This might be a two year old video but I've used the 14-42 lens since I got a G1 from eBay in 2016, then a body upgrade to a G2. Since December 2019 I have this lens paired to a G7 and it works great. In darkness it's not as good but it's good enough to capture the comet Neowise from my bedroom window in 2020 👍. Thank you for your video.
I love this lens. Stable consistent boka can be a real advantage when shooting a series of shots of one subject. I'm sick of blurry backgrounds anyway. Just think about your shot more and make your background nice! It's defiantly sharper and nicer than the 14-140 🤮. It's actually a nice macro lens with a small tube because it naturally has a large depth of field. It's good for action shots of moving subjects because there is not the problem of waiting for your stabilisation to catch up with your camera. The dynamic range, contrast and colour is good. There is no problem with vinyeting or distortion or sharpness. It's a very versatile little lens that will stay in my bag. And it's biggest advantage is it is a BORING lens. It makes you concentrate on what really matters. I like it when people say, "that's a nice picture" not "waw what did you take that with" It's a good lens for begginers and an excellent lens for experienced photographers who have grown up a bit. Why wouldn't you have one for 50ish quid?
This lens is extremely underrated and most people who trash it have no idea what they talk about. If you want to travel light and will take mainly landscapes in bright full sun, like you're touring Spain in July, this lens is going to be great. Stupid people would actually buy the Panasonic Summilux 15 mm 1.7 to shoot in....full bright sun light???? I'll say it again, indoor, the 14-42 sucks, outside in the summer as a travel lens, it's all you need, especially if it's attached to a GH5.
I was thinking about getting the 14mm 2.5 just because of the size. Might get this one though because the extra focal legths can come in handy. I already have the 42.5 1.7 and 20mm 1.7.... I'm selling the 20mm because i found myself wishing I had a wider lens too many times
@@PhilippeOrlando nah I can't. 14mm is $200, 14-42 is $250, 15mm is $550. I don't want to spend that much. I just noticed Olympus has a pancake lens 14-42 also 3.5-5.6 for $225
I very rarely shoot in this (APS-C) '18-55' range and when I do it's usually landscapes or buildings so the lack of depth of field isn't a big deal breaker for me. I think it could also make for a great street photography lens, being about as small as most pancake primes but giving you that variable focal length to adapt without changing lenses and like you pointed out, it seems well suited to vlogging and other non-cinematic video. With how small, light weight and (relatively) cheap they are used, I was able to fill that focal length slot and have it with me when I go without it feeling like a waste of space, weight or money
I think i will get this lens for my em5 mark ii. Bought it used i am a hobbyist/camera collector and I don’t have an endless amount of disposable income so the best tool for the best price is my deal.
I own this lens and I adore it. I can just throw it in my backpack and I won't feel I'm carrying a bulky camera. For everyday, daylight shots it's really good. I shoot in cine-D -5 contrast and tend to not expose over 80 IRE in the highlights for that darker cine look, and yes - you can achieve a cine look with this lens, took me ages to figure it out but it's possible. Next to this setup I have a G9 with the leica 10-25 and still - my default go-to setup is the tiny one..
Funny video! Thanks for making it. This is a good general purpose lens. The downside is not that it 'feels cheap' it's the aperture that makes this lens a problem which forces the user to up the iso or lower the shutter.
Yeah, I've had one since 2018 and have never been able to get good crisp shots without full sunlight. I thought it was me being incapable, but it's the lens, unfortunately.
Actually I only use vintage manual Arriflex cine lenses from Zeiss, Cooke and Angenieux. I own the Lumix 14-42 since many years, but never used it. But some weeks ago I grabbed it out to test an automatic lens. And do you know what? I really like the lens and now I use it very often.
Blurred background is the trademarkd of novices . Who cares about blurred background. I can think of millions of movies, shot between 1930 and today where everything is in focus. Only in some dialogue scenes is the background blurred, and not always. As soon as I hear "I want bokeh and background blurred" I know I'm not at the right place.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy Can't wait! I use a micro 4/3 camera of my own at work, and I'm always looking for great budget gear! your guitar videos always look and sound great! Keep up the great work!
Man I feel like your being a little unfair on that lens, for a start, the image is sharp as hell! And secondly, I don't really understand why you think the lens should be doing all the work for you. That all being said...I confess I am a total beginner when it comes to these kinds of lenses and for the price it seems unbelievably good for the money. Also I could be wrong, but could the camera be effecting preformance? Would a speed booster not help in performance? I'm scouring the web right now looking for the perfect lens to be my first, multipurpose lens, wich will probably be my only lens for a while since I've just forked out a crap ton of money for the bmpcc original, so from what I'm seeing here, I think I may well get this one! So thanks for the video :)
I have a lot of MFT lenses. I like the 14-42mm for snapshots while running around. It's small and light, a good match for my GX85. I prefer it to the 12-32mm because it has a focus ring and it doesn't have to extend before use. It has its purposes, so don't get snobby. ;-)
I use a GX9 mainly with the 20mm f1.7 and Olympus 45mm f1.8. I'm planning a trip but currently don't have a wide option apart from this lens which came with my old G3 and has sat unused in a drawer for years. So I took it out for a trial and was staggered! Closed down a little it is very sharp (best at f8) and resolves fine detail very well. In particular it is much better at foliage, grass etc. than a 12-32 I borrowed one time. It has remarkable colour and rendering producing very natural attractive images. It also focuses quite close. I do process RAW in DXO Photolab which gives me way better results than in camera JPEGs. It's going on the next trip. I find the criticism of its low light performance surprising. The maximum available apertures are stamped on the front just outside the round glass bit! It is a slow lens. Incidentally just as it's worth reassessing old files with new software, it's worth taking a fresh look at this lens combined with a modern sensor and post processing.
