Panasonic 14mm vs 14-45mm

N

nighstar

eternal beginner
Local time
7:32 AM
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
484
i'm in desperate need of opinions!

i just bought an E-PL1 converted to full spectrum infrared thinking that i would use it with the Panasonic 14-140mm that i already have. i bought some (not cheap) 62mm red/infrared filters to use on the lens.

3 days later the camera has arrived while the filters are still in the mail. being ever impatient, i decided to test out the camera hand-holding a 77mm IR filter that i already have in front of the lens and to my horror i've discovered that the lens suffers from horrible hotspots....

le sigh.

so now i'm looking for a cheap (because i've already blown too much money!) wide-angle, hotspot-less lens. having now done the research that i should have done earlier, it seems the 14mm prime and 14-45mm zoom are my best options.

my current thoughts are:

  • i've already ordered 62mm filters and the 14mm = a 46mm filter; 14-45mm = a 52mm filter
  • prime lenses are awesome and i already own the Panny 20mm + a prime would make the E-PL1-IR an even more likely companion for my much bigger 5D Mark III
  • on the other hand, the zoom would give me more options + a 52mm -> 62mm step up ring would be less of a jump and less prone to flare??

but i'm still undecided.... if anyone has any experience with these two lenses (whether related to IR or not), i'd much appreciate hearing them! for example, is the 14-45mm @14mm just as capable as the 14mm prime...? do you generally find yourself reaching for the prime over the zoom...? etc

thanks in advance. :)
 
I used the zoom on a trip a couple of years ago and was happy with the convenience. But now viewing the photos on the new iPad with that fantastic screen, I see that photos taken with my Nikon p7000 are much crisper than a GF1 plus 14-45 zoom.

I have the Panny 14mm but haven't really used it enough to compare. It did only cost $160 though.
 
I just got the PL-1 as well, but the seller didn't include the charger with
the camera, (it should be coming today) I'll take some shots today and let
you know how the Olympus is.

Range
 
Thardy said:
I used the zoom on a trip a couple of years ago and was happy with the convenience. But now viewing the photos on the new iPad with that fantastic screen, I see that photos taken with my Nikon p7000 are much crisper than a GF1 plus 14-45 zoom.

I have the Panny 14mm but haven't really used it enough to compare. It did only cost $160 though.
Click to expand...

He's asking about IR performance and lack of hotspots in IR images.
 
nighstar said:
i'm in desperate need of opinions!

i just bought an E-PL1 converted to full spectrum infrared thinking that i would use it with the Panasonic 14-140mm that i already have. i bought some (not cheap) 62mm red/infrared filters to use on the lens.

3 days later the camera has arrived while the filters are still in the mail. being ever impatient, i decided to test out the camera hand-holding a 77mm IR filter that i already have in front of the lens and to my horror i've discovered that the lens suffers from horrible hotspots....

le sigh.

so now i'm looking for a cheap (because i've already blown too much money!) wide-angle, hotspot-less lens. having now done the research that i should have done earlier, it seems the 14mm prime and 14-45mm zoom are my best options.

my current thoughts are:

  • i've already ordered 62mm filters and the 14mm = a 46mm filter; 14-45mm = a 52mm filter
  • prime lenses are awesome and i already own the Panny 20mm + a prime would make the E-PL1-IR an even more likely companion for my much bigger 5D Mark III
  • on the other hand, the zoom would give me more options + a 52mm -> 62mm step up ring would be less of a jump and less prone to flare??

but i'm still undecided.... if anyone has any experience with these two lenses (whether related to IR or not), i'd much appreciate hearing them! for example, is the 14-45mm @14mm just as capable as the 14mm prime...? do you generally find yourself reaching for the prime over the zoom...? etc

thanks in advance. :)
Click to expand...

I can't help you with the question but i'am curious where you got the converted camera from and what was the final cost.
 
I have both and prefer the 14mm prime as it makes for a nice compact package. While the 14-45 is quite sharp, I enjoyed using it, I always reach for the 14mm prime. It is a great performer.
 
stompyq said:
He's asking about IR performance and lack of hotspots in IR images.
Click to expand...

i already know that both of these lenses work well for IR, so i'm really just looking for general experiences with the lenses, whether for IR or not.

also SHE, not he. ;)

stompyq said:
I can't help you with the question but i'am curious where you got the converted camera from and what was the final cost.
Click to expand...

i bought mine off eBay & it was converted by the seller (not professionally). total cost: $250 AUD + shipping, which is pretty cheap.

there are many places who will professionally convert cameras, such as http://www.lifepixel.com . they also have tutorials for DIY conversions.

@raid

SHE! and that was in another thread. ;)
 
nighstar said:
i'm in desperate need of opinions!

i just bought an E-PL1 converted to full spectrum infrared thinking that i would use it with the Panasonic 14-140mm that i already have. i bought some (not cheap) 62mm red/infrared filters to use on the lens. 3 days later the camera has arrived while the filters are still in the mail. being ever impatient, i decided to test out the camera hand-holding a 77mm IR filter that i already have in front of the lens and to my horror i've discovered that the lens suffers from horrible hotspots....

my current thoughts are:

  • i've already ordered 62mm filters and the 14mm = a 46mm filter; 14-45mm = a 52mm filter
  • prime lenses are awesome and i already own the Panny 20mm + a prime would make the E-PL1-IR an even more likely companion for my much bigger 5D Mark III
  • on the other hand, the zoom would give me more options + a 52mm -> 62mm step up ring would be less of a jump and less prone to flare??
Click to expand...
Answering your three points.
You can send the 62mm filters back and exchange for 46mm, I would think.
The 14mm and the E-PL1 make the most portable camera outside of a p&s so that makes a lot of sense. I have the 14 and it is a sharp lens, not quite up to the standard of the 20mm. Never had the 14-45 but have read that it too is very good, though bulky.
Step up rings--yet more bulk? Is the 14mm prone to flare? Not in my experience. handles stark light well.
 
traveler_101 said:
Answering your three points.
You can send the 62mm filters back and exchange for 46mm, I would think.
The 14mm and the E-PL1 make the most portable camera outside of a p&s so that makes a lot of sense. I have the 14 and it is a sharp lens, not quite up to the standard of the 20mm. Never had the 14-45 but have read that it too is very good, though bulky.
Step up rings--yet more bulk? Is the 14mm prone to flare? Not in my experience. handles stark light well.
Click to expand...

i bought the 62mm filters used from a seller on eBay who may not accept returns if the item is not faulty in some way.... i guess i should confirm this, though.

thanks a lot to you and to everyone who has shared their experiences with the lenses thus far. you've been a big help. :)
 
nighstar said:
i already know that both of these lenses work well for IR, so i'm really just looking for general experiences with the lenses, whether for IR or not.

also SHE, not he. ;)



i bought mine off eBay & it was converted by the seller (not professionally). total cost: $250 AUD + shipping, which is pretty cheap.

there are many places who will professionally convert cameras, such as http://www.lifepixel.com . they also have tutorials for DIY conversions.

@raid

SHE! and that was in another thread. ;)
Click to expand...


Haha. Sorry my bad. Thanks for correcting my attempted correction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom