My own set of Panasonic 14-140 f3.5-5.6 questions before I take the plunge...

- Reviews I read mentioned shutter shock but these are older reviews with G7 and G7X cameras.  Do you think I would experience this on my GX9?

-Just how prevalent and serious is this issue of not allowing a shot to be fired in low light situations?  That sounds like it could be quite aggravating.

-I know image quality questions get asked a lot about this lens but currently I have the kit 12-60 f3.5-5.6 lens, and the 45-150 f4-5.6 lens (as well as the Leica 15 f1.7).  The 12-60 is sharper than the 45-150 and the Leica (as expected) is sharper than the 12-60 even when both lens stepped down.  Would the 14-140 be giving up anything in sharpness (as well as color and contrast perhaps even more important), compared to the 12-60 and 45-150 within the overlapping focal ranges?

The Leica 15mm lens has me drooling and makes me wonder just how much sharper the Leica 12-60 f2.8-f4 lens would be over the Panasonic 12-60 but in reality whenever I'm out doing nature walks, I'm constantly swapping between the 12-60 and the 45-150 so in practicality the 14-140 makes more sense.  This would be the last lens I would buy for quite some time although if I find necessity dictates, I may get the 12-32 pancake as it's cheap.

Thanks for any thoughts...

geepondy wrote:

- Reviews I read mentioned shutter shock but these are older reviews with G7 and G7X cameras. Do you think I would experience this on my GX9?

Shuttershock was due the mechanical shutter mechanism of the G7. the G80 had the new type. So no problems anymore. (don't know if the gx9 has the new shutter.)

-Just how prevalent and serious is this issue of not allowing a shot to be fired in low light situations? That sounds like it could be quite aggravating.

slow range about 1/120sec and slower only when longrange was shot. as far as i remember reading about it.

-I know image quality questions get asked a lot about this lens but currently I have the kit 12-60 f3.5-5.6 lens, and the 45-150 f4-5.6 lens (as well as the Leica 15 f1.7). The 12-60 is sharper than the 45-150 and the Leica (as expected) is sharper than the 12-60 even when both lens stepped down. Would the 14-140 be giving up anything in sharpness (as well as color and contrast perhaps even more important), compared to the 12-60 and 45-150 within the overlapping focal ranges?

My 12-60 and 14-140mmii where equal except ofcaorse in ends of focalrange the 14 was for 12-60 and the 60 was for the 14-140.

The Leica 15mm lens has me drooling and makes me wonder just how much sharper the Leica 12-60 f2.8-f4 lens would be over the Panasonic 12-60 but in reality whenever I'm out doing nature walks, I'm constantly swapping between the 12-60 and the 45-150 so in practicality the 14-140 makes more sense.

i sold the kit 12-60mm to make money for the PL12-60. And i already bought a nearly new 14-140mmii in front on secondhand.🙂

PL against kit: nicer micro contrast rendering, looks sharper outside in real world. i tested both in test set up and the kit is very closer then.

faster aperture along the focal lenght.  Better optics.

plus for the kit is lighter, cheaper, smaller. Because i had the 14-140mm the kit 12-60mm was gathering dust on the shelf. Did look for a UAW as 7-14mm or 8-18mm.

settled for the PL 12-60mm.

In nature the 14-140mm is usefull but not for running and flying wildlive, they are mostly just out of reach for a frame filling shot.

For that reason i bought a 100-300mmii. (45-200mmii is always on debate for its optics but it isn't that bad. it's need some practise i think.)

This would be the last lens I would buy for quite some time although if I find necessity dictates, I may get the 12-32 pancake as it's cheap.

Thanks for any thoughts...

my two cents.

What about buying a (used) second body, both as a backup as well as two-body-two-lens setup?  Your G7 + 12-60 and a used GX85/9 + 45-150?

geepondy wrote:

- Reviews I read mentioned shutter shock but these are older reviews with G7 and G7X cameras. Do you think I would experience this on my GX9?

No.

-Just how prevalent and serious is this issue of not allowing a shot to be fired in low light situations? That sounds like it could be quite aggravating.

I haven't heard of this as a lens problem.  If your camera setting for shutter release is set to "focus" priority, the camera will not take a photo until AF thinks it has found focus.  This can be an issue in low light with a lot of lenses.