First off, no bad lens, only bad photographer;-). I've not used the 14-42, but did experience the (allegedly superior) 14-45. That lens was incredible for the price, keeps pace with the olympus pro lenses I have. Apparently Panasonic threw the kitchen sink at it, as it was the kit lens with, as I recall, the original G1, so they were out to impress. Cost cutting always hits somewhere, with 14-45 it came in the form of plastic build, no weather proofing and rubber grommets that come off. Ah well.
According to internet every Panasonic G kit lens has been better than the one before! The one in the video is the last one they did and also the one I have as well.
Just one more question: If we use this lens in a paid assignment and are able to make the focus work by pin pointing on the display screen (which works really fine), can anyone in the audience be able to point out that a cheap kit lens was used? Your tests are simple but very revealing.
Confusingly there is another 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 lens made by Panasonic - the “X” power zoom version. Despite the specs it is a very different lens and I prefer it. For a start it collapses to a pancake size, and has a wide angle lens converter from Panasonic that t5urns it into an 11-33mm which is a really useful focal range (22-66mm equiv). It also pair brilliantly with the X 45-175mm f4-5.6 PZ which is small, lightweight, and incredibly sharp. Since they tend to be underrated by many, these lenses are much less common than this kit zoom, and possibly because a little of the bad rap this kit lens gets rubs off on the PZ meaning the PZ lenses used on eBay can be found for similar prices to this kit lens making them a bargain. I bought mine for less than $200 each which is incredible value. These are all great walk around lenses that won’t weigh you down. It is also satisfying to know that some of the best performers in the Panasonic range for sharpness and AF speed are so affordable.
It should be noted that the bad rap often applies to the MARK I version (which takes a 52mm filter, whereas the MARK II, the one reviewed, takes a 46mm lens). Panasonic released the MARK II of this lens with a slew of design amendments to resolve many of the complaints that folks had about the original version. That's made the MARK II a great lens for its price (under $100 on eBay). ❤🎉
I have an Olympus Mark OM-DIII. I just crushed my kit lens Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 EZ Lens, and since I am on the budget and shooting videos a lot but also some photography I wonder if I shall try something new and buy the compatible Panasonic lens or stick to the original one. The reviews and price of both lenses are very similar.
I am glad people like this kit lens. Just bought a Panasonic G5 with 14-42mm and Tamron 35-80 f2.8-3.8 adaptall-2 lens 140$. First i had no idea about the Tamron lens and it is kinda a legend old lens (well most of the ppl who used it say like this) After i watched your video i am happier because my 14-42 Pana lens is also very good.
I only have 2 lenses. This one and a telephoto. I'd like to get a better wide zoom that goes a bit wider with a faster aperture for stars and junk and eventually get a good versatile bunch of lenses. Probably three lenses that cover the whole range of zoom i'll ever need and a new camera and i'm set. But 6,000 dollars is a good amount of money so not yet
Good stuff, I am, as you pointed out, one of those people that own and never use this lens! Just a tip: would be useful to add something/a card over the shots re camera u wr shooting with - didn't know which was which!
I have this lens! Picked it up for under 100 coins and been my daughter's favorite Oly E-pm1 setup. I compared it with a Lumix 14mm f2.5 ($380) and can't tell the difference.
Two questions: If I shoot corporate interviews with this lens in bright 1000 watt halogen lamp lights and proper exposure will it be considered "broadcast quality." Second, is bokeh not over-emphasised by short film makers. Most of the shots in short films have such shallow depth of field that it gets irritating. Just check the big budget movies, the bokeh is rarely used when it enhances the story and not just for the aesthetic value of the shot.
Just got this lens the14-42mm with the lumix dmc g3 I just bought for £45 it came with the lumix case, charger and an sd card. Seems ok for what I paid for it, will definitely feature it on my channel content.
@@umb3rto641 I will be uploading a video about it on my channel, probably later this evening. I will use it and do a few more videos, really happy with the photo quality and camera features., I have advertised it for £180 a little high perhaps but that is what I feel it is worth for me to part with it, plenty on ebay around the £150- £160 range but then they want postage on top etc Have had a couple of offers of £120 just don't want to let it go for that low really! It is mint, not a well used example.
I have a Panasonic Lumix GH2. I pretty much only use my camera for vlogs. I currently have the Panasonic 25mm lens. Do you think this would be an overall better lens for vlogging?
This is a better lens for vlogging based on being a wider angle and it will probably look more stable when you walk around too. It won't have the niceness of the 25mm f1.7 but it works great.
Great video thanks for helping me decide. I bought it used and it has a small rattle sound when you move it. Is that damaged or part of IS ? Thanks, -newbie
I have shown two videos one made with this kit lens and the other with the more expensive 12-35mm 2.8 lens to friends (same content) and everyone preferred the kit lens. The background blur of the 2.8 did not impress them much. This was quite shocking to me. Thanks for the video. Background blur is probably held in too high esteem.
