Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brian

Not necessarily. The quality of the lens and the skill of the shooter result in better quality. It tends to be true that you can get better results the closer you are to the subject - but that is true of most any lens.

Quality of lens tends to be a function of the cost of the lens. Fixed aperture zooms tend to provide higher quality than variable aperture zooms and faster primes tend to provide higher quality than slower. But skill of the shooter and closeness to subject can easily influence quality of the result more than the capability of the lens.

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

A very good lens I am using more and more.

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5

Also very good for its price. That and the 45-150 compete for my most used.

but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

That's the trend with some exceptions which you can usually see on the price. Read some tests and you'll see how they compare.

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.

25 is not wide and on many lenses distortion is at least partly corrected in camera and there are lots of apps that can eliminate the residual distortion too.

I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens

25mm could be a good all round fl for that purpose though I don't know what items you shoot and in what circumstances. f1.7 is fast so helps getting good exposure in dim light but only a thin slice of the (3d) object will look sharp.

Brian

There are two non PZ version 14~42, the mk-I is mediocre at best, and the mk-II is a great lens having IQ very close to, or in opinion of some of its  owners, better than the legendary 14~45. The mk-II is also better than 12~32 on IQ. One of the best f/3.5 class general standard zoom lens of panny.

However, your 14~140 (I guess it is the f/3.5-5.6 mk-I or II) has IQ very comparable to 14~42 mk-II. In fact my copy of 14~140 mk-I is not weaker than the premium 12~35 f/2.8 and has edge to edge sharpness even better than 12~35 f/2.8 on wide open of both. To match with 14~140, I usually shall stop down 12~35 to f/3.5~4.

When compare to 45~150, 14~140 is always a winner.

If f/2.8 and 12 is not required, I would say 14~140 can replace 12~35 + 45~150 without doubt not only on its versatile all-in-one zoom range but also its IQ.

25 f/1.7 had been awarded a gold award by DPR recently. However, it has many reports on sample variation since released. Make sure the return policy of your seller.

Among the f/1.7 primes of 15, 20, 25 and 42.5, I picked 15 because of the wider AoV is better for limited shooting spaces indoor. Never regret it.

Are you referring to mk-I of 14-42?

I don't have 14~42 mk-II, but heard more than enough good comment on it from members I trusted... It is very difference to the mk-I.

Brisn5757 wrote:

.....

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

........

It definitely used to be like that in the film days. Not much anymore, it is now mainly a function of price.

alcelc wrote:

Are you referring to mk-I of 14-42?

I don't have 14~42 mk-II, but heard more than enough good comment on it from members I trusted... It is very difference to the mk-I.

I have the II. It's the only normal range zoom lens I ever had so can't compare but have been happy with its performance since 2015. Just checked what Optical Limits said about both. The difference was less than I remembered but they were tested on 16 vs 12 MP cameras so not directly comparable. Anyway the II is 'surprisingly impressive' in terms of resolution and has low CA according to OL.

It was what I heard repeatedly by mk-II's owners. 😀

Some even put it the best ever f/3.5ish standard zoom lens of M43... I can't verify this because I have already too many lenses in similar class. I believe even it might not be the best, it must be among the best.

Truth be told , there are better options for ALL the lenses you mentioned in your post

most of the lenses you mentioned are entry level zooms. depending on your budget of course , you could do much better than that

Harold

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

I have owned all three of these lenses.

The second version of the non-power-zoom 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 takes a 46mm filter. https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses/panasonic_14-42_3p5-5p6_ii It is a much better lens than the original one.

The original non-power-zoom 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 takes a 52mm filter. https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses/panasonic_14-42_3p5-5p6/specifications I have owned this lens too, and it is not a good lens.

I thought the 45-150 was also pretty good. I sold that and the 14-42 II to acquire the 14-140, for the convenience of having basically that full range in one lens.

I think the image quality of the 14-140 is as good as that of the 14-42 II and 45-150. Some may say better. So I would recommend against buying the 14-42 II if your reason for doing so is to get better image quality. If you just want a smaller lens to use when you don't need longer than 42mm, it might make sense.

I think it would make more sense to sell your 45-150 and then consider buying the 12-32, to have 12mm at the wide end and a very compact lens for when you don't want to use the 14-140.

Or a prime, like you mention (25mm f/1.7, which is not a wide angle lens)

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

That's a general rule of thumb, but it does not always hold true. I don't think it holds true in comparing the 14-140 against the other two lenses you mention. It certainly doesn't hold true when comparing, say, the Olympus 12-100 against any 14-42 lens.

Do you think the image quality from your 45-150 is better than from your 14-140?   While some 10x zoom lenses don't have very good image quality, most here think that the Panasonic 14-140 f/3.5-5.6 is very good, me included.

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brian

Yes.

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

This is usually true all else being equal.

The 45-150 f4-5.6 is a nice sharp lens (I have it)

The original 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 zoom does not have a good reputation. (but I have never tried it)

If do have the 12-60 f3.5-5.6 zoom and I find it a sharp lens. It's a good companion to the 45-150.

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brian

Eric Nepean wrote:

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

This is usually true all else being equal.

The 45-150 f4-5.6 is a nice sharp lens (I have it)

The original 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 zoom does not have a good reputation.

Dear Eric, did you wish to say the bigger and oldest version of 14~140, which is f/4~5.8 instead of the newer and smaller f/3.5~5.6 version?

AFAIK the 14~140 f/3.6-5.6 mk-I, before its updated mk-II WR version was released, was one of the most recommended lenses of M43 Panny non pro class lens.

Or did you refer to the shutter shock possibility of this particular lens?

(but I have never tried it)

IMHO 14~140 is sharper than 12~60 if we can avoid SS. On similar zoom range, on IQ my mk-I is comparable to 12~35 f/2.8, marginally better than 12~32 and beat 45~150.

If do have the 12-60 f3.5-5.6 zoom and I find it a sharp lens. It's a good companion to the 45-150.

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brian

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Eric
(Feel free to edit and repost any image that I have posted in a DPR, as long as you identify me as the original poster)

alcelc wrote:

Eric Nepean wrote:

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a Panasonic G7 camera and the following lens

14-140mm zoom f3.5-5.6 Lens
45-150mm zoom lens f4-5.6 lens (was free when I got the camera)

I was thinking of buying the 14-42mm lens f3.5 but only if I get better quality from a short range zoom lens as the 14-140mm lens replaces the other two lens.

Do shorter range zoom lens offer better quality?

This is usually true all else being equal.

The 45-150 f4-5.6 is a nice sharp lens (I have it)

The original 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 zoom does not have a good reputation.

Dear Eric, did you wish to say the bigger and oldest version of 14~140, which is f/4~5.8 instead of the newer and smaller f/3.5~5.6 version?

Hello Albert

I think your knowledge of the 14-140 zooms is superior to mine. You own one, and I note your careful evaluattion.

I meant to refer to the bigger and oldest version of 14-140, which is f/4~5.8

AFAIK the 14~140 f/3.6-5.6 mk-I, before its updated mk-II WR version was released, was one of the most recommended lenses of M43 Panny non pro class lens.

Or did you refer to the shutter shock possibility of this particular lens?

I wasn't thinking of shutter shock, simply MTF. I too have heard many postive comments about the MKI and MKII versions you refer too. However, its difficult to find any quantitative evaluation of thee image quality

(but I have never tried it)

IMHO 14~140 is sharper than 12~60 if we can avoid SS. On similar zoom range, on IQ my mk-I is comparable to 12~35 f/2.8, marginally better than 12~32 and beat 45~150.

That's a very useful comparison.

It's Interesting that my evaluation of the 12-32 is different than yours. I have quite a high regard for my original version 12-35 f/2.8 and also my 45-150. I have 3 copies of the 12-32 and I don't like the images from any of them (although one is the best) It seems there is some sample variation.

What is your opinion of the shutter shock of the 14-140 f/3.6-5.6 MKI and MKII on your latest bodies (I see you have both G85 and GX80 on your gear list)?

I do like my GX7 but my current cameras are GX8 and GM5.

If do have the 12-60 f3.5-5.6 zoom and I find it a sharp lens. It's a good companion to the 45-150.

The other option would be to get a fixed lens (eg Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f1.7 lens)
I'm not certain if this lens is a good option as wide angle lens tend to give distortion.
I would use a fixed lens for photographing items on display. Maybe there is a better option for fixed lens.

Brian