" if the older 14 to 140mm hadn't existed, my reaction to this new lens would have been astonishment". Thanks David for this comment. That's all I needed to hear :)
You, David, are boringly consistent...all of your reviews have the same and exact level of calm brilliance. Well done. Again. As Usual. And for the benefit of us all.
Came across this today while researching which version of the GX9 to get, with the 14-140 or one of the others options and was something of a surprise to suddenly see shots of my old hometown, Kingston! I left years ago and am now filled with a massive sense of nostalgia. Thanks for that :) Great video too, I think i'm convinced...
Thanks! I don't know how long since you last went there but when did the London Road still ran through the town centre. They've built a bigger road skirting the centre now but the traffic jams still happen because everything has to filter over Richmond Bridge. Nice place to live, though. My own thoughts on Micro Four Thirds lead me to see the GX9 as about the best Micro Four Thirds camera available, taking into account the size and bagability of the design and the fact that it has the same IQ as the flagship cameras. The only downside is the small EVF but I find it perfectly usable. A good option is the 12-32mm and 35-100mm compact lenses, both very sharp and will fit in a small shoulder bag. But, as you say, so many options and the 14-140 is a superb one lens solution.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thanks for the reply David. it was about 14 years ago so I'm sure much has changed! Lived in New Malden for longer actually, worked in the old Forbouys there for a while. been in Brno in the Czech rep since then. Both lovely places to live. Both horrendous traffic at times :) Quite a novice with cameras to be honest, but looking at trying to take nicer pics. Have an old Fujifilm fixed lens 'prosumer' I think they call it, from years ago (S5500) with a 37-370mm equiv. 10x zoom. I do like to take some pictures at range, zoos etc, do you think I would miss the reach if I went for the 12-32mm and 35-100mm option? Haven't used that in a while though as it's only a 4mpx camera and really showing it's age. Upgrade long overdue!
Thank you David. I think my plan will be to get the 14-140 and bring the 7-14 and also the 20mm. Should be a good light package. I appreciate your advice!
Lovely review, thank you! I managed to nab the Mk II of this lens for just $180 used. I have some primes which are much faster, but absolutely love the versatility in this lens.
That was a good price. Yes, this is the lens to take out when you're not sure what you'll need and I see little difference in sharpness between this and much less versatile zooms.
Thank you for opinion on that topic. I had this feeling as well, so I think I made my mind and will go for the G6 kit. :D If I still feel tempted by the OM-D I can always get it body only next year for a bargain! ;) Keep up your great work! We m43 interested people and for sure the the real users do appreciate your efforts!
I bought this lens for my GM1 for traveling around South America off the back of your review David. Excellent piece of kit and did all I wanted in between my 12-32 & 100-300. I left those lenses at home as I had the 14-140. I think that anybody buying a Lumix G for the first time should just get the body + this lens. Excellent review mate.
It seems to be a good philosophy when switching to any system (e.g. DSLR to MFT, compact to DSLR); save up and get an affordable body that has all the features you need, then fit it with the broadest-range zoom you can reasonably afford. This buys you shooting time on the camera while the pennies re-accumulate. Little luxuries like ultra-telephoto (your 100-300) and fast primes or wide zooms can follow later as finances allow, but remember that as always, the best is the enemy of good enough, and unless money is no object, you ought to match your lens/body spending to the sort of shots you're taking.
Glad you like the videos. Yes, another nice lens for MFT but there are some beautiful primes out there. My personal favourite, the Olympus 45mm f1.8 is one of them. The Olympus 75 looks a beauty, too.
David, once again a brilliant review. I purchased the 20mm 1.7 after watching your review, and the photos are just breathtaking. This 14-140 will be the next addition for my Panasonic GF6... A wonderful camera that your don't hear much about... Perhaps too entry level for some. But paired with my Nikon D7100, I now feel like I can take outstanding shots regardless of what gear I bring. Thanks again for the informative videos. Your work is appreciated. Cheers, Thomas.
Very helpful David. Being new to the MFT world, I likely would not have known that there even was a new, smaller version of this lens. Very important since I buy quite a bit of my gear used on eBay, and I would only want the smaller version. Oh, and the "little black dress" analogy was a hoot! The humor and self-effacement in your reviews make them much more interesting and fun.
Patrick Fitzgerald Thanks, Patrick. The photography is fun, so I don't like to be _too_ serious in my videos. The fact is that the MFT cameras rekindled my enjoyment of photography and it's nice to know that I can pass that on.
I'm with you on that my friend. The size, weight, quality and features of my newly acquired GX7 is making me want to get out there and take a look around with fresh eyes. Heck, I'm even experimenting with black and white again!
olafreinhardweyer I wanted the ability to change lenses, so no. I'll pick up a used Panasonic camera body with 4K in the future, and I'll still be able to use my current lenses.
Thanks for the kind words. As long as the picture is good who cares about the quality, I go with that but up to a point. A good pic with good quality still trumps the good pic with poor quality. MFT meets my quality needs but we're all different. I can get shallow enough DoF for what I want but others want shallower. MFT is one compromise among many and for me hits the spot but that doesn't make it right for everyone or even a majority. If I were a working pro again, I would be using FF.
***** As I said in the review, when I go through my lens usage in Lightroom, this zoom and its predecessor are right at the top. Wide range zooms for DSLRs often involve a large IQ hit but this one doesn't.
David Thorpe Nice review! Do you use z GH7? I'm interested in G7 for photo but for video too, and I want to know how good this camera is for photos like landscapes, portraits, general stuff. I would like to know, maybe I'll sell my DSLR for it. Thanks David! :)
YourTrulyFriend I haven't tried a G7 yet but it has the same sensor as my GX7 which I use a great deal. The image quality is excellent but you have to expect to take a small hit in image quality compared to an APS camera (although is some cases the GX7 is better). There's a larger hit compared to a full frame camera, of course. Nonetheless , for practical uses to which cameras are put, prints up to A3 and viewing on screen, even the largest monitors, the quality is no different. In my view, the convenience and ease of use of MFT, plus the wonderful range of top quality lenses available and the near professional video capabilities make it a better choice. I have a video on the subject here: th-cam.com/video/lS2A6xH2MFw/w-d-xo.html The super zoom reviewed here is a good example of the advantages of the format, in fact
David Thorpe Thanks! I saw your other video about why you chose the 4/3 format. It looks pretty good. I'll go to a store here in my country to take a look at some 4/3 format cameras, and see how I like them. For almost the same reasons I want one too, to be easy to carry and good enough for photos/videos. My Nikon D5100 (current DSLR with kit lenses) is OK, not very heavy on its own, but if I carry a bag with DSLR, 2 kit lenses, one wide prime, they are bulky and heave. And that's not OK because I often end by not taking them with me. :)
YourTrulyFriend You mirror exactly the reasons I went for MFT. There are other excellent compact formats but as an ex-pro I judge the usefulness of a system on the lens range available as much as the camera bodies and that's where MFT is streets ahead of the others. It's on the lenses that you save most of the weight and bulk.
YourTrulyFriend I am migrating from Nikon over to Micro Four Thirds and I love using my Panasonic G6 coupled with the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 & 35-100mm f2.8 (note; double the focal lengths for 35mm equivalent). The 2 Nikon lenses are mega large & heavy compared to these 2-they are lighter, fast AF and super sharp edge-to-edge, a joy to use.
I've been using a pair of this lens for many years and they continue to be my default grab-and-go lenses for M4/3. Also have a Sony A7iii and a 24-240, which is Sony's 10X zoom equivalent which gives the same advantages but is very significantly bigger and especially heavier and so isn't used anything like as often.
I love your lens reviews David! I am planning on buying the Gh4 and am having a hard time deciding which lens to start off with. I will be shooting mostly video and I like the versatility of the 14-140 II. The one thing keeping me from pulling the trigger is the posts and videos exposing a possible problem with it's O.I.S. There appears to be micro jitters in some of the videos I have seen. I am not sure if this problem is universal. It is noticeable on your footage of the frog @ 4:42. Have you noticed this with your original version, F/4-5.8, and do you think there will be a firmware fix for the new one in the future? Thanks!
+618 Fishing The jitter on my video is caused by my hand on the zoom ring, I think. Normally I'd never zoom during a video since it looks pretty awful. I haven't noticed the jitter problem myself but maybe someone else would have some information? The original version I never noticed any jitter either. I'm not a top video man, though! Certainly for one lens for video, this is it.
another concern to consider is the noise the lens is constantly making as long as OIS is on... it sounds like a hard drive booting up, but sustained as long as its on.. the volume goe sdown SLIGHTLY once u hit record, but the noise is quite obviously there and picked up by the mic
Thanks for the review. While I think the combination of 12-35mm F2.8 and 35-100mm F2.8 is probably the MFT "holy grail", based on your review I think I might seriously reconsider where to spend the money. This looks to be a solid all-round lens with all the necessary focal lengths covered.
Just tried it and yes, it is louder. Nothing to be concerned about as you can't hear it on video. I find that the volume is similar with OIS turned on or off but the character changes a little.
Thanks Debby. I'd lean to the 14-140 too. I'm not a technical whizz so can't make comparisons on a graph or anything but I use mine for its versatility, without doubts about IQ coming into it. Apart from primes, the only lens I have used that is better is the 12-35 f2.8 Panasonic. As I say in the video, for many photographers this is the only lens they will ever need.
Thanks John! I tried doing the voice over off shooting from the hip but get all these ums and ers and miss points. One thing I am never going to do is start with that "Hi guys" thing!
I have the original 14-140. It was my first MFT lens back in 2008. I never particularly liked the lens and I never used it since getting the 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8’s. It needed these improvements but I won’t be upgrading.
Ordering one of these apart of the new G7 kit. Selling my omd em5 mkii and 12-40 pro since the 4k video is so nice. Plus I have the Leica 15mm and 25mm that will go nicely on the g7
Neverland Traders I think a lot of video people will go for the G7, 4k at a very reasonable price and this is an ideal all round lens for it. Superzooms used to be a bog compromise on IQ but the Panasonic isn't.
Thanks Frederick. There's no question that the 25mm is a fantastic lens and the f1.4 aperture is good for shallow depth of field but the 12-35 is just as sharp for practical purposes - especially for video - and much more versatile. Also, it has the 58mm filter size the same as the 14-140 and 35-100 which is great for video people, one set of filters covers all. And highly effective stabilisation, too. It's all a trade-off in the end but I agree with your view, the zoom covers way more.
Sorry to say it doesn't have a motor in the lens like the little 14-42 compact zoom, so no. It would be a perfect video lens of it did, wouldn't it? But, thanks to your question, I found out something new. I had been using my GH3 on manual focus and when I connected it to my iPad, noticed a new slider on the screen - for manual focus. It works on my Olympus 45mm too! I can't see when I'd use it but nice to know - so thanks :-)
I have a GX1 and GH3. For the first time over the weekend I put my MK I 14-140 (my heaviest lens) on the GX1, and surprisingly it worked well and was a comfortable fit. I usually just use the 20mm with the GX1, but will use the 14-140 on it more. Still, I'd like to have the new version. Thanks for the comparisons.
Great review as usual David. BTW: I believe your review of the Lumix 12-35mm has me sold. Was going to get the Panasonic 25mm f1.4 Summilux Leica. Costs half as much and was really excited about the f1.4. But all things said and done looks like the 12-35mm covers more. Way more. Especially for video work. Thanks so much for that review also.
Thanks Richard. It's pretty well perfect for the use you describe. Not big enough to be an encumbrance and performing well enough that you are not getting a second best result. Plus covering almost as great a range of most sets of primes will. The compromise for people who don't like compromise :-)
Great review once again David. I had completely discounted this lens as a serious one to get. But now I'm reconsidering that view and may pick it up for my Lumix G6. Thank you.
Thanks for your video. Completely agree that it's a very exciting upgrade. Ordered it and eagerly waiting for mine to be delivered. Thought that aside from weight, filter thread and aperture values, another major difference from the initial 14-140 mm was the motor element (like you have in the G X (lenses) so that the lens can be driven from a smartphone if the Pana body implements it (right now G6, GF6 and upcoming GX7). Right or wrong?
Thanks for brilliant videos - M4/3 user since original G1, lots since then. Common interests - cycling (I ran the Folding Society, the folding bike web site for a number of years), iPads & other computer gear (been programming computers since 1967, using digital cameras since around 1993). Thanks again for your superb videos - I have a lot of catching up to do. Mike PS: Even what I assume are your across-the-road photos are quite similar to mine, though mercifully I don't have much traffic.
Excellent review David. I've been giving some thought to buying this lens for for general use on family vacations when I don't want to take all my primes.
David- I ended up buying this lens on the strength of your review and others and am very pleased to say the least. It is the perfect lens for me , reasonably priced and an all around range I need for a variety of video shooting situations. As you say, 'a kit lens par excellance.'
Hi David Thanks for the great review,, as usual,,, can you please tell me what is the difference between the 14-140mm in this review, and the new 2019 kk 2 version ?
Yes, if you find the old one a bit heavy, the new one is a big improvement. And while the 12-35 is definitely sharper than the 14-140, there's little in it with the 35-100 I find. Though, of course you have the two extra stops of the f2.8 35-100. But if this 14-140 was the on ly lens I could have, I could live with that.
Thanks! On the lenses, if you have an Olympus camera body, I'd wait to see the Olympus offerings since they offer a greater zoom range and the lack of in lens stabilisation doesn't matter. If the performance is as good or better than the Panasonics and the price within reason then they'd be best. For a Panasonic body I'd go for the Panasonic lenses regardless since they have the stabilisation. The e-m1, if you don't have any older 4/3 lenses I'd stick with an O-Md or GH3 for now.
i have the OM-D and the G6 and can say that both are brilliant cameras. the G6 14-140mm kit would certainly be the better buy if you're wanting to take pictures of everything. the OM-D shines with specialist lenses but lacks in the quality of displays and obviously the wifi.
I am waiting to get mine in the mail. After having used the pan/leica 25mm f1.4, the oly 45mm f1.8 and the slr magic 12mm f1.6 I am excited to have a more versatile walking around or travel lens in my lineup. At first I was hesitant with the alleged quality drop from primes, but your video and the other examples I've seen are looking great, so even if there is a difference, it's small enough to make the whole framing versatility advantage win out in the end. I hope! Thanks David for all your excellent reviews.
Simon Jakobsson Thanks Simon. Naturally it won't have the extreme sharpness of your primes but it's a very sharp lens in its own right and by any standards. When I go through all my stuff in LightRoom, it's this lens (and the previous version) that has taken the majority of it.
Good morning! (Or at least it's morning in Texas). :-) Just wanted to ask you if you've ever compared the 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 to the 35-100mm f2.8 lens in low-light situations? I am torn as to whether to shell out the dough for the latter. I love the 14-140mm mk ii and have rarely noticed (maybe once!) the whirring noise, so that's not an issue. I heard you say that the newer 14-140mm stays in focus better at the long end than the first version and I'd believe it! It's a fantastic lens! Would you say that the ONLY difference between the newer version of the 14-140mm and the 35-100 f2.8 would be the increased light in low-light situations? I'm not sure I need the 35-100mm f2.8, but don't want to miss out on a great lens. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated since I can't find many comparisons of the two lenses online. Thanks, David! I hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
+Linda McMullin Hi Linda. The 35-100 f/2.8 is a good lens but it really is only worth buying if you need or feel you need the f/2.8 aperture. If you use the f/2.8 faster lens at the apertures available on the 14-140, the latter has similar sharpness in the centre - that is to say, excellent and generally better at the edges. As an all round one stop solution, I don't think the 14-140 has ever been surpassed.
This guy just sounds so convincing and professional. If he said that a window glass makes a great lens I'd trust him with my money :D Jokes aside, really great lens and body reviews are to be found right on this man's channel.
sorely tempted to trade in 12-35 2.8 as that mostly gets used at 5.6 in the studio and f4 out and about. when does this new model stop down to f4? have the sigma 19 2.8, 14 2.5, 45 1.8 and the 25 1.4 if i need faster and the 7-14 if i need wider. would be nice to carry this super zoom, the 7-14 and the 25mm 1.4 as a holiday kit.
+Brian Cullen If you do, you'll find just about every parameter except physical size a big improvement. I doubt that there is a better all round camera in photography than a GX8 with this lens. And the gear you have is no slouch, highly capable. The combined body/ lens stabilization is excellent and the focusing speed is astounding.
Mr. Thorpe, Nice review. There are other reviewers of this lens that share your thoughts. I looked at Flikr and found good image quality. I Have an Olympus OM-D E-M5 and don't need the stabilization; however, I do like the weather sealing of the new Olympus M.Zuiko ED 14-150mm f/4-5.6 II. Have you had a chance to compare these two lenses and if so, what do you think? Also, DXO mark rates the sharpness' of the Panasonic a "5" and the Olympus a "4", which below that of the terrible 12-50mm. My other two lenses are the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and the Olympus 75mm f/1.8. What are your thoughts?
Hello David. I have a question, but first I'd like to mention how good your videos are. I have just bought the Panasonic lumix GX1, for reasons such as low cost/ lower weight/ I'm a beginner. I am wondering whether newer lenses such as the one in this video would not function as well as older lenses on the GX1? - Thanks.
Thanks Jeff! For compactness and general ease of use, the GX9. Its normal main criticism is the EVF but for 16:9 it uses the whole screen area and is good. The EVF cropped for 4:3 which makes it appear smaller but for occasional use it's perfectly fine and the monitor is a good as any camera anyway. The G90 is nice but if you shoot 4K the sensor is a bit too cropped for my taste, making wide-angles less effective. At the present discounted prices the G9 is a steal. It's the dearest Panasonic but a top notch camera for both video and stills.