Got G85 a couple months ago. My mistake is I only bought body only then pairing with 45-150mm which is good but then I realized that I need more wider view 🤣 for now I use 25mm 7artisans and thinking to buy this lens. Your video help me so much. Thanks. Btw, Im from Indonesia which is a bit hard to find that lens 😢
This lens seems to be hard to find these days. I don't plan on getting one for myself, I have the 12-60 Lumix often on my GX9 and the 12-60 Leica on my G80/85 for general photography and videography, so I am set. But for someone I know who might want to start from scratch I think that this would be perfect with say the GX9. Is it still widely available in Australia?
It's a sharp lens for photography. If the lighting is good and 14mm (28mm) is wide enough then it's probably fine. The 12-35mm is f2.8 and might be a better (wider option).
Personally, I think primes have had their day - the idea of changing lenses in the field exposing the sensor appalls me. Alright with film cameras but sensors are a different thing. So this leaves zooms and they've come a long way since film days, however... like all things photo/video everything is a compromise. If you need speed for your Bokeh that means more glass = more weight. For 'everyday' use the 14-42 is a little beauty that can hold it's own and, when bolted to a G7, you have a very lightweight 4/3 setup that will deliver the goods. IMHO in comparison to kit zooms from larger sensored camvids, IQ wise, they can't hold a candle to this 14-42.
What's your go-to lens again? I use an Olympus PEN EPL6 (MFT mount) for my photography and videography and I run the equivalent Olympus glass on my videos... It works, but that's about all I can say for it 😂. I run a 50-200mm most of the time for photos, but need something wider for videos (as my room is too small to go to 50mm - which I guess is 100mm eqv.). As far as I understand, any Panasonic MFT lens would also work on the Olympus, so basically I'm after some tips! 😀
My two favourites that I own are the Panasonic 25mm f1.7 and believe it or not the Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 I seem to get pretty great results from that one especially in the studio. I really need to try some Olympus lenses down the track I hear great things about them. I did try the 20mm f1.7 and I liked that a lot but I don't own it yet.
After watching review videos in UA-cam, I trie ld to use My 14-42mm lens version II kept for long time, puchased as a bundle lens, but it was not really good. Not sharp and color was not vivid. I think the lens might not be in a good condition. Version 1 14-42 lens 13 years old looks better than II in my case
I am also using same lens with lumix g85 camera. its too good lens. but its not good for vloggers, most of time face became out of focus, but for videographers can make good videos.
Looking at getting a Panasonic camera and a cheapish lens! This might be it. Question for you, how do photos do? Im sure it doesn't give you the depth you would like but does it at least do half decent?
If you get the 25mm lens you get plenty of background blur if that's what you're looking for. This kit lens is awesome for bright sunny days and also for in controlled studio situations. I took this lens overseas and it was awesome. Nice and sharp and super-light weight. This particular lens won't give you a lot of background blur but for what it does it works well.
Just bought g7 like a week ago that come with this lens , and For someone who broke as a joke like me this is kinda a good lens, still useable, and did an okey job i mean not everyone can afford panasonic leica 25mm 1.8 or some fancier lens so 🤷🏽♀️. Im gonna use it for a while at least maybe until i save enough to get a better lens 😅 if i want to shoot with white aperture im just gonna shoot with my old trusty vintage nikon f , i mostly shoot a photos anyway
My only issue with this lens and why I think it's a terrible kit lens is it's inability to capture in low light, I believe a kit lens should at least be able to handle low light environments. If you want to make a really dark horror short film, it's fine for that because it won't pick up what's on the other side of an open door if you dim the lights. You can still get some good cinematic shots with the thing even on very overcast days but increasing the ISO is just something you'll have to live with unless you're shooting on a bright and sunny day. All in all, if it weren't for this kit lens being so cheap I wouldn't have been able to afford a good DSLR like my G7 as I don't make much money and I've wanted a good camera since I was a kid playing around with my mom's massive film camcorder the size of a cinder block. It's not a bad lens, it's just not a great lens, you have limitations but I've been able to work around many of them.
I agree with you but a low light lens, especially on MFT, is going to cost more. These lenses sacrifice their low light potential to come in at a price point we can all appreciate ... but also to motivate end users to upgrade their kit (and its lens..es).
@@StephenIsTrying We just shot day 1 on Sunday, July 5th. I got a 25mm lens instead of the 14-42mm, and the footage looks absolutely incredible! Better than I anticipated.
PLEASE help... beginner here, so be kind ;-) we have just bought this lens with a lumix G3 camera.(limited budget ) we had a 35 mm equiv 20mm bridge camera, and buying a 14mm lens were expecting to simply get a wider angle shot. It simply inst anywhere as wide as our 20mm camera's wide angle shot.. cant figure out why ! :-( TIA.
Perhaps by now you have figured it out? If not... there are several different sensor sizes each with different lens types. A so-called full frame camera sensor (small format) with a 24-70 lens would have in micro four thirds a 12-35 lens to be "equivalent" .... so in your post if you have a 20mm lens in a 35mm (small format/full frame) camera, obviously that will have wider field of view like a 10mm lens in the micro four thirds system. 🙂
Yeah for sure! It works great outdoors or with good indoor lighting. It's stabilized so it works great for walking depending on your camera. Which camera are you using it with?