Would the 14-140 be giving up anything in sharpness (as well as color and contrast perhaps even more important), compared to the 12-60 and 45-150 within the overlapping focal ranges?

As to the 45-150, no.   I haven't used the 12-60.

The Leica 15mm lens has me drooling and makes me wonder just how much sharper the Leica 12-60 f2.8-f4 lens would be over the Panasonic 12-60 but in reality whenever I'm out doing nature walks, I'm constantly swapping between the 12-60 and the 45-150 so in practicality the 14-140 makes more sense. This would be the last lens I would buy for quite some time although if I find necessity dictates, I may get the 12-32 pancake as it's cheap.

Another option you could consider if you want top image quality and want to swap lenses less often is the Olympus 12-100.  It's bigger, heavier, and pricier than the 14-140 II, but its image quality is amazing, it's constant f/4, and it's weather resistant.  I bought a used one for $900 to replace my 14-140 and I'm happy with that decision.  It doesn't go to 140mm, but it goes to 12, so there's a trade-off there.

geepondy wrote:

- Reviews I read mentioned shutter shock but these are older reviews with G7 and G7X cameras. Do you think I would experience this on my GX9?

-Just how prevalent and serious is this issue of not allowing a shot to be fired in low light situations? That sounds like it could be quite aggravating.

An improved shutter was released with the GX80/85, so shutter shock isn't an issue the GX9. It wasn't a big issue with earlier cameras, either, except with certain lenses (14-140mm f3.5-5.6, 14-42mm PZ) within a narrow range of shutter speeds.

-I know image quality questions get asked a lot about this lens but currently I have the kit 12-60 f3.5-5.6 lens, and the 45-150 f4-5.6 lens (as well as the Leica 15 f1.7). The 12-60 is sharper than the 45-150 and the Leica (as expected) is sharper than the 12-60 even when both lens stepped down. Would the 14-140 be giving up anything in sharpness (as well as color and contrast perhaps even more important), compared to the 12-60 and 45-150 within the overlapping focal ranges?

The 14-140mm II is sharper than the 45-150mm (I have both lenses). It's a great all-around daylight lens. Image quality

The Leica 15mm lens has me drooling and makes me wonder just how much sharper the Leica 12-60 f2.8-f4 lens would be over the Panasonic 12-60 but in reality whenever I'm out doing nature walks, I'm constantly swapping between the 12-60 and the 45-150 so in practicality the 14-140 makes more sense. This would be the last lens I would buy for quite some time although if I find necessity dictates, I may get the 12-32 pancake as it's cheap.

The 14-140mm, 7-14mm f 4 and the 15mm would be an excellent simple all-around kit. There's no real need for weather sealed lenses with a non-weathersealed camera.

That's more or less my usual travel kit: 7-14mm, 14-140mm and Voigtländer 17.5mm and 42.5mm. When my girlfriend carries a camera, she uses the 14-140mm and I'll bring my 12-40mm. We share the 7-14mm.

Like the 14-140, punches above it's weight.  I like the PL 12-60 more for micro contrast and it's faster, but the 14-140 really is quite good, and I like it's range.  Both are good choices depending on your intended use.

Jonathan

I have the Panasonic 14-150 noted by the OP. That lens is probably the main reason I keep up with m43 because the combined bulkitude/image quality of that lens mounted on my Oly is worth putting up with the many things I dislike about the camera.

Combined with the built in m43 lens correction algorithms I think it is the best travel zoom I have owned, but I only shoot in raw. Side by side comparisons with Canon/Nikon/Sigma et al for travel zooms covering the same range the differences seem pretty obvious to me.

But it is what it is.

geepondy wrote:

- Reviews I read mentioned shutter shock but these are older reviews with G7 and G7X cameras.

I have being using G7+14-140 for over a year. It was my main camera for my 2018 spring trip to Tuscany (Firenze, Pisa, Siena, san Giminiano).

The G7 firmware update introduced a turnaround "auto e-shutter" to avoid the shutter shock on lenses prone to it. The 14-140 belongs to this category.

I enabled this option which automatically switches to e-shutter for shutter speeds between 1/60 and 1/320 when using the 14-140, and never experimented shutter shock in my photography.

This auto e-shutter is lens dependant and the 14-140 seems to be the only lens in my set to trigger its activation.

Do you think I would experience this on my GX9?