Thanks again for a great test, I really enjoy every time you test cameras and lenses. Are you able to make a test of the Olympus 9-18mm.f.4-5.6, as I think it's an interesting lens for a better price than the Panasonic 7-14mm.f.4. Many Greetings jess
Mr.thorpe your reviews are what got me into mft. Thanks for all the good work you put into it! Now I would like to ask you about your thoughts on the new e-m1 and the constant f2.8 zooms that olympus are putting out now. I am conflicted if I should go to olympus for my zooms and have to wait a little or buy the panasonic ones now and move on. Thank you again!
Interested? I've ordered one! Thanks for the kind words, Paul. A neighbour of mine has a GF1 I advised him to buy quite a while ago. He comes over and sees whatever camera I am using at the time but the GF1 has hit a sweet spot for him and he's seen nothing he likes better for his particular use so far. The GX7 might just pip it for him but it is a lot more expensive.
David- Really enjoy the video and find many of your videos very informative. Just thinking about getting into m4/3. My question is from a purely IQ standpoint, that is forgetting cost and convenience am I better off with the the 14-42 and 45-150 or 45-175 combo or the new 14-140. I would be getting the 14-42 as part of a kit as the 14-140 is not available in kit form here in the US. I'm leaning 14-140 but would appreciate your valued opinion
Thank you for your opinion! I think I will really go for the G6 14-140 kit. I am also a beginner and new to the m43 system, so I think the G6 will be more than sufficient with respect to IQ and the 14-140 as a starter and explorer lens. :D The OM-D's look and feel are just so amazing, that it won't jump out of my head! :P
Hi, if you were to chose which kit lens is best for g85 being bundled with it, the 12-60mm or the 14-140mm? I saw some bundles for sale online with the 14-140mm and I have no idea which one would be better for me as my all around lens If I were to buy my first camera.
Hi David, I have a bit of a dilemma - I am looking at this lens as a general all purpose lens but I shoot mainly video and have recently been eyeing up the Olympus M.Zuiko 12-40 f/2.8 for video instead, what lens do you think I should opt for? Thanks in advance!
SGC If you have a Panasonic body it really is useful to have stabilization and I'd opt for the 14-140 whatever. But even if you have an Olympus body I'd opt for that too, personally. The 12-40 f/2.8 is a great lens but as an all rounder, the extra 100mm reach of the 14-140 makes it a better all purpose lens. For video, a couple of mm wider isn't crucial and the faster aperture is less important with the slower shutter speeds of video. In terms of IQ, the 12-40 is the better lens (as it ought to be) but in day to day use there's not enough difference to overcome the advantage of the super-zoom. Given the difference in price, you could buy the 14-140 _and_ Olympus 25 or 45 primes for interviewand shallow DoF stuff. In which case you get wider range zoom plus shallower DoF when you want it..
Unequivocally, the 14-140. Thanks for the kind words. The Panasonic gives little away by having a wide focal range. It holds up very well at the 140 end which is unusual for such lenses.
I had the 12-60 and a very nice lens too. It's not as good as an 'all in one' solution, though because of the restricted long end. I took just the 12-60 on a trip to Paris and found myself constantly wishing I'd brought the 14-140 instead. Having said that, I am particularly fond of long lens perspectives. For myself, given the choice it is the 14-140. With the money saved, a fast prime like the 25mm f/1.7 could be added to the mix.
@@DavidThorpeMFT I won't add another comment, but I will agree wholeheartedly. I wonder if my colour-loving wife has a black dress, let alone a little one. No, just checked, she does not! :-o Joke ruined! :-(
Thanks for the head-up. It was announced in January and I read a few rumours but still not available. Strange. I wonder how the price will compare to the Panasonic and Olympus equivalents if and when it surfaces?
Hi David. I am completely new to photography and plan to film 4K video of nature, up close of insects, zoom for birds, etc and wide angle for mountains, rivers, lakes oceans, etc. Then there will be times I will want to do low light, like a campfire, sunrise or sunset. I just purchased the GH4 and the new 14-140mm f3.5 to f5.6 lense. I was curious if you had any suggestions for me? What other lenses should I get? I keep seeing that the Metabones speed booster and the Nikon lenses might be the way to go for low light.
+David B. Mathis Hi David - the 14-140 will do a lot of what you need but not the high speed camp fire light, possibly. However, with a highish ISO settings it might do that perfectly well. Certainly with sunrises and sunsets it is easily capable. With landscapes, I find longer lenses good as much as wide angle since often a detail of a scene can tell you more than trying to get everything in, which tends to diminish the scale of a scene. You see a lot of ultra wide angle landscapes with a large object in the foreground. In general, a 14mm should be wide enough for most landscapes. For close-ups of insects, you really need a dedicated macro lens. In my opinion the Olympus 60mm is the best available for Micro Four Thirds. Macro is not easy with movie, though because it is so hard to keep the subject i focus. Birds, that is very specialized and requires a long lens. The Metabones and Nikkor lenses is good but remember that you have no automatic functions and the combination will be very hard to use. You can have auto functions with some Canon lenses but again, I'd stay with native Micro Four Thirds lenses if I could. Plus, the extreme aperture speed you can get with Metabones isn't necessary for day to day work. Probably the new Panasonic 100-400mm would be suitable or the 300mm f/4 with 1.4x converter. This is big money, though. My overall suggestion would be that the only lens you _need_ is the macro, assuming that the close focus of the 14-140 won't do. I would then do my best to do all the other things with the 14-140 and note what it cannot do to your satisfaction. But don't assume that if you can't do something, it needs more equipment. The 14-140 is a highly versatile lens and getting the best out of it can take some learning. Which is the fun of it all, of course!
Wow. I really like the phrases you use. So between this one and the 35-100 2.8 which one you recommend regarding sharpness. I don't shoot in low light much.
Thanks Ahmed! The 35-100 has better central sharpness but the 14-140 is much better at the edges. Overall, in day to day use, you won't see much difference. The 35-100 only makes sense if you intend to use it at f/2.8 a lot. Otherwise the 14-140 is much more versatile - for many photographers the only lens they need and it sounds your best bet to me.
Thanks Benjamin.One thing to add is that the GX7 and GM1 have updated WiFi and you can monitor and control video live through them. It's also even easier to connect and you can manually focus the lenses. I'll be uploading a video onhwo ot works with the GM1 in a day or so.
Nice video David. I have the old one and it is fine except weight compared to my Tamron 18-200 for my NEX7. So I think you sold me on an upgrade. Waiting on my GX7 and the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 - will get lens before camera so will use on my OMD-5 and GX1. The primes are super nice like my 20mm 1.7 but an all-around to me is a must. Will be ordering 12-35 f2.8 shortly. Not sure if Olympus 14-150 is as good but it is light but IQ maybe not as good.
Thx for the great video. My question is: Just got the Gh2 for video shooting only and looking to buy the 14-140mm lens but do u suggest for video I get the old or new version? Many Regards
M Pess Thanks for the kind words. I'd go for the new version because it is generally all round a bit better. As I said in the video, I wouldn't bother to upogarde to the new one if I had the older one but given the lighter weight and slighly faster aperture of the new one I'd opt for that. On the other hand, if I saw the old one at a really good price that enabled me to buy that _and_ the Olympus 45mm f1.8 for shallow depth of field video, I'd do that.
David Thorpe Last questions please: Is that first or second Generation: www.bestbuy.com/site/panasonic-lumix-g-x-vario-14-140mm-f-4-0-5-8-ois-zoom-lens-for-g-series-cameras-w-3-uv-cpl-nd8-filters-tripod/1311722278.p?id=mp1311722278&skuId=1311722278
Hi David, thank you for your review. Shortly I bought a GH5 with the 14-140 lens, latest version. I noticed that I when pull zoom very fast in video mode, AF drops out and needs a lot time to get in focus. Do I have a problem? Please your reaction
No, it's fact of life, I'm afraid. A panfocal lens will hold its focus as it is zoomed and so is ideal for video but comes in at much, much higher prices. For stills panfocus really doesn't matter since refocusing is so fast. The only thing you can do in video is zoom at a pace that the autofocus can cope with or stop and start a new sequence each time you alter focal length. I don't think there are any panfocal zooms for stills.
Very interesting video this and you have answered a question I have had for ages. Being new the the mft market I bought a used GF3 with a 14-42mm lens and love it, I was considering adding a longer zoom lens but your video has made my mind up not to, so I thank you for that. My reason for getting the GF3 was size nothing more and when fitted with a bigger lens I might as well use my bridge camera which aint going to weigh much more and will give as good results.