Dear GNT, I am a novice in manual photography and have recently purchased the G7 with a 14-42 kit lens. Being a Sony Video Camera user in the past I am really struggling to make good quality 4k videos outdoors. This lens has a very limited range and blurs out objects even with the aperture at maximum. Is it something that I am doing wrong? I once used the Panasonic VX-1 4k camcorder that had optical zoom and I was blown away with the quality of video it shot with minimal effort. Do I need to buy another lens for outdoor video to generate sharper footage for distant objects?
I haven't used that lens but a lot of people like the 12mm for landscapes as you get a slightly wider field of view. I've done some reviews on the 12-60mm it should give you some insight into it. :)
@@GeekyNerdyTechy i mean, if i connect this lens to my gh5, and i also Connect a zoom controller via remote port from the gh5, and i zoom with the cntroller , the lens zoom will function ?
@@GeekyNerdyTechy I'm thinking mainly photography like weddings and stills at minimum. Some wildlife at max. Might record some video, but I can use my phone for that if necessary. Which camera would you recommend? I was looking at the Lumix g100, though it's pricy for what it's offering. I currently have a Nikon d3200
@@jedvolkmanfilms5284 You could try the 12-42 lens but if you are shooting indoors then the 7-14mm might be the best bet. At 7mm you might get some of that "Go Pro" fish eye thing but its quite common in those situations.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy yeah definitely would not want the fish eye look. I hear Laowa 12 mm is probably best for real estate because it keeps the lines straight. But it's made for a full frame camera. Any brand recommendations for the micro four thirds?
This is one of the better auto-focus lenses for Panasonic bodies. Odds are if you are behind the camera filming I would suggest one area mode where you can move the focus box wherever you like (or manual focus).
![[UA] Team Vitality проти NAVI | IEM Cologne 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wttO1zVRTC0/mqdefault.jpg)
This might be a two year old video but I've used the 14-42 lens since I got a G1 from eBay in 2016, then a body upgrade to a G2. Since December 2019 I have this lens paired to a G7 and it works great. In darkness it's not as good but it's good enough to capture the comet Neowise from my bedroom window in 2020 👍.
Thank you for your video.
I love this lens. Stable consistent boka can be a real advantage when shooting a series of shots of one subject. I'm sick of blurry backgrounds anyway. Just think about your shot more and make your background nice! It's defiantly sharper and nicer than the 14-140 🤮. It's actually a nice macro lens with a small tube because it naturally has a large depth of field. It's good for action shots of moving subjects because there is not the problem of waiting for your stabilisation to catch up with your camera.
The dynamic range, contrast and colour is good. There is no problem with vinyeting or distortion or sharpness. It's a very versatile little lens that will stay in my bag. And it's biggest advantage is it is a BORING lens. It makes you concentrate on what really matters. I like it when people say, "that's a nice picture" not "waw what did you take that with" It's a good lens for begginers and an excellent lens for experienced photographers who have grown up a bit. Why wouldn't you have one for 50ish quid?
Best comment about this lens
This is actually the only lens I own that has autofocus and IS, so I actually use it a lot for gimbal or jib shots where I can't control focus
This lens is extremely underrated and most people who trash it have no idea what they talk about. If you want to travel light and will take mainly landscapes in bright full sun, like you're touring Spain in July, this lens is going to be great. Stupid people would actually buy the Panasonic Summilux 15 mm 1.7 to shoot in....full bright sun light???? I'll say it again, indoor, the 14-42 sucks, outside in the summer as a travel lens, it's all you need, especially if it's attached to a GH5.
I was thinking about getting the 14mm 2.5 just because of the size. Might get this one though because the extra focal legths can come in handy. I already have the 42.5 1.7 and 20mm 1.7.... I'm selling the 20mm because i found myself wishing I had a wider lens too many times
@@Yoko.Kurama Then go for the 15 summilux 1.7 then!
@@PhilippeOrlando nah I can't. 14mm is $200, 14-42 is $250, 15mm is $550. I don't want to spend that much. I just noticed Olympus has a pancake lens 14-42 also 3.5-5.6 for $225
What would you recommend for low light and indoors for doing landscape/vacation (sightseeing)/building photography?
I hope you enjoy this review. I had a great time filming it for you all!
That lens is actually really good
It's fantastic for the right situation. :)
I like the slower depth focus in the trees, it's another rather than instant. You're selling me this camera more and more mate. Great video! 👍😊🎥
Thanks mate! If it makes you feel any better about the purchase I just got a second G85 today after selling 2 x guitars. 😄
@@GeekyNerdyTechy do the version 2 only have metal mount?
I very rarely shoot in this (APS-C) '18-55' range and when I do it's usually landscapes or buildings so the lack of depth of field isn't a big deal breaker for me. I think it could also make for a great street photography lens, being about as small as most pancake primes but giving you that variable focal length to adapt without changing lenses and like you pointed out, it seems well suited to vlogging and other non-cinematic video. With how small, light weight and (relatively) cheap they are used, I was able to fill that focal length slot and have it with me when I go without it feeling like a waste of space, weight or money
I think i will get this lens for my em5 mark ii. Bought it used i am a hobbyist/camera collector and I don’t have an endless amount of disposable income so the best tool for the best price is my deal.
