Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens tested at SLRgear.

Share

SLRgear published their Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 test. The lens is very sharp, Chromatic Aberration is somewhat high for this lens, Vignetting and Distortion are negligible. And their conclusion is very short: “With sharp results and only slight issues with CA, Panasonic has produced a very nice walk-around lens “. Read the full review (with image samples and graphs) at SLRgear.

M43photo.blogspot compared the Panasonic 20mm with the new 14mm lens.

Check the price and availabiltiy of the lens:
USA: Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, eBay
Germany: Amazon.de, Pixmania.de, eBay.de
France: Amazon.fr, Pixmania.fr, eBay.fr
UK: Amazon.uk, Pixmania.uk, eBay.uk

Share
  • There appears to be a “rumor” on various Internet forums that this lens is bad. I think that is just plain wrong. While the edge sharpness could have been better from f/2.5, I think the optical qualities of the lens are just fine.

  • Greg

    This lens is not sharp come on! I have it. It is ok, but it is SOFT !

  • Brod1er

    Which is it- tacksharp or soft? It cant be both Or is there an issue with some samples only??

  • Ulli

    I think lab tests claim it to be average, while in real world, at least mine and photos i have see on from other owners, sharpness is good, even wide open.

  • KjKe

    I have the lens and my copy is not quite as sharp as my 20/1.7, which is spectacular. By any other standard it is very good indeed.
    Over the years I have noticed that sample variation is much larger between wide angle primes than between primes of other focal lengths. Copies of Canon’s professional wide angles are e.g. known to vary in performance between stellar and useless.

  • AP_web

    I have the 14mm and 20mm. It’s not as sharp as the 20mm but it’s very compact and saves me from switching lens so often(20mm to 9-18mm). I also have the black version which looks so sexy on the e-p2.

  • yep, I like mine, some CA but you have to be at 100% to see it. Its a disappointment in that regard only. The benefit in size and handling far outweigh this though. Its a good buy, but I think the price isn’t right (for any of the m43 lenses).

    The 20 is certainly better. And both Pan 14 + 20 are better than the Oly 17.

  • m.arc

    When having the Pana 20 mm f1.7 is there any reason to go for this as well?

    • if you like your kit zoom 14-42 or whatever … then have the 20/1.7 as a small lens option (and of course a fast aperture) then possibly not

      but if you don’t like zooms: 14 + 20 is sweet (add the 17mm if you are silly)

    • Gino

      $400 is little much for not so wide, not so fast, not so sharp lens. I will keep my money either for fast zoom or for 50mm lens from Olympus.

      • its really really small:
        http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcapfoto/5357344499/

        makes the PEN = jacket pocket size with any of the pancake lenses

        I think the rumor we are waiting for is Olyumpus 3x new pancakes, so a 12mm should be present soon (but for small it might be f2.8) + a new standard to replace the 17 (just guessing) and a portrait lens (40mm?)

        • Gino

          Completely agree that 14mm prime is very small lens. But it doesn’t make much difference in size/weight for me when attached to my EP2. May be for owners of GF2 this lens have more sense.

          • compared to the 17 or 20 prime, the 14mm is just ‘small’ … but compared to a 14-42 or 14-45 kit its tiny tiny and if your only 14mm lens is currently part of a 14-42, 14-45, or 14-140 then the prime is a good idea. But only if you want super portability. I can pop my E-P1 + 14 into my work bag and also my 20/1.7 and have very little space taken up and a great deal of shooting options. Personally I’m not a kit zoom fan, so yes I could have kit zoom + 20/1.7 instead, but I voted for the pancakes. And I’m waiting eagerly for the Oly 12/18/40 (if I say it often enough it’ll come true, or I’ll get kicked out of here)

  • I think the Lumix 20mm lens is a must have lens. For indoor photography without a flash, for example. Unless you specifically dislike non-zoom lenses.

    The Lumix 14mm lens, on the other hand, is not a must have lens in the same way. It’s for people who like using a wide angle prime (obviously), and for whom compactness is important. If not, just use the kit lens at 14mm. The difference in aperture, f/2.5 vs f/3.5 is not that large.

    Let me say, again, that I disagree with those who say that this lens is optically bad. Unless you’re making huge prints, or looking at 100% pixel level, then I doubt the optical quality is an issue for you.

    http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2010/11/panasonic-lumix-g-14mm-f25.html

  • frank

    I think the 14mm is no wide enough for a wide and not fast enough for a prime. I bet it is good, it is just nor for me. I will buy a 12/2.0 instantly though as 12 (or 24 in 35mm) is where the real wide angle begins. I have never used my 28mm (in fullframe) lenses much so the 14mm m4/3 doesn’t interest me. I’ll wait for the 12-55/2.5 to arrive! And use my 20/1.7…

    • I totally agree.

      • katy

        I received my 14mm yesterday with the GF2.
        so far I’ve found it to be VERY sharp and quick to focus with both the GF1 & GF2!

        Maybe the lack of sharpness is when it is used with the Olympus EPLs?

        • George

          maybe u really didn’t use a sharp lens before ?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close