The Micro Four Thirds body will give better results than a bridge camera simply because of the bigger sensor. Whether that 'better' result will be perceivable depends on the use to which the image is put. If nothing radical is being done with the image, then the logic of your argument is flawless. I apply the same logic to the use of a FF or Micro Four Thirds camera. There's a differnce but does it matter?
In a head to head the 4 thirds would win esp in low light and my bridge camera is getting on a fair bit now too, but yes love my little Panny she aint doing so bad so far, time will tell but so far so good. All the best.
I tried two in a store and they were kinda stiff when zooming, I couldn't zoom very smoothly. Do you think this normal? Or is it a problem? I'm thinking it could be bad for video
Mine is nicely smooth on zooming and has been from day one. It doesn't require much effort at all. Stiff zooming would be very awkward for video. I'd say there is something wrong. My 100-400 had very stiff zooming, too.
Yours looked stiff & slightly jerky in your video, though, even as you said the words "silky smooth." I have a used one on my also used GX8. It's a bit stiff, perhaps due to plastic-on-plastic bearings. But my clamped-on focus lever makes it acceptable for video. For stills, it's not an issue.
Hi David, I was planning to get the new 35-100mm for an upcoming vacation, but now after watching this video, I'm not sure which would be better? My current lenses are 20mm, 12-32mm, 45-150mm, 7-14mm and the olympus 60mm macro. I shoot mainly landscape and street photography, but really take pictures of anything I see, haha.. My plan is to bring 2-3 lenses, most likely the 20mm and 7-14, plus something with a little more reach.. The closest I have for that would be the 45-150mm, but I don't find myself using that lens much... I was planning on the 35-100 because I figured it would mate well with the 12-32.
voms vom The little 35-100 is perfect for travel. It and the 12-32 zoom are both sharp and tiny. On the other hand, the 14-140 is a real do it all lens and has the advantage of no lens changing (I dislike changing lenses in dusty or sandy places) and the extra reach. I could go either way but if you don't mind the extra bulk (by MFT standards!) I'd take the 7-14 and a 14-140. That's a comprehensive outfit and if you like to take pictures of anything, as you say, that combo with the xtra reach really will cover about anything.
Hi - the 35-100 companion to the 12-32 would be ideal but would involve lens changing which I presume you want to avoid. There is a size mismatch visually I suppose but in terms of usage, no problem with the 14-140. I use it on my GM1 sometimes without a thought. Be aware that the lens juts out a few mm under the camera body so if you put it down on a flat surface the outfit rests on the lens body, so you can't use a table top as a support.
thanks for your feedback with this intuitive video. with panasonic and the micro 4/3 mount, what are your thoughts of the olympus lens? some olympus lens seem to be faster and a reasonable price, but the olympus doesn't seem friendly with lack of compatability with the auto focus features in most modern panasonics. would appreciate any insight you can share.
ric m Leaving aside that Olympus lenses won't be stabilized on a Panasonic body (except the GX7), in other respects they'll work just as well, one on another. I have a video about it here: th-cam.com/video/QTlEXzIAAvQ/w-d-xo.html The GH4's Depth from Defocus focusing aid won't operate but I don't find that any great loss. Basically, I'd buy the lens I wanted whatever the make.
ric m I use Panasonic & Olympus lenses on my Panasonic G6, both of which work perfectly. The Olympus 60mm macro is great as is the 45mm f1.8-super sharp and delicious bokeh. Of course, no stabilisation when using the Oly lenses on Panasonic bodies as David said-oh, unless you buy the brand new Panasonic GX8 which has Duel IS-winner!
Steve Ferneyhough It'll be interesting to see how well the dual stabilization works. Particularly important will be the in body stabilization because if that is as effective as Olympus's the GX8 could be a winner.
Tecnovlog From what I've read so far it's not that different from the GX7 stabilization. Olympus seem to be progressing faster than Panasonic with stabilization and video. But they don't do 4k, of course which may or may not be important.
Hi.. Based on some youtube review on panasonic G7, am very pleased with it and planning to buy, request you to give your opinion on the same, my usage predominantly 60% video and rest images. And if you are recommending G7, should i go with the kit lens 14-42 or 14-140, please guide...Thanks
+Ivar Rain Hi Ivar - If you can, go with the 14-140, It is bigger and more expensive but ideal for video to save lens changing. For stills, there is little compromise in sharpness and it is better than the kit zoom. A good friend who wanted to get into photography and video asked me recently what he should buy and my advice was a G7 and this lens.
I see that one version of this lens says "HD" in red on it. They're both the f/3.5-5.6 version (Not the 4.5-5.8). What's the difference between them? For reference, here are the links on amazon: www.amazon.com/Panasonic-H-FS14140AK-14-140mm-F3-5-5-6-O-I-S/dp/B0153WGIW8/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1464725957&sr=8-4&keywords=panasonic+14-140 vs www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Lumix-Vario-14-140mm-3-5-5-6/dp/B00CFCTH14/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1464725957&sr=8-3&keywords=panasonic+14-140
You've got me there, Tony. No-one seems to know. Whatever, it is certainly cosmetic because all the lens have the same stabilization and optical construction.
Thanks David. For anyone reading this, I've asked about the 2 different yet same spec lenses on dpreview.com: www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57852613 The main idea is that Panasonic simply did a paint job, dropped the red "HD" logo, probably since the lens can be used to record 4K, not just HD.
That sounds like it. Panasonic wouldn't redesign the optics or mechanics of a lens without giving it a different lens part number. Nothing like confusing customers, eh? :-) I have the 'older' newer one with HD on it.
As always very down to earth and informative. I had the old lens and loved its versatility and am trying to decide between this and the Oly 14-150 mk11 Any Thoughts...its for a old e-5 mk11 Thanks
Thanks Philip - I prefer the Panasonic 14-140 overall because its edge to edge performance is better. But if there is a big difference in price, there's nothing wrong with the Olympus. That E-M5ll can't be that old :-)
Such a joy to hear his voice again. RIP David.
I love when I'm looking for a lens review and I find one of David's.
Hope you're getting some great shots wherever you are mate.
"...A bit tighta and a bit shorta!" Yes! You are the man, David!
:-)
I miss your reviews David. 😪RIP.
Miss you, Sir!
Thanks for all your correspondence. I wish I could have met you.
" if the older 14 to 140mm hadn't existed, my reaction to this new lens would have been astonishment". Thanks David for this comment. That's all I needed to hear :)
You have a great gift for communicating. The visuals support a clear narrative. Metaphors like the little black skirt capture an essential point.
You, David, are boringly consistent...all of your reviews have the same and exact level of calm brilliance. Well done. Again. As Usual. And for the benefit of us all.
Wow, thanks Larry!
You're my primary source for all MFT purchases. Thank you, David.
Great to hear that, Arjen - thank you!
David Thorpe
Oerhört saknad.
Came across this today while researching which version of the GX9 to get, with the 14-140 or one of the others options and was something of a surprise to suddenly see shots of my old hometown, Kingston! I left years ago and am now filled with a massive sense of nostalgia. Thanks for that :) Great video too, I think i'm convinced...
Thanks! I don't know how long since you last went there but when did the London Road still ran through the town centre. They've built a bigger road skirting the centre now but the traffic jams still happen because everything has to filter over Richmond Bridge. Nice place to live, though.
My own thoughts on Micro Four Thirds lead me to see the GX9 as about the best Micro Four Thirds camera available, taking into account the size and bagability of the design and the fact that it has the same IQ as the flagship cameras. The only downside is the small EVF but I find it perfectly usable. A good option is the 12-32mm and 35-100mm compact lenses, both very sharp and will fit in a small shoulder bag. But, as you say, so many options and the 14-140 is a superb one lens solution.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thanks for the reply David. it was about 14 years ago so I'm sure much has changed! Lived in New Malden for longer actually, worked in the old Forbouys there for a while. been in Brno in the Czech rep since then. Both lovely places to live. Both horrendous traffic at times :)
Quite a novice with cameras to be honest, but looking at trying to take nicer pics. Have an old Fujifilm fixed lens 'prosumer' I think they call it, from years ago (S5500) with a 37-370mm equiv. 10x zoom. I do like to take some pictures at range, zoos etc, do you think I would miss the reach if I went for the 12-32mm and 35-100mm option? Haven't used that in a while though as it's only a 4mpx camera and really showing it's age. Upgrade long overdue!
Thank you David. I think my plan will be to get the 14-140 and bring the 7-14 and also the 20mm. Should be a good light package. I appreciate your advice!
I am considering this lens, reviewing a ton of videos. & where do I finish up? With the late great Mr. Thorpe! A fine review, RIP dear sir.
Lovely review, thank you! I managed to nab the Mk II of this lens for just $180 used. I have some primes which are much faster, but absolutely love the versatility in this lens.
That was a good price. Yes, this is the lens to take out when you're not sure what you'll need and I see little difference in sharpness between this and much less versatile zooms.