I own this lens and I adore it. I can just throw it in my backpack and I won't feel I'm carrying a bulky camera. For everyday, daylight shots it's really good. I shoot in cine-D -5 contrast and tend to not expose over 80 IRE in the highlights for that darker cine look, and yes - you can achieve a cine look with this lens, took me ages to figure it out but it's possible. Next to this setup I have a G9 with the leica 10-25 and still - my default go-to setup is the tiny one..
Funny video! Thanks for making it. This is a good general purpose lens. The downside is not that it 'feels cheap' it's the aperture that makes this lens a problem which forces the user to up the iso or lower the shutter.
Yeah, I've had one since 2018 and have never been able to get good crisp shots without full sunlight. I thought it was me being incapable, but it's the lens, unfortunately.
I use it for studio portraits
Works pretty decent
What settings did you use on this lens to achieve the portrait look?
Me: happy that I borrowed a camera from a friend
UA-cam: making fun of it
Thanks
Just some light-hearted humor. I really like this lens for run and gun stuff where I want some stabilization.
I actually got a G7 this week and this is the only lens I have, so I came here looking for information and opinions.
Thank you.
Actually I only use vintage manual Arriflex cine lenses from Zeiss, Cooke and Angenieux. I own the Lumix 14-42 since many years, but never used it. But some weeks ago I grabbed it out to test an automatic lens. And do you know what? I really like the lens and now I use it very often.
Blurred background is the trademarkd of novices . Who cares about blurred background. I can think of millions of movies, shot between 1930 and today where everything is in focus. Only in some dialogue scenes is the background blurred, and not always. As soon as I hear "I want bokeh and background blurred" I know I'm not at the right place.
I thought that voice sounded familiar. I'm used to hearing you talk about guitar gear.
Thanks mate. :-)
I love your guitar gear videos, I had no idea you did camera equipment as well! is there anything else you do?
Thanks a lot ChadTV. I have a smaller vlog channel I add to from time to time but this one I am going to add a lot more to this year.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy Can't wait! I use a micro 4/3 camera of my own at work, and I'm always looking for great budget gear! your guitar videos always look and sound great! Keep up the great work!
Man I feel like your being a little unfair on that lens, for a start, the image is sharp as hell! And secondly, I don't really understand why you think the lens should be doing all the work for you. That all being said...I confess I am a total beginner when it comes to these kinds of lenses and for the price it seems unbelievably good for the money. Also I could be wrong, but could the camera be effecting preformance? Would a speed booster not help in performance?
I'm scouring the web right now looking for the perfect lens to be my first, multipurpose lens, wich will probably be my only lens for a while since I've just forked out a crap ton of money for the bmpcc original, so from what I'm seeing here, I think I may well get this one! So thanks for the video :)
lol what was unfair about my comments? You mean my jokes at the start? This lens is good, just don't expect too much from it.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy it’s about understanding our 🇦🇺irony lol ✌️
Every video I've mainly filmed on my channel is with this 14-42 lens. Check it out.
no way, i was just watching you on "in the blues".
diversifying i see!
I have quite a number of channels. :) Guitar and tech are my two main things though.
I have a lot of MFT lenses. I like the 14-42mm for snapshots while running around. It's small and light, a good match for my GX85. I prefer it to the 12-32mm because it has a focus ring and it doesn't have to extend before use. It has its purposes, so don't get snobby. ;-)
I use a GX9 mainly with the 20mm f1.7 and Olympus 45mm f1.8. I'm planning a trip but currently don't have a wide option apart from this lens which came with my old G3 and has sat unused in a drawer for years. So I took it out for a trial and was staggered! Closed down a little it is very sharp (best at f8) and resolves fine detail very well. In particular it is much better at foliage, grass etc. than a 12-32 I borrowed one time. It has remarkable colour and rendering producing very natural attractive images. It also focuses quite close. I do process RAW in DXO Photolab which gives me way better results than in camera JPEGs. It's going on the next trip.
I find the criticism of its low light performance surprising. The maximum available apertures are stamped on the front just outside the round glass bit! It is a slow lens.
Incidentally just as it's worth reassessing old files with new software, it's worth taking a fresh look at this lens combined with a modern sensor and post processing.
First off, no bad lens, only bad photographer;-). I've not used the 14-42, but did experience the (allegedly superior) 14-45. That lens was incredible for the price, keeps pace with the olympus pro lenses I have. Apparently Panasonic threw the kitchen sink at it, as it was the kit lens with, as I recall, the original G1, so they were out to impress. Cost cutting always hits somewhere, with 14-45 it came in the form of plastic build, no weather proofing and rubber grommets that come off. Ah well.
According to internet every Panasonic G kit lens has been better than the one before! The one in the video is the last one they did and also the one I have as well.
Just one more question: If we use this lens in a paid assignment and are able to make the focus work by pin pointing on the display screen (which works really fine), can anyone in the audience be able to point out that a cheap kit lens was used? Your tests are simple but very revealing.
Confusingly there is another 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 lens made by Panasonic - the “X” power zoom version. Despite the specs it is a very different lens and I prefer it. For a start it collapses to a pancake size, and has a wide angle lens converter from Panasonic that t5urns it into an 11-33mm which is a really useful focal range (22-66mm equiv). It also pair brilliantly with the X 45-175mm f4-5.6 PZ which is small, lightweight, and incredibly sharp.
