shot with the Panasonic 14-42 II at 20mm

Shot with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II

I don't see any difference in sharpness in the center of the image between the two lens. This makes me happy because my kit lens is as sharp as a prime lens

On the other hand I am a little bummed out, because I tought I will now have more sharper images, as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is regarded as one of the sharpest lens in the system.

I just wanted to share, to show that the Panasonic kit lenses can be very sharp and great images can be taken with them.

The new kit lens does have a good reputation.  Only have the 20mm and 12-32mm myself.

1) Did you notice that the prime has a noticeably better T-stop than the kit lens, based on your EXIF data?

2) Was the kit lens wide open at 20mm, or did you stop it down a little bit?

3) Centre sharpness tends to be good for most lenses and Panasonic hopefully concentrated on this for the kit lens.

Good that you are happy with your kit lens.

Andrew

I would say that between these two shots, the image taken with the zoom is even a bit sharper. But the difference is so small as to be inconsequential.

What's nice about the 20/1.7 is that it's sharp from edge to edge at f/2.

Panasonic 14-42 (II) HD with smaller 46mm filter is the most underrated M43 lens.

Its is way sharper than the horrible plasticky 14-42 version 1 with 52mm filter.

Also way better than the soft 14mm f/2.5 pancake

About equal to my 20/1.7 I & 25/1.7

and mine was slightly sharper than my PL 25/1.4 as well.

Most people confuse it with the inferior version 1, and few people actually shot side by side comparison photo on tripod. If they do, they always comes to the same shocking conclusion that this is one of the sharpest kit zoom ever made.

The 14-42 II I know is ok in the centre and soft in the corner.

If I had known these results, I would have sent it back and had it exchanged. But now it is 4 years old and gathers dust.

BTW, I tried my 14-45 again 2 weeks ago and found it very nice, but awfull slow at F3,5 and more...

Peter

Can we put it on another way, not sure how 14-42II performs (don't have similar testing test nor own one), according to Opticallimits.com (the old Photozone.de), the 20 f/1.7 should have its sweetest spot at f/2.8 instead of f/4. It also has the sharpest across the frame at f/2.8.

Therefore, 20 f/1.7 does not only has the faster speed of f/1.7, it is sharpest at f/2.8 that 14-42II can't reached.

According to Opticallimit.com:

20 f/1.7: sweetest spot at f/2.8, MTF score on GX1: center = 2515, edge = 2046;

14-42PZ: 14 best at f/3.5 wide open, score on GX1: center = 2868, edge = 2183;

12-32: 12 best at f/3.5 wide open, score on GX1: center = 2819, edge = 2065.

The oldest 14-45: 14 best at f/3.5 wide open, score on G1: center = 2512, edge = 2079

P.S. the lower resolution of G1 might cause a lower score of 14-45.

Therefore, we better say most of Pany's lenses are very sharp, including the kit zooms. It is very happy to see the high price/performance of the consumer grade kit zooms of Pany.

Photozone's test sure don't confirm those numbers.  The 20mm f1.7 I have is my sharpest lens of a dozen or so (although just tied with the 4/3 Oly 50mm f2 macro) and the contrast is better than all the zooms I've experienced.

All this anecdotal data (including mine) and even the testing data really seems to suggest that there is a lot of variance in the lenses.

gp

gary payne wrote:

Photozone's test sure don't confirm those numbers. The 20mm f1.7 I have is my sharpest lens of a dozen or so (although just tied with the 4/3 Oly 50mm f2 macro) and the contrast is better than all the zooms I've experienced.

My 20mm f1.7 is sharper than the 15 which I sold on. It is as sharp as most of my lenses except the 75 and the 40-150 pro, which are sharper. Sample variation? Dunno, but I am keeping mine!

All this anecdotal data (including mine) and even the testing data really seems to suggest that there is a lot of variance in the lenses.

gp

007peter wrote:

Panasonic 14-42 (II) HD with smaller 46mm filter is the most underrated M43 lens.

Its is way sharper than the horrible plasticky 14-42 version 1 with 52mm filter.

Also way better than the soft 14mm f/2.5 pancake

About equal to my 20/1.7 I & 25/1.7

and mine was slightly sharper than my PL 25/1.4 as well.

Most people confuse it with the inferior version 1, and few people actually shot side by side comparison photo on tripod. If they do, they always comes to the same shocking conclusion that this is one of the sharpest kit zoom ever made.

I bought a new, de-kitted 14-42 HD II for $99 on eBay three years ago.  I've only used it a couple of times, but it did seem quite sharp at f/4 in good light.

When I'm just knocking about I usually bring my Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 for outdoor use, and my Panny 15mm f/1.7 for indoor shooting.  However, after pondering this thread (and taking another look at the shots I got from my 14-42 II), I may just leave the 12-35 at home next time, and bring the 14-42 II in its stead.  It would certainly be make for a lighter kit to carry about.