Thank you for opinion on that topic. I had this feeling as well, so I think I made my mind and will go for the G6 kit. :D If I still feel tempted by the OM-D I can always get it body only next year for a bargain! ;)
Keep up your great work! We m43 interested people and for sure the the real users do appreciate your efforts!
I bought this lens for my GM1 for traveling around South America off the back of your review David.
Excellent piece of kit and did all I wanted in between my 12-32 & 100-300. I left those lenses at home as I had the 14-140.
I think that anybody buying a Lumix G for the first time should just get the body + this lens.
Excellent review mate.
Mark Lyons Thanks Mark. I do the same as you - if I'm going away without the express intention to take pictures, this is the lens I take.
It seems to be a good philosophy when switching to any system (e.g. DSLR to MFT, compact to DSLR); save up and get an affordable body that has all the features you need, then fit it with the broadest-range zoom you can reasonably afford. This buys you shooting time on the camera while the pennies re-accumulate. Little luxuries like ultra-telephoto (your 100-300) and fast primes or wide zooms can follow later as finances allow, but remember that as always, the best is the enemy of good enough, and unless money is no object, you ought to match your lens/body spending to the sort of shots you're taking.
jsm666 Couldn't agree more. And in fact, although I have a good number of luxury lenses, when I look on LightRoom the 14-140 is my most used lens.
Glad you like the videos. Yes, another nice lens for MFT but there are some beautiful primes out there. My personal favourite, the Olympus 45mm f1.8 is one of them. The Olympus 75 looks a beauty, too.
David, once again a brilliant review. I purchased the 20mm 1.7 after watching your review, and the photos are just breathtaking. This 14-140 will be the next addition for my Panasonic GF6... A wonderful camera that your don't hear much about... Perhaps too entry level for some. But paired with my Nikon D7100, I now feel like I can take outstanding shots regardless of what gear I bring. Thanks again for the informative videos. Your work is appreciated. Cheers, Thomas.
Very helpful David. Being new to the MFT world, I likely would not have known that there even was a new, smaller version of this lens. Very important since I buy quite a bit of my gear used on eBay, and I would only want the smaller version. Oh, and the "little black dress" analogy was a hoot! The humor and self-effacement in your reviews make them much more interesting and fun.
Patrick Fitzgerald Thanks, Patrick. The photography is fun, so I don't like to be _too_ serious in my videos. The fact is that the MFT cameras rekindled my enjoyment of photography and it's nice to know that I can pass that on.
I'm with you on that my friend. The size, weight, quality and features of my newly acquired GX7 is making me want to get out there and take a look around with fresh eyes. Heck, I'm even experimenting with black and white again!
Patrick Fitzgerald It's very special, black and white makes you see differently. I love it.
Patrick Fitzgerald Did you consider the FZ1000 or LX100 before deciding for GX7? 4k video is good bait but I am very hesitant to bite.
olafreinhardweyer I wanted the ability to change lenses, so no. I'll pick up a used Panasonic camera body with 4K in the future, and I'll still be able to use my current lenses.
Thanks for the kind words. As long as the picture is good who cares about the quality, I go with that but up to a point. A good pic with good quality still trumps the good pic with poor quality. MFT meets my quality needs but we're all different. I can get shallow enough DoF for what I want but others want shallower.
MFT is one compromise among many and for me hits the spot but that doesn't make it right for everyone or even a majority. If I were a working pro again, I would be using FF.
I miss you David...
***** As I said in the review, when I go through my lens usage in Lightroom, this zoom and its predecessor are right at the top. Wide range zooms for DSLRs often involve a large IQ hit but this one doesn't.
David Thorpe Nice review! Do you use z GH7? I'm interested in G7 for photo but for video too, and I want to know how good this camera is for photos like landscapes, portraits, general stuff. I would like to know, maybe I'll sell my DSLR for it. Thanks David! :)
YourTrulyFriend I haven't tried a G7 yet but it has the same sensor as my GX7 which I use a great deal. The image quality is excellent but you have to expect to take a small hit in image quality compared to an APS camera (although is some cases the GX7 is better). There's a larger hit compared to a full frame camera, of course. Nonetheless , for practical uses to which cameras are put, prints up to A3 and viewing on screen, even the largest monitors, the quality is no different. In my view, the convenience and ease of use of MFT, plus the wonderful range of top quality lenses available and the near professional video capabilities make it a better choice. I have a video on the subject here: th-cam.com/video/lS2A6xH2MFw/w-d-xo.html
The super zoom reviewed here is a good example of the advantages of the format, in fact
David Thorpe Thanks! I saw your other video about why you chose the 4/3 format. It looks pretty good. I'll go to a store here in my country to take a look at some 4/3 format cameras, and see how I like them. For almost the same reasons I want one too, to be easy to carry and good enough for photos/videos. My Nikon D5100 (current DSLR with kit lenses) is OK, not very heavy on its own, but if I carry a bag with DSLR, 2 kit lenses, one wide prime, they are bulky and heave. And that's not OK because I often end by not taking them with me. :)
YourTrulyFriend You mirror exactly the reasons I went for MFT. There are other excellent compact formats but as an ex-pro I judge the usefulness of a system on the lens range available as much as the camera bodies and that's where MFT is streets ahead of the others. It's on the lenses that you save most of the weight and bulk.
YourTrulyFriend I am migrating from Nikon over to Micro Four Thirds and I love using my Panasonic G6 coupled with the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 & 35-100mm f2.8 (note; double the focal lengths for 35mm equivalent). The 2 Nikon lenses are mega large & heavy compared to these 2-they are lighter, fast AF and super sharp edge-to-edge, a joy to use.
I've been using a pair of this lens for many years and they continue to be my default grab-and-go lenses for M4/3. Also have a Sony A7iii and a 24-240, which is Sony's 10X zoom equivalent which gives the same advantages but is very significantly bigger and especially heavier and so isn't used anything like as often.
I love your lens reviews David! I am planning on buying the Gh4 and am having a hard time deciding which lens to start off with. I will be shooting mostly video and I like the versatility of the 14-140 II. The one thing keeping me from pulling the trigger is the posts and videos exposing a possible problem with it's O.I.S. There appears to be micro jitters in some of the videos I have seen. I am not sure if this problem is universal. It is noticeable on your footage of the frog @ 4:42. Have you noticed this with your original version, F/4-5.8, and do you think there will be a firmware fix for the new one in the future? Thanks!
+618 Fishing The jitter on my video is caused by my hand on the zoom ring, I think. Normally I'd never zoom during a video since it looks pretty awful. I haven't noticed the jitter problem myself but maybe someone else would have some information? The original version I never noticed any jitter either. I'm not a top video man, though! Certainly for one lens for video, this is it.
another concern to consider is the noise the lens is constantly making as long as OIS is on... it sounds like a hard drive booting up, but sustained as long as its on.. the volume goe sdown SLIGHTLY once u hit record, but the noise is quite obviously there and picked up by the mic
I always look forward to your reviews...Great job as usual. Thanks!
What a great review!
If I do decide to go w Panasonic camera, this is the lens I’m getting!
Thank you for the awesome and clear explanation!
Thanks for the review. While I think the combination of 12-35mm F2.8 and 35-100mm F2.8 is probably the MFT "holy grail", based on your review I think I might seriously reconsider where to spend the money. This looks to be a solid all-round lens with all the necessary focal lengths covered.
Miss you, Dave.
I really enjoy your reviews: informative, concise and comprehensive! Quite a feat, actually! Keep on the good work. And thank you, too :)
Just tried it and yes, it is louder. Nothing to be concerned about as you can't hear it on video. I find that the volume is similar with OIS turned on or off but the character changes a little.
Thanks Debby. I'd lean to the 14-140 too. I'm not a technical whizz so can't make comparisons on a graph or anything but I use mine for its versatility, without doubts about IQ coming into it. Apart from primes, the only lens I have used that is better is the 12-35 f2.8 Panasonic.
As I say in the video, for many photographers this is the only lens they will ever need.
10 years ago and I still want to buy this lens!
Another excellent review David. I think this lens might be exactly what my EM-5 needs.
Great review. You are the master of the B-roll-only pre-scripted review. Great writing!
Thanks John! I tried doing the voice over off shooting from the hip but get all these ums and ers and miss points. One thing I am never going to do is start with that "Hi guys" thing!
I have the original 14-140. It was my first MFT lens back in 2008. I never particularly liked the lens and I never used it since getting the 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8’s. It needed these improvements but I won’t be upgrading.
Ordering one of these apart of the new G7 kit. Selling my omd em5 mkii and 12-40 pro since the 4k video is so nice. Plus I have the Leica 15mm and 25mm that will go nicely on the g7
Neverland Traders I think a lot of video people will go for the G7, 4k at a very reasonable price and this is an ideal all round lens for it. Superzooms used to be a bog compromise on IQ but the Panasonic isn't.
Yes, I've pre-ordered one too David. I'm not sure when it will be actually available though.