Since they tend to be underrated by many, these lenses are much less common than this kit zoom, and possibly because a little of the bad rap this kit lens gets rubs off on the PZ meaning the PZ lenses used on eBay can be found for similar prices to this kit lens making them a bargain. I bought mine for less than $200 each which is incredible value. These are all great walk around lenses that won’t weigh you down. It is also satisfying to know that some of the best performers in the Panasonic range for sharpness and AF speed are so affordable.
It should be noted that the bad rap often applies to the MARK I version (which takes a 52mm filter, whereas the MARK II, the one reviewed, takes a 46mm lens). Panasonic released the MARK II of this lens with a slew of design amendments to resolve many of the complaints that folks had about the original version. That's made the MARK II a great lens for its price (under $100 on eBay). ❤🎉
I have an Olympus Mark OM-DIII. I just crushed my kit lens Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 EZ Lens, and since I am on the budget and shooting videos a lot but also some photography I wonder if I shall try something new and buy the compatible Panasonic lens or stick to the original one. The reviews and price of both lenses are very similar.
I am glad people like this kit lens. Just bought a Panasonic G5 with 14-42mm and Tamron 35-80 f2.8-3.8 adaptall-2 lens 140$. First i had no idea about the Tamron lens and it is kinda a legend old lens (well most of the ppl who used it say like this) After i watched your video i am happier because my 14-42 Pana lens is also very good.
I only have 2 lenses. This one and a telephoto. I'd like to get a better wide zoom that goes a bit wider with a faster aperture for stars and junk and eventually get a good versatile bunch of lenses. Probably three lenses that cover the whole range of zoom i'll ever need and a new camera and i'm set. But 6,000 dollars is a good amount of money so not yet
Good stuff, I am, as you pointed out, one of those people that own and never use this lens! Just a tip: would be useful to add something/a card over the shots re camera u wr shooting with - didn't know which was which!
I have this lens! Picked it up for under 100 coins and been my daughter's favorite Oly E-pm1 setup. I compared it with a Lumix 14mm f2.5 ($380) and can't tell the difference.
nice video ! thanks. is it worth to upgrade from canon eos m100 to this camera?
Thank you. One question:
How would this perform in a studio with black\white\grey screen portrait still photography?
That smoke transition is sick! would love to see how you do that
It was a transition plugin I purchased from MotionVFX.
Very useful video, thanks.
the Lumix DMC-G7KEC with this lens, vs an a6400 with a normal 50mm lenses. is the 6400 way better?
Two questions: If I shoot corporate interviews with this lens in bright 1000 watt halogen lamp lights and proper exposure will it be considered "broadcast quality."
Second, is bokeh not over-emphasised by short film makers. Most of the shots in short films have such shallow depth of field that it gets irritating. Just check the big budget movies, the bokeh is rarely used when it enhances the story and not just for the aesthetic value of the shot.
I just realized you are the same guy from the In The Blues channel
Its me hehe :-)
Thank you so much for sharing! Super test! Great video production! Good day!
👍🍀🇭🇺🌞☝️
Thank you! Cheers!
@@GeekyNerdyTechy
You're very welcome! Have a nice day, weekend, holiday to you and everyone, in strength, health, peace!
👍🍀🇭🇺🌞☝️
Use the Panasonic 14-42mm mk2 lens a lot. With GM1, GX7, GX8, G9. Pretty good lens. I also have the 12-35 f2.8, etc. Thanks. toronto canada.
Just got this lens the14-42mm with the lumix dmc g3 I just bought for £45 it came with the lumix case, charger and an sd card.
Seems ok for what I paid for it, will definitely feature it on my channel content.
what a steal dammit
@@umb3rto641 I will be uploading a video about it on my channel, probably later this evening.
I will use it and do a few more videos, really happy with the photo quality and camera features., I have advertised it for £180 a little high perhaps but that is what I feel it is worth for me to part with it, plenty on ebay around the £150- £160 range but then they want postage on top etc
Have had a couple of offers of £120 just don't want to let it go for that low really!
It is mint, not a well used example.
Have you used the 14-42 power zoom? I like the size of it
I have a Panasonic Lumix GH2. I pretty much only use my camera for vlogs. I currently have the Panasonic 25mm lens. Do you think this would be an overall better lens for vlogging?
This is a better lens for vlogging based on being a wider angle and it will probably look more stable when you walk around too. It won't have the niceness of the 25mm f1.7 but it works great.
in body stablization active???? what in body stalization????
Great video thanks for helping me decide. I bought it used and it has a small rattle sound when you move it. Is that damaged or part of IS ? Thanks, -newbie
True words !!! Thanks.
Is this Len good for landscape photography? Is it wide angle enough?
A 400mm is wide enough for landscape photography, So yes, and 14mm is quite wide. I rarely use anything wider.
I have shown two videos one made with this kit lens and the other with the more expensive 12-35mm 2.8 lens to friends (same content) and everyone preferred the kit lens. The background blur of the 2.8 did not impress them much. This was quite shocking to me. Thanks for the video. Background blur is probably held in too high esteem.
Got G85 a couple months ago. My mistake is I only bought body only then pairing with 45-150mm which is good but then I realized that I need more wider view 🤣
for now I use 25mm 7artisans and thinking to buy this lens. Your video help me so much. Thanks.