I think all recent Panasonic models now have an electronic first curtain shutter which avoids shutter shock.

-Just how prevalent and serious is this issue of not allowing a shot to be fired in low light situations? That sounds like it could be quite aggravating.

Never met that though I shot a lot inside churches or at night. But of course, If you select Focus priority, the shutter wont fire if the camera cannot focus, which may happen when there is no contrast on the target. When this happen, I just focus on a contrasty or textured target at the same distance, and recompose.

-I know image quality questions get asked a lot about this lens but currently I have the kit 12-60 f3.5-5.6 lens, and the 45-150 f4-5.6 lens (as well as the Leica 15 f1.7). The 12-60 is sharper than the 45-150 and the Leica (as expected) is sharper than the 12-60 even when both lens stepped down. Would the 14-140 be giving up anything in sharpness (as well as color and contrast perhaps even more important), compared to the 12-60 and 45-150 within the overlapping focal ranges?

IMO, there is no free meal and I disagree with previous posters who said that the 14-140 is as sharp as the 12-60 f3.5-5.6.

I have both, and my 12-60 f3.5-5.6 is obviously sharper, both in the center and across the frame. It also delivers more optical contrast and clarity and thus the images dont need as much contrast and clarity optimization in post-processing.

IMO, the 14-140 is really outstanding for a 10X zoom, but, as with all superzooms, there is a visible regular decrease in sharpness and contrast when zooming towards the long end.

Though I dont have one, I believe that a moderate 3.3X zoom like the 45-150 should probably outperform the 14-140 across their common range.

But that extra IQ of a 2 lenses set is to balance with the convenience of an all-in-one lens like the 14-140 which will deliver "good enough" IQ as long as you dont pixel peep and are ready to push the sliders in post processing when needed.

The Leica 15mm lens has me drooling and makes me wonder just how much sharper the Leica 12-60 f2.8-f4 lens would be over the Panasonic 12-60 but in reality whenever I'm out doing nature walks, I'm constantly swapping between the 12-60 and the 45-150 so in practicality the 14-140 makes more sense. This would be the last lens I would buy for quite some time although if I find necessity dictates, I may get the 12-32 pancake as it's cheap.

I also have the 12-32 and shot a lot with it. It is almost as good as the 12-60 across their common range but 32 at the long end is not very long.

My experience is that the 12-32 is a good complement to the 14-140 at the wide end, but, depending of your most used focal lengths, you might find yourself swapping between the 12-32 and the 14-140 as often as between the 12-60 and 45-150.

The main trump of the 12-32 is its very compact size when collapsed. But this may be less obvious on a medium sized GX9 than on my GM5.

I am going to visit China within a few weeks and I will probably bring two bodies, my new GX8 and the tiny GM5, with three zooms: 12-60, for cityscapes and landscapes, the 14-140 as it is my only real tele lens, and the 12-32 on GM5 when small size is paramount, or as a ready to shoot second camera when the 14-140 will be mounted on the GX8.

Thanks for any thoughts...

Thank you for the comments.  I guess the best thing to do is order one and try it out.

I know from experience that Panasonic plays pricing games on many of their products of which the price can suddenly change by $100 or more from one week to the next and then revert back.  The current US price for this lens is $598.  Is that the typical price for this lens or is it $100 more or $100 less (or some other amount) than what it normally is?

From this Photography Blog, review, I don't think the sample images look very sharp at all, although many of them are kind of dreary subject photos.

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_g_x_vario_14_140mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_review/sample_images

I bought mine on sale from B&H December 10, 2014, for $529.  Sold it last November for $425.  You might have to wait til the holidays to do better than the current $598.

geepondy wrote:

From this Photography Blog, review, I don't think the sample images look very sharp at all . . .

It's not going to be as sharp as a good prime, but no prime will let you get these shots from the same vantage point (view at 100%):

14mm

40mm

140mm

Those were all with the somewhat dated G5.  If you want better and can live with 100mm max, buy the Oly 12-100.

geepondy wrote:

From this Photography Blog, review, I don't think the sample images look very sharp at all, although many of them are kind of dreary subject photos.

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_g_x_vario_14_140mm_f3_5_5_6_asph_review/sample_images

In good light, mine compares very well against my 12-40mm. It's nice having the extra reach without swapping lenses. My only wish is that it were weather sealed.