Thanks Frederick. There's no question that the 25mm is a fantastic lens and the f1.4 aperture is good for shallow depth of field but the 12-35 is just as sharp for practical purposes - especially for video - and much more versatile.
Also, it has the 58mm filter size the same as the 14-140 and 35-100 which is great for video people, one set of filters covers all. And highly effective stabilisation, too. It's all a trade-off in the end but I agree with your view, the zoom covers way more.
Thank you for another great review. I'm considering buy this lens for traveling purposes.
It was made for that, really. Small things help, too, like in sandy or dusty environments no need to change the lens and expose the sensor.
You've been costing me too much in Panasonic gear lately, Mr. Thorpe.
Reviews much appreciated, though. Thanks!
Haha! Of course, Panasonic pay me £2,500 per week to sell thier gear....not! Actually, they don't even reply to my emails :-)
@@DavidThorpeMFT Hi David, I think guyo68 meant something different: that thanks to your reviews, He is convinced to buy gears :)
Sorry to say it doesn't have a motor in the lens like the little 14-42 compact zoom, so no. It would be a perfect video lens of it did, wouldn't it?
But, thanks to your question, I found out something new. I had been using my GH3 on manual focus and when I connected it to my iPad, noticed a new slider on the screen - for manual focus. It works on my Olympus 45mm too!
I can't see when I'd use it but nice to know - so thanks :-)
I have a GX1 and GH3. For the first time over the weekend I put my MK I 14-140 (my heaviest lens) on the GX1, and surprisingly it worked well and was a comfortable fit. I usually just use the 20mm with the GX1, but will use the 14-140 on it more. Still, I'd like to have the new version. Thanks for the comparisons.
Great review as usual David. BTW: I believe your review of the Lumix 12-35mm has me sold. Was going to get the Panasonic 25mm f1.4 Summilux Leica. Costs half as much and was really excited about the f1.4. But all things said and done looks like the 12-35mm covers more. Way more. Especially for video work. Thanks so much for that review also.
Thanks Richard. It's pretty well perfect for the use you describe. Not big enough to be an encumbrance and performing well enough that you are not getting a second best result. Plus covering almost as great a range of most sets of primes will. The compromise for people who don't like compromise :-)
Great review once again David. I had completely discounted this lens as a serious one to get. But now I'm reconsidering that view and may pick it up for my Lumix G6. Thank you.
Thanks for your video. Completely agree that it's a very exciting upgrade. Ordered it and eagerly waiting for mine to be delivered.
Thought that aside from weight, filter thread and aperture values, another major difference from the initial 14-140 mm was the motor element (like you have in the G X (lenses) so that the lens can be driven from a smartphone if the Pana body implements it (right now G6, GF6 and upcoming GX7). Right or wrong?
Soon, I hope. I'm really excited about this one.
Thanks for brilliant videos - M4/3 user since original G1, lots since then. Common interests - cycling (I ran the Folding Society, the folding bike web site for a number of years), iPads & other computer gear (been programming computers since 1967, using digital cameras since around 1993). Thanks again for your superb videos - I have a lot of catching up to do.
Mike
PS: Even what I assume are your across-the-road photos are quite similar to mine, though mercifully I don't have much traffic.
Excellent review David. I've been giving some thought to buying this lens for for general use on family vacations when I don't want to take all my primes.
Thanks David for this review, very thorough and with class.
Thank you, Richarrd. Glad you liked it.
David- I ended up buying this lens on the strength of your review and others and am very pleased to say the least. It is the perfect lens for me , reasonably priced and an all around range I need for a variety of video shooting situations. As you say, 'a kit lens par excellance.'
Richard Bock Good to hear, Richard and thanks for letting me know.
Awesome video David great work as usual!
Hi David Thanks for the great review,, as usual,,, can you please tell me what is the difference between the 14-140mm in this review, and the new 2019 kk 2 version ?
Thanks, Robert! The newer version has some weather sealing. Optically they are identical.
Yes, if you find the old one a bit heavy, the new one is a big improvement. And while the 12-35 is definitely sharper than the 14-140, there's little in it with the 35-100 I find. Though, of course you have the two extra stops of the f2.8 35-100. But if this 14-140 was the on ly lens I could have, I could live with that.
RIP David. I'm still telling ppl to stop down to F8 for best sharpness with this lens thanks to you :(
Thanks! On the lenses, if you have an Olympus camera body, I'd wait to see the Olympus offerings since they offer a greater zoom range and the lack of in lens stabilisation doesn't matter. If the performance is as good or better than the Panasonics and the price within reason then they'd be best.
For a Panasonic body I'd go for the Panasonic lenses regardless since they have the stabilisation. The e-m1, if you don't have any older 4/3 lenses I'd stick with an O-Md or GH3 for now.
Thank you once again for another top - class review.
Thanks Paul - glad you liked it.
i have the OM-D and the G6 and can say that both are brilliant cameras. the G6 14-140mm kit would certainly be the better buy if you're wanting to take pictures of everything. the OM-D shines with specialist lenses but lacks in the quality of displays and obviously the wifi.
It's at about 24mm that it shows f4. I'd hate to get rid of my 12-35 but I agree, if it is used mostly in the studio at f5.6 it doesn't earn its keep.
I have the old version the gray one and yes it's soft in the long end but DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw will fix that with their sharpening technology.
I am waiting to get mine in the mail. After having used the pan/leica 25mm f1.4, the oly 45mm f1.8 and the slr magic 12mm f1.6 I am excited to have a more versatile walking around or travel lens in my lineup. At first I was hesitant with the alleged quality drop from primes, but your video and the other examples I've seen are looking great, so even if there is a difference, it's small enough to make the whole framing versatility advantage win out in the end. I hope! Thanks David for all your excellent reviews.
Simon Jakobsson Thanks Simon. Naturally it won't have the extreme sharpness of your primes but it's a very sharp lens in its own right and by any standards. When I go through all my stuff in LightRoom, it's this lens (and the previous version) that has taken the majority of it.
Rest in peace friend!
Good morning! (Or at least it's morning in Texas). :-) Just wanted to ask you if you've ever compared the 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 to the 35-100mm f2.8 lens in low-light situations? I am torn as to whether to shell out the dough for the latter. I love the 14-140mm mk ii and have rarely noticed (maybe once!) the whirring noise, so that's not an issue. I heard you say that the newer 14-140mm stays in focus better at the long end than the first version and I'd believe it! It's a fantastic lens! Would you say that the ONLY difference between the newer version of the 14-140mm and the 35-100 f2.8 would be the increased light in low-light situations? I'm not sure I need the 35-100mm f2.8, but don't want to miss out on a great lens. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated since I can't find many comparisons of the two lenses online. Thanks, David! I hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
+Linda McMullin Hi Linda. The 35-100 f/2.8 is a good lens but it really is only worth buying if you need or feel you need the f/2.8 aperture. If you use the f/2.8 faster lens at the apertures available on the 14-140, the latter has similar sharpness in the centre - that is to say, excellent and generally better at the edges. As an all round one stop solution, I don't think the 14-140 has ever been surpassed.
Thanks, David! I hesitate to spend the $ for the 35-100mm f2.8, because it's so darn expensive. I may do it someday but not right now. Thanks, again!
This guy just sounds so convincing and professional. If he said that a window glass makes a great lens I'd trust him with my money :D
Jokes aside, really great lens and body reviews are to be found right on this man's channel.
Thanks you, much appreciated.
Nice review as always. Thanks David. Are you interested in the GX7? It may be the camera to finally replace my GF1.
sorely tempted to trade in 12-35 2.8 as that mostly gets used at 5.6 in the studio and f4 out and about. when does this new model stop down to f4? have the sigma 19 2.8, 14 2.5, 45 1.8 and the 25 1.4 if i need faster and the 7-14 if i need wider. would be nice to carry this super zoom, the 7-14 and the 25mm 1.4 as a holiday kit.
nice final comments David. I'm thinking about up grading from gx1 with pz 14-42 to gx8 with something like this.
+Brian Cullen If you do, you'll find just about every parameter except physical size a big improvement. I doubt that there is a better all round camera in photography than a GX8 with this lens. And the gear you have is no slouch, highly capable. The combined body/ lens stabilization is excellent and the focusing speed is astounding.
+David Thorpe cool rock on, thanks for the advice.
Mr. Thorpe,
Nice review. There are other reviewers of this lens that share your thoughts. I looked at Flikr and found good image quality. I Have an Olympus OM-D E-M5 and don't need the stabilization; however, I do like the weather sealing of the new Olympus M.Zuiko ED 14-150mm f/4-5.6 II. Have you had a chance to compare these two lenses and if so, what do you think? Also, DXO mark rates the sharpness' of the Panasonic a "5" and the Olympus a "4", which below that of the terrible 12-50mm. My other two lenses are the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and the Olympus 75mm f/1.8. What are your thoughts?