Btw, Im from Indonesia which is a bit hard to find that lens 😢
This lens seems to be hard to find these days. I don't plan on getting one for myself, I have the 12-60 Lumix often on my GX9 and the 12-60 Leica on my G80/85 for general photography and videography, so I am set. But for someone I know who might want to start from scratch I think that this would be perfect with say the GX9. Is it still widely available in Australia?
How good it will be for interior photography? Where light is not an issue? Indoor …..
It's a sharp lens for photography. If the lighting is good and 14mm (28mm) is wide enough then it's probably fine. The 12-35mm is f2.8 and might be a better (wider option).
Personally, I think primes have had their day - the idea of changing lenses in the field exposing the sensor appalls me. Alright with film cameras but sensors are a different thing. So this leaves zooms and they've come a long way since film days, however... like all things photo/video everything is a compromise. If you need speed for your Bokeh that means more glass = more weight. For 'everyday' use the 14-42 is a little beauty that can hold it's own and, when bolted to a G7, you have a very lightweight 4/3 setup that will deliver the goods. IMHO in comparison to kit zooms from larger sensored camvids, IQ wise, they can't hold a candle to this 14-42.
Excellent vid Thanks
What's your go-to lens again? I use an Olympus PEN EPL6 (MFT mount) for my photography and videography and I run the equivalent Olympus glass on my videos... It works, but that's about all I can say for it 😂. I run a 50-200mm most of the time for photos, but need something wider for videos (as my room is too small to go to 50mm - which I guess is 100mm eqv.). As far as I understand, any Panasonic MFT lens would also work on the Olympus, so basically I'm after some tips! 😀
My two favourites that I own are the Panasonic 25mm f1.7 and believe it or not the Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 I seem to get pretty great results from that one especially in the studio. I really need to try some Olympus lenses down the track I hear great things about them. I did try the 20mm f1.7 and I liked that a lot but I don't own it yet.
Hey bri i have g7 with this lens but the quality is not good what i can do ?pls help me
After watching review videos in UA-cam, I trie ld to use My 14-42mm lens version II kept for long time, puchased as a bundle lens, but it was not really good. Not sharp and color was not vivid. I think the lens might not be in a good condition. Version 1 14-42 lens 13 years old looks better than II in my case
Thanks for this amazing information 🔥💓😊🎸
camera stabilization does not work lumix (G90) when this lens is mounted.why.?
Thanks for another honest review! :)
Thanks! I had a lot of fun making this video! 😃
I am also using same lens with lumix g85 camera. its too good lens. but its not good for vloggers, most of time face became out of focus, but for videographers can make good videos.
Just click it over to manual focus if the AF is giving you problems. Then tap on the screen where you face is and it will hold focus there.
Whats the difference between this one and the one with the same name but with a grey base?
There are a few older versions of this. This one is the newest and bestest.
*wait please, leave everything behind for a moment, from where I used to listen to this music, driver?! **2:04** do you have the name of it please?!*
It's part of the free UA-cam audio library. I can't recall the ambient track or the funky track sorry, it's been ages since I made this video.
I think the only reason this lens gets stick is because it's a 'kit lens' . It's not a bad little lens at all...
which has better resolution between 12 42 mm to 12 32 mm_?
Looking at getting a Panasonic camera and a cheapish lens! This might be it. Question for you, how do photos do? Im sure it doesn't give you the depth you would like but does it at least do half decent?
If you get the 25mm lens you get plenty of background blur if that's what you're looking for. This kit lens is awesome for bright sunny days and also for in controlled studio situations. I took this lens overseas and it was awesome. Nice and sharp and super-light weight. This particular lens won't give you a lot of background blur but for what it does it works well.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy Ok!! Thank you for the response!
i love this lens for ever
Just bought g7 like a week ago that come with this lens , and For someone who broke as a joke like me this is kinda a good lens, still useable, and did an okey job i mean not everyone can afford panasonic leica 25mm 1.8 or some fancier lens so 🤷🏽♀️. Im gonna use it for a while at least maybe until i save enough to get a better lens 😅 if i want to shoot with white aperture im just gonna shoot with my old trusty vintage nikon f , i mostly shoot a photos anyway
My only issue with this lens and why I think it's a terrible kit lens is it's inability to capture in low light, I believe a kit lens should at least be able to handle low light environments. If you want to make a really dark horror short film, it's fine for that because it won't pick up what's on the other side of an open door if you dim the lights. You can still get some good cinematic shots with the thing even on very overcast days but increasing the ISO is just something you'll have to live with unless you're shooting on a bright and sunny day.
All in all, if it weren't for this kit lens being so cheap I wouldn't have been able to afford a good DSLR like my G7 as I don't make much money and I've wanted a good camera since I was a kid playing around with my mom's massive film camcorder the size of a cinder block.
It's not a bad lens, it's just not a great lens, you have limitations but I've been able to work around many of them.
I agree with you but a low light lens, especially on MFT, is going to cost more. These lenses sacrifice their low light potential to come in at a price point we can all appreciate ... but also to motivate end users to upgrade their kit (and its lens..es).
hey~ your b&h link is a 14-140mm.. :)
It depends upon the body because the nikon z30 with the same lens is very nice but the lumix kitlens is a trash
by any cahnce do you have aguitar chanel too ?
I just bought a Lumix g7 with this lens for £246 GBP I'm new to photography/videography
I'm planning to shoot a local feature, suspense film with this lens on a Gh4, any advice? (With an ois of course)
Thanks!