SzBencej wrote:

A little while ago I replaced my dreadful Panasonic 14-42 lens with the newer version of the kit lens (14-42 ii). I am very happy with it, but I needed a faster lens for indoor shooting and I recently bought the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II prime lens. I really like this lens so far, it looks good on my camera, sharp and compact.

However today I compared the sharpness of the lens with my 14-42 II kit lens.

I included my test shots below:

Shot with the Panasonic 14-42 II at 20mm

Shot with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II

I don't see any difference in sharpness in the center of the image between the two lens. This makes me happy because my kit lens is as sharp as a prime lens

On the other hand I am a little bummed out, because I tought I will now have more sharper images, as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is regarded as one of the sharpest lens in the system.

I just wanted to share, to show that the Panasonic kit lenses can be very sharp and great images can be taken with them.

Have you compared the corner sharpness  and contrast of each @200%?   There is definitely a difference.

Good luck with both.

Hung

SzBencej wrote:

A little while ago I replaced my dreadful Panasonic 14-42 lens with the newer version of the kit lens (14-42 ii). I am very happy with it, but I needed a faster lens for indoor shooting and I recently bought the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II prime lens. I really like this lens so far, it looks good on my camera, sharp and compact.

However today I compared the sharpness of the lens with my 14-42 II kit lens.

I included my test shots below:

Shot with the Panasonic 14-42 II at 20mm

Shot with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II

I don't see any difference in sharpness in the center of the image between the two lens. This makes me happy because my kit lens is as sharp as a prime lens

On the other hand I am a little bummed out, because I tought I will now have more sharper images, as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is regarded as one of the sharpest lens in the system.

I just wanted to share, to show that the Panasonic kit lenses can be very sharp and great images can be taken with them.

My experience is similar. I'm happy to use the 14-42 most of the time and resort to the 20 only for moving subjects in low light or for thinner DOF. Also abandoned the thought of getting the Oly 12-40 or Pana 12-35 which i drooled over in the past.

rurikw wrote:

SzBencej wrote:

A little while ago I replaced my dreadful Panasonic 14-42 lens with the newer version of the kit lens (14-42 ii). I am very happy with it, but I needed a faster lens for indoor shooting and I recently bought the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II prime lens. I really like this lens so far, it looks good on my camera, sharp and compact.

However today I compared the sharpness of the lens with my 14-42 II kit lens.

I included my test shots below:

Shot with the Panasonic 14-42 II at 20mm

Shot with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 II

I don't see any difference in sharpness in the center of the image between the two lens. This makes me happy because my kit lens is as sharp as a prime lens

On the other hand I am a little bummed out, because I tought I will now have more sharper images, as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is regarded as one of the sharpest lens in the system.

I just wanted to share, to show that the Panasonic kit lenses can be very sharp and great images can be taken with them.

My experience is similar. I'm happy to use the 14-42 most of the time and resort to the 20 only for moving subjects in low light or for thinner DOF. Also abandoned the thought of getting the Oly 12-40 or Pana 12-35 which i drooled over in the past.

I love the 20mm f1.7 but I would tend not to use it for this. I am happy with moving subjects in good light or low light shots with no movement, but not both.

RobbieBear wrote:

rurikw wrote:

My experience is similar. I'm happy to use the 14-42 most of the time and resort to the 20 only for moving subjects in low light or for thinner DOF. Also abandoned the thought of getting the Oly 12-40 or Pana 12-35 which i drooled over in the past.

I love the 20mm f1.7 but I would tend not to use it for this. I am happy with moving subjects in good light or low light shots with no movement, but not both.

Maybe not the best but sometimes the 45/1.8 is too narrow and the 20 is my only high speed alternative. Not my most common scenario. For non-moving subjects in low light I don't know if the unstabilised 20 has much advantage over the stabilised 14-42 on my GX7 with rudimentary IBIS. Actually I have used the 20 a lot in museums but not sure the 14-42 wouldn't work as well.

rurikw wrote:

RobbieBear wrote:

rurikw wrote:

My experience is similar. I'm happy to use the 14-42 most of the time and resort to the 20 only for moving subjects in low light or for thinner DOF. Also abandoned the thought of getting the Oly 12-40 or Pana 12-35 which i drooled over in the past.

I love the 20mm f1.7 but I would tend not to use it for this. I am happy with moving subjects in good light or low light shots with no movement, but not both.

Maybe not the best but sometimes the 45/1.8 is too narrow and the 20 is my only high speed alternative. Not my most common scenario. For non-moving subjects in low light I don't know if the unstabilised 20 has much advantage over the stabilised 14-42 on my GX7 with rudimentary IBIS. Actually I have used the 20 a lot in museums but not sure the 14-42 wouldn't work as well.

You could probably use either but the Panny has the f1.7 which gives you a bit more control over DOF than the 14-42.