Hello David. I have a question, but first I'd like to mention how good your videos are. I have just bought the Panasonic lumix GX1, for reasons such as low cost/ lower weight/ I'm a beginner. I am wondering whether newer lenses such as the one in this video would not function as well as older lenses on the GX1? - Thanks.
Hi Reuben. Thanks for the kind words. Yes, this lens will function just as well on your GX1 as any other MFT camera, regardless of size or age.
Hi David brilliant video again, what panasonic camera would you invest in for video but to use for occasional stills. thank you Jeff
Thanks Jeff! For compactness and general ease of use, the GX9. Its normal main criticism is the EVF but for 16:9 it uses the whole screen area and is good. The EVF cropped for 4:3 which makes it appear smaller but for occasional use it's perfectly fine and the monitor is a good as any camera anyway. The G90 is nice but if you shoot 4K the sensor is a bit too cropped for my taste, making wide-angles less effective.
At the present discounted prices the G9 is a steal. It's the dearest Panasonic but a top notch camera for both video and stills.
Thanks again for a great test, I really enjoy every time you test cameras and lenses. Are you able to make a test of the Olympus 9-18mm.f.4-5.6, as I think it's an interesting lens for a better price than the Panasonic 7-14mm.f.4.
Many Greetings
jess
Mr.thorpe your reviews are what got me into mft. Thanks for all the good work you put into it! Now I would like to ask you about your thoughts on the new e-m1 and the constant f2.8 zooms that olympus are putting out now. I am conflicted if I should go to olympus for my zooms and have to wait a little or buy the panasonic ones now and move on. Thank you again!
Interested? I've ordered one! Thanks for the kind words, Paul. A neighbour of mine has a GF1 I advised him to buy quite a while ago. He comes over and sees whatever camera I am using at the time but the GF1 has hit a sweet spot for him and he's seen nothing he likes better for his particular use so far.
The GX7 might just pip it for him but it is a lot more expensive.
David- Really enjoy the video and find many of your videos very informative. Just thinking about getting into m4/3. My question is from a purely IQ standpoint, that is forgetting cost and convenience am I better off with the the 14-42 and 45-150 or 45-175 combo or the new 14-140. I would be getting the 14-42 as part of a kit as the 14-140 is not available in kit form here in the US. I'm leaning 14-140 but would appreciate your valued opinion
Thank you for your opinion! I think I will really go for the G6 14-140 kit. I am also a beginner and new to the m43 system, so I think the G6 will be more than sufficient with respect to IQ and the 14-140 as a starter and explorer lens. :D The OM-D's look and feel are just so amazing, that it won't jump out of my head! :P
Mr. Thorpe,
I made a mistake. The DXO Mark score for the Panasonic lens mentioned here is a "7" and the Olympus is a "4".
Hi, if you were to chose which kit lens is best for g85 being bundled with it, the 12-60mm or the 14-140mm?
I saw some bundles for sale online with the 14-140mm and I have no idea which one would be better for me as my all around lens If I were to buy my first camera.
Hi David, I have a bit of a dilemma - I am looking at this lens as a general all purpose lens but I shoot mainly video and have recently been eyeing up the Olympus M.Zuiko 12-40 f/2.8 for video instead, what lens do you think I should opt for?
Thanks in advance!
SGC If you have a Panasonic body it really is useful to have stabilization and I'd opt for the 14-140 whatever. But even if you have an Olympus body I'd opt for that too, personally. The 12-40 f/2.8 is a great lens but as an all rounder, the extra 100mm reach of the 14-140 makes it a better all purpose lens. For video, a couple of mm wider isn't crucial and the faster aperture is less important with the slower shutter speeds of video. In terms of IQ, the 12-40 is the better lens (as it ought to be) but in day to day use there's not enough difference to overcome the advantage of the super-zoom. Given the difference in price, you could buy the 14-140 _and_ Olympus 25 or 45 primes for interviewand shallow DoF stuff. In which case you get wider range zoom plus shallower DoF when you want it..
Great video, intriguing lens. Thanks
Would you go with this lens or the Olympus 12-200mm please?
Unequivocally, the 14-140. Thanks for the kind words. The Panasonic gives little away by having a wide focal range. It holds up very well at the 140 end which is unusual for such lenses.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thanks very much
very old video, but I am thinking about this lens or invest a little more for the 12 - 60 2.8
I had the 12-60 and a very nice lens too. It's not as good as an 'all in one' solution, though because of the restricted long end. I took just the 12-60 on a trip to Paris and found myself constantly wishing I'd brought the 14-140 instead. Having said that, I am particularly fond of long lens perspectives. For myself, given the choice it is the 14-140. With the money saved, a fast prime like the 25mm f/1.7 could be added to the mix.
Just watch this. Thanks. Would like to kmow does it work with olympus including the stabilisation feature?
I'm told the OIS does not work with the Olys. But, if you have IBIS, you're good to go anyway. Mr. Thorpe is no longer with us , sadly.
I love ur humour, about the little black dress in the drawer, hahahahahhahahhahaa
:-)
@@DavidThorpeMFT I won't add another comment, but I will agree wholeheartedly. I wonder if my colour-loving wife has a black dress, let alone a little one. No, just checked, she does not! :-o Joke ruined! :-(
Thanks for the head-up. It was announced in January and I read a few rumours but still not available. Strange. I wonder how the price will compare to the Panasonic and Olympus equivalents if and when it surfaces?
Hi David. I am completely new to photography and plan to film 4K video of nature, up close of insects, zoom for birds, etc and wide angle for mountains, rivers, lakes oceans, etc. Then there will be times I will want to do low light, like a campfire, sunrise or sunset. I just purchased the GH4 and the new 14-140mm f3.5 to f5.6 lense.
I was curious if you had any suggestions for me? What other lenses should I get? I keep seeing that the Metabones speed booster and the Nikon lenses might be the way to go for low light.
+David B. Mathis Hi David - the 14-140 will do a lot of what you need but not the high speed camp fire light, possibly. However, with a highish ISO settings it might do that perfectly well. Certainly with sunrises and sunsets it is easily capable. With landscapes, I find longer lenses good as much as wide angle since often a detail of a scene can tell you more than trying to get everything in, which tends to diminish the scale of a scene. You see a lot of ultra wide angle landscapes with a large object in the foreground. In general, a 14mm should be wide enough for most landscapes.
For close-ups of insects, you really need a dedicated macro lens. In my opinion the Olympus 60mm is the best available for Micro Four Thirds. Macro is not easy with movie, though because it is so hard to keep the subject i focus. Birds, that is very specialized and requires a long lens. The Metabones and Nikkor lenses is good but remember that you have no automatic functions and the combination will be very hard to use. You can have auto functions with some Canon lenses but again, I'd stay with native Micro Four Thirds lenses if I could. Plus, the extreme aperture speed you can get with Metabones isn't necessary for day to day work.
Probably the new Panasonic 100-400mm would be suitable or the 300mm f/4 with 1.4x converter. This is big money, though. My overall suggestion would be that the only lens you _need_ is the macro, assuming that the close focus of the 14-140 won't do. I would then do my best to do all the other things with the 14-140 and note what it cannot do to your satisfaction. But don't assume that if you can't do something, it needs more equipment. The 14-140 is a highly versatile lens and getting the best out of it can take some learning. Which is the fun of it all, of course!
Wow. I really like the phrases you use.
So between this one and the 35-100 2.8 which one you recommend regarding sharpness. I don't shoot in low light much.
Thanks Ahmed! The 35-100 has better central sharpness but the 14-140 is much better at the edges. Overall, in day to day use, you won't see much difference. The 35-100 only makes sense if you intend to use it at f/2.8 a lot. Otherwise the 14-140 is much more versatile - for many photographers the only lens they need and it sounds your best bet to me.
Hi David, this looks like a great travel lens. Do you know what the maximum aperture is at 40mm?
Seong Oh Yes, a great travel lens. Max aperture at 40mm is f/4.7.
Great review. One question. How are you sending video from your GH3 to the ipad. That looks so seamless. Thanks for your work.
never mind just found your video on how to do it (:
Thanks Benjamin.One thing to add is that the GX7 and GM1 have updated WiFi and you can monitor and control video live through them. It's also even easier to connect and you can manually focus the lenses. I'll be uploading a video onhwo ot works with the GM1 in a day or so.
David Thorpe Fantastic. I bet you are excited to get your hands on the GH4 (:
Nice video David. I have the old one and it is fine except weight compared to my Tamron 18-200 for my NEX7. So I think you sold me on an upgrade. Waiting on my GX7 and the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 - will get lens before camera so will use on my OMD-5 and GX1.
The primes are super nice like my 20mm 1.7 but an all-around to me is a must. Will be ordering 12-35 f2.8 shortly. Not sure if Olympus 14-150 is as good but it is light but IQ maybe not as good.