Did you make the feature yet?
@@StephenIsTrying We just shot day 1 on Sunday, July 5th. I got a 25mm lens instead of the 14-42mm, and the footage looks absolutely incredible! Better than I anticipated.
Um I used that on my g7 and when I used it on my new s1 vs its kit lens its sjit. bit good for budget
PLEASE help... beginner here, so be kind ;-) we have just bought this lens with a lumix G3 camera.(limited budget ) we had a 35 mm equiv 20mm bridge camera, and buying a 14mm lens were expecting to simply get a wider angle shot. It simply inst anywhere as wide as our 20mm camera's wide angle shot.. cant figure out why ! :-( TIA.
Perhaps by now you have figured it out? If not... there are several different sensor sizes each with different lens types. A so-called full frame camera sensor (small format) with a 24-70 lens would have in micro four thirds a 12-35 lens to be "equivalent" .... so in your post if you have a 20mm lens in a 35mm (small format/full frame) camera, obviously that will have wider field of view like a 10mm lens in the micro four thirds system. 🙂
I got this lens along with the 45-150. I’m new to using cameras. I got this for my vlog channel. You think I’ll be fine with this?
Yeah for sure! It works great outdoors or with good indoor lighting. It's stabilized so it works great for walking depending on your camera. Which camera are you using it with?
@@GeekyNerdyTechy I'm using the Lumix G7!
Dear GNT, I am a novice in manual photography and have recently purchased the G7 with a 14-42 kit lens. Being a Sony Video Camera user in the past I am really struggling to make good quality 4k videos outdoors. This lens has a very limited range and blurs out objects even with the aperture at maximum. Is it something that I am doing wrong? I once used the Panasonic VX-1 4k camcorder that had optical zoom and I was blown away with the quality of video it shot with minimal effort. Do I need to buy another lens for outdoor video to generate sharper footage for distant objects?
I thought it was the mark 1 that got all the bad press ? You got the the mark ii there...
How can you tell the Mark1 from the Mark 2 ?
The IS works if I use it with an olympus camera?
I don't think so, but the Olympus cameras have excellent IBIS.
Is the 12-32mm better for landscapes 4k video than the 14-42mm lens, on G7?
I haven't used that lens but a lot of people like the 12mm for landscapes as you get a slightly wider field of view. I've done some reviews on the 12-60mm it should give you some insight into it. :)
@@GeekyNerdyTechy I suppose you are talking about the first version of the 14-42mm, not the newer 14-42mm II version, which is apparently sharper.
At this point the Panasonic 12-60 kit lens is waaayys better and sharper
Can this be used with a lanc zoom controller, conected via remote of the lumix??
I am not sure what you mean sorry?
@@GeekyNerdyTechy i mean, if i connect this lens to my gh5, and i also Connect a zoom controller via remote port from the gh5, and i zoom with the cntroller , the lens zoom will function ?
Mordy beach. I haven't been there in AGES!
Man thanks for the review I thinks that was the G7 right
Hi Yoichi, I was using the G85. 😎
@@GeekyNerdyTechy ok
how good is the lumix g85 and g7 in 2023?
The G7 is okay for manual focus tripod or gimbal shots, but there's much better choices. It really depends on what you need it for.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy I'm thinking mainly photography like weddings and stills at minimum. Some wildlife at max. Might record some video, but I can use my phone for that if necessary. Which camera would you recommend? I was looking at the Lumix g100, though it's pricy for what it's offering. I currently have a Nikon d3200
what is a good variable nd filter for this lense?
I recently purchased an affordable one called a Gobe Variable ND. It works great and I have a video on my channel about it :)
@@GeekyNerdyTechy awesome thank you! You just gained a new sub!!!
Is the 14-42 good for real estate videos?
You might want a 12mm wide lens possibly. 14mm isn't super wide.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy ok thanks. Do you have any wide lense recommendations for the Lumix G7?
@@jedvolkmanfilms5284 You could try the 12-42 lens but if you are shooting indoors then the 7-14mm might be the best bet. At 7mm you might get some of that "Go Pro" fish eye thing but its quite common in those situations.
@@GeekyNerdyTechy yeah definitely would not want the fish eye look. I hear Laowa 12 mm is probably best for real estate because it keeps the lines straight. But it's made for a full frame camera. Any brand recommendations for the micro four thirds?
The 12-32mm is the better kit lens. Sharp and wider.
Thanks
Id the focus good for music videos?
This is one of the better auto-focus lenses for Panasonic bodies. Odds are if you are behind the camera filming I would suggest one area mode where you can move the focus box wherever you like (or manual focus).
Is this lens any good for insect photography and macro?
Macro might be a little limited for kit lenses. Best case scenario for you is an extreme close-up. You need an actual macro lens.
is it weather sealed?
Yes
With which f, have this lens best sharpenss?
Probably the same as most, around 5,8 to 8
Where are you from?
So is it good for vlogging?
2:07 lol
Captian price
Que estupidez el título!
I got one for 35 dollars for my GH4, whith the sun in my country, i need ND filters too.
Check out the Gobe ND filters they are great value and work really well. :)
@@GeekyNerdyTechy six months later i can tell: is a great little piece of glass.
Nice video
Poor little lens it sort was ok but for the price awesome ha ha stay safe see ya
hhhhh, i gonna keep't, thkU 4 the review