Thx for the great video. My question is: Just got the Gh2 for video shooting only and looking to buy the 14-140mm lens but do u suggest for video I get the old or new version? Many Regards
M Pess Thanks for the kind words. I'd go for the new version because it is generally all round a bit better. As I said in the video, I wouldn't bother to upogarde to the new one if I had the older one but given the lighter weight and slighly faster aperture of the new one I'd opt for that. On the other hand, if I saw the old one at a really good price that enabled me to buy that _and_ the Olympus 45mm f1.8 for shallow depth of field video, I'd do that.
David Thorpe
Last questions please: Is that first or second Generation:
www.bestbuy.com/site/panasonic-lumix-g-x-vario-14-140mm-f-4-0-5-8-ois-zoom-lens-for-g-series-cameras-w-3-uv-cpl-nd8-filters-tripod/1311722278.p?id=mp1311722278&skuId=1311722278
M Pess That's the original one. That one is f4-f5.8, the newer one is f3.5-f.56.
Hi David
Do you think it is worth to replace the 35-100 mm to the 14-140mm?
thanks Robert
Hi David, thank you for your review. Shortly I bought a GH5 with the 14-140 lens, latest version. I noticed that I when pull zoom very fast in video mode, AF drops out and needs a lot time to get in focus. Do I have a problem? Please your reaction
No, it's fact of life, I'm afraid. A panfocal lens will hold its focus as it is zoomed and so is ideal for video but comes in at much, much higher prices. For stills panfocus really doesn't matter since refocusing is so fast. The only thing you can do in video is zoom at a pace that the autofocus can cope with or stop and start a new sequence each time you alter focal length. I don't think there are any panfocal zooms for stills.
Very interesting video this and you have answered a question I have had for ages. Being new the the mft market I bought a used GF3 with a 14-42mm lens and love it, I was considering adding a longer zoom lens but your video has made my mind up not to, so I thank you for that. My reason for getting the GF3 was size nothing more and when fitted with a bigger lens I might as well use my bridge camera which aint going to weigh much more and will give as good results.
The Micro Four Thirds body will give better results than a bridge camera simply because of the bigger sensor. Whether that 'better' result will be perceivable depends on the use to which the image is put. If nothing radical is being done with the image, then the logic of your argument is flawless. I apply the same logic to the use of a FF or Micro Four Thirds camera. There's a differnce but does it matter?
In a head to head the 4 thirds would win esp in low light and my bridge camera is getting on a fair bit now too, but yes love my little Panny she aint doing so bad so far, time will tell but so far so good. All the best.
I tried two in a store and they were kinda stiff when zooming, I couldn't zoom very smoothly. Do you think this normal? Or is it a problem? I'm thinking it could be bad for video
Mine is nicely smooth on zooming and has been from day one. It doesn't require much effort at all. Stiff zooming would be very awkward for video. I'd say there is something wrong. My 100-400 had very stiff zooming, too.
Yours looked stiff & slightly jerky in your video, though, even as you said the words "silky smooth."
I have a used one on my also used GX8. It's a bit stiff, perhaps due to plastic-on-plastic bearings. But my clamped-on focus lever makes it acceptable for video. For stills, it's not an issue.
Hi David,
I was planning to get the new 35-100mm for an upcoming vacation, but now after watching this video, I'm not sure which would be better? My current lenses are 20mm, 12-32mm, 45-150mm, 7-14mm and the olympus 60mm macro. I shoot mainly landscape and street photography, but really take pictures of anything I see, haha.. My plan is to bring 2-3 lenses, most likely the 20mm and 7-14, plus something with a little more reach.. The closest I have for that would be the 45-150mm, but I don't find myself using that lens much... I was planning on the 35-100 because I figured it would mate well with the 12-32.
voms vom The little 35-100 is perfect for travel. It and the 12-32 zoom are both sharp and tiny. On the other hand, the 14-140 is a real do it all lens and has the advantage of no lens changing (I dislike changing lenses in dusty or sandy places) and the extra reach. I could go either way but if you don't mind the extra bulk (by MFT standards!) I'd take the 7-14 and a 14-140. That's a comprehensive outfit and if you like to take pictures of anything, as you say, that combo with the xtra reach really will cover about anything.
Hi David, I'm using GM5 with 12-32mm lens and is considering a multi-purpose lens. Would it be overkill to fit 14-140mm on my GM5? Thanks
Hi - the 35-100 companion to the 12-32 would be ideal but would involve lens changing which I presume you want to avoid. There is a size mismatch visually I suppose but in terms of usage, no problem with the 14-140. I use it on my GM1 sometimes without a thought. Be aware that the lens juts out a few mm under the camera body so if you put it down on a flat surface the outfit rests on the lens body, so you can't use a table top as a support.
thanks for your feedback with this intuitive video.
with panasonic and the micro 4/3 mount, what are your thoughts of the olympus lens? some olympus lens seem to be faster and a reasonable price, but the olympus doesn't seem friendly with lack of compatability with the auto focus features in most modern panasonics.
would appreciate any insight you can share.
ric m Leaving aside that Olympus lenses won't be stabilized on a Panasonic body (except the GX7), in other respects they'll work just as well, one on another. I have a video about it here: th-cam.com/video/QTlEXzIAAvQ/w-d-xo.html
The GH4's Depth from Defocus focusing aid won't operate but I don't find that any great loss. Basically, I'd buy the lens I wanted whatever the make.
ric m I use Panasonic & Olympus lenses on my Panasonic G6, both of which work perfectly. The Olympus 60mm macro is great as is the 45mm f1.8-super sharp and delicious bokeh. Of course, no stabilisation when using the Oly lenses on Panasonic bodies as David said-oh, unless you buy the brand new Panasonic GX8 which has Duel IS-winner!
Steve Ferneyhough It'll be interesting to see how well the dual stabilization works. Particularly important will be the in body stabilization because if that is as effective as Olympus's the GX8 could be a winner.
David Thorpe but for what i know even in gx8 the inbody stabilization won't work during video, and if that's true, well it's a shame
Tecnovlog From what I've read so far it's not that different from the GX7 stabilization. Olympus seem to be progressing faster than Panasonic with stabilization and video. But they don't do 4k, of course which may or may not be important.
Hi.. Based on some youtube review on panasonic G7, am very pleased with it and planning to buy, request you to give your opinion on the same, my usage predominantly 60% video and rest images. And if you are recommending G7, should i go with the kit lens 14-42 or 14-140, please guide...Thanks
+Ivar Rain Hi Ivar - If you can, go with the 14-140, It is bigger and more expensive but ideal for video to save lens changing. For stills, there is little compromise in sharpness and it is better than the kit zoom. A good friend who wanted to get into photography and video asked me recently what he should buy and my advice was a G7 and this lens.
Thanks David....Which is the sharpest lens for the video, if i plan to go for G7..
+Ivar Rain The sharpest is probably the 12-35mm f/2.8 but for ultimate sharpness you need the primes, 15, 25 and 42.5mm f/1.7s, for example.
If I get this for the om-d em-10 mark ii, what would be better, using the lens' OIS or the camera's IBIS?
They'd be pretty similar but I'd use the Olympus's for preference.
I see that one version of this lens says "HD" in red on it. They're both the f/3.5-5.6 version (Not the 4.5-5.8).
What's the difference between them?
For reference, here are the links on amazon:
www.amazon.com/Panasonic-H-FS14140AK-14-140mm-F3-5-5-6-O-I-S/dp/B0153WGIW8/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1464725957&sr=8-4&keywords=panasonic+14-140
vs
www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Lumix-Vario-14-140mm-3-5-5-6/dp/B00CFCTH14/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1464725957&sr=8-3&keywords=panasonic+14-140
You've got me there, Tony. No-one seems to know. Whatever, it is certainly cosmetic because all the lens have the same stabilization and optical construction.
Thanks David. For anyone reading this, I've asked about the 2 different yet same spec lenses on dpreview.com:
www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57852613
The main idea is that Panasonic simply did a paint job, dropped the red "HD" logo, probably since the lens can be used to record 4K, not just HD.
That sounds like it. Panasonic wouldn't redesign the optics or mechanics of a lens without giving it a different lens part number. Nothing like confusing customers, eh? :-) I have the 'older' newer one with HD on it.
Another great review. Makes me want to buy it.
Hello, how are the two 14-140 lens differentiated, one is new and one is older....? What is the newer and older one called exactly?
+Carl H The easiest way to tell is that the newer one is f/3.5 ~ f/5.6 and the older one f/4 ~ f/5.8. They are both optically excellent.
thank you, David... all your videos are really excellent.
As always very down to earth and informative. I had the old lens and loved its versatility and am trying to decide between this and the Oly 14-150 mk11
Any Thoughts...its for a old e-5 mk11
Thanks
Thanks Philip - I prefer the Panasonic 14-140 overall because its edge to edge performance is better. But if there is a big difference in price, there's nothing wrong with the Olympus. That E-M5ll can't be that old :-)