The Panasonic 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 Zoom Lens for Micro Four Thirds, MFT Cameras

[@carlashcroft6652]

Such a joy to hear his voice again. RIP David.

[@patrysscaron]

I miss your reviews David. 😪RIP.

[@gatto190]

"...A bit tighta and a bit shorta!" Yes! You are the man, David!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

:-)

[@Merjia]

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.

[@thegreatvanziniphotos5976]

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.

[@mindykateashley]

" 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 :)

[@312SES]

Miss you, Sir! Thanks for all your correspondence. I wish I could have met you.

[@ernreeders1487]

You have a great gift for communicating. The visuals support a clear narrative. Metaphors like the little black skirt capture an essential point.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@emilnilsson7991]

David Thorpe

[@rymdskrotet]

Oerhört saknad.

[@fucq67]

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!

[@Hrochnick]

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...

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@Hrochnick]

@@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!

[@cory9437]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@larbueno]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Wow, thanks Larry!

[@1arjen8]

You're my primary source for all MFT purchases. Thank you, David.

[@davidthorpe7732]

Great to hear that, Arjen - thank you!

[@GAUROCH2]

I miss you David...

[@tonypowers123]

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!

[@XHItube]

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!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@hedydd2]

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.

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

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.

[@davidthorpe7732]

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.

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

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!

[@davidthorpe7732]

Patrick Fitzgerald It's very special, black and white makes you see differently. I love it.

[@olafreinhardweyer]

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.

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

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.

[@guyo68]

You've been costing me too much in Panasonic gear lately, Mr. Thorpe. Reviews much appreciated, though. Thanks!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Haha! Of course, Panasonic pay me £2,500 per week to sell thier gear....not! Actually, they don't even reply to my emails :-)

[@alexm.6549]

@@DavidThorpeMFT Hi David, I think guyo68 meant something different: that thanks to your reviews, He is convinced to buy gears :)

[@sess5206]

Miss you, Dave.

[@danbei2232]

10 years ago and I still want to buy this lens!

[@paultaylor5513]

Yes, I've pre-ordered one too David. I'm not sure when it will be actually available though.

[@melvindada]

Thanks David for this review, very thorough and with class.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Thank you, Richarrd. Glad you liked it.

[@melvindada]

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.'

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Richard Bock Good to hear, Richard and thanks for letting me know.

[@oversteptheMark]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@artistjoh]

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.

[@simon_jakobsson]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@anibalibanezrisso6248]

Thank you for another great review. I'm considering buy this lens for traveling purposes.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@carlycruise]

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

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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 :-)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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 :-)

[@baze3SC]

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.

[@MrCharlesTuna]

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.

[@FrederickHagan]

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.

[@OttoVonRaz]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@JohnPaquette]

Great review. You are the master of the B-roll-only pre-scripted review. Great writing!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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!

[@wormburner37]

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.

[@edshotsdotcodotuk]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Soon, I hope. I'm really excited about this one.

[@cyvan1750]

RIP David. I'm still telling ppl to stop down to F8 for best sharpness with this lens thanks to you :(

[@RichardEllaPhotography]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@REP96st]

I always look forward to your reviews...Great job as usual. Thanks!

[@paulstevenson200]

Thank you once again for another top - class review.

[@davidthorpe7732]

Thanks Paul - glad you liked it.

[@nikobizarr5652]

Another excellent review David. I think this lens might be exactly what my EM-5 needs.

[@datapro007]

The Olympus 12-200mm is almost here. I'm hoping David reviews it. I bought my 14-140mm v2 several years ago for under $400. The 12-200 is listed by B&H for $900. Doesn't look like I'll change lenses.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

I'm hoping to buy one for review - be interesting to compare it with the 14-140. Wide range zooms tend to be at their worst performance at the longest end of their range but the 14-140 holds up very well. I wonder if the 12-200 will?

[@gamingwithstand6886]

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.

[@mikehessey]

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.

[@BillBooz]

Great, honest review, David. Especially like the “little black dress” analogy! 😀 The announcement about Olympus’ new Pro lens, the 12-200mm, which I’m considering buying when it’s released next month (March 2019) has prompted me to explore alternatives and this Panasonic popped onto my radar. I’m interested in a versatile travel lens. I now typically travel with my E-M5 II, the Pro 12-40mm, and the tiny Panasonic 35-100mm, f/4-5.6. The new Olympus would add 60mm of reach and is weather sealed, but slower compared to this Panasonic lens. Plus, it has no OIS. What do you think? Also, how does one distinguish the older version from this newer model?

[@BillBooz]

See aperture range is f/3.5-5.6 on newer version, David, vs f/4-5.8 on older version.

[@BillBooz]

David Thorpe, thank you for reply! For my needs and how I find I use lenses when I travel (I might take three extra lenses but, typically, I find I never take off my 12-40mm anyway!), the Panasonic 14-140mm is looking better and better. Plus, I recently purchased a used Panasonic GX85 so having the IS in lens would be useful. I think you just saved me $400! Cheers!

[@JeanV1986]

I really enjoy your reviews: informative, concise and comprehensive! Quite a feat, actually! Keep on the good work. And thank you, too :)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@westwoodcreative]

David - I am about to embark on my first Panasonic G6 / 4/3 camera body and wanted help on which lens to get for it - your narration is wonderful and the remark about the upgrade comparing to the little black dress made me audibly laugh out loud - great videos bud.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

westwoodcreative Thanks! Actually, the 14-42mm kit zoom which comes with the G6 seems a very good lens and I'd probably go with that since the kits are always a bargain price, maybe looking to buy some other lenses later on. If we are talking of one lens only, I would be happy with the new 14-140 zoom you've just looked at and maybe a dealer would give a good price on that if bought with the G6 body. It's bigger but it covers every normally used focal length and as I say in the video could well be all many photographers would ever need. What I've done sometimes is buy with the kit lens and sell that on eBay, using the money towards the lens I wanted. The G6 with either of those lenses will be a joy to use.

[@biscuitsalive]

Great review. I just did some tests with this lens for video. (Unfairly comparing it to the 70-200 2.8 canon lens) Found its great. But Image stabilization suffers greatly in video use)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

biscuitsalive In what way suffers? I use it for video but my video knowledge is pretty basic so it seems OK to me.

[@biscuitsalive]

If you have a glance at my 2nd most recent video. It kind of showed up the IS as very twitchy for video. I still think it's a good lens. And I was unfairly comparing it to a lens that is twice the price and 3times the weight. But as far as my lens collection goes they were the nearest in length I have.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

biscuitsalive I suppose the test is unfair but that stabilization glitch shouldn't be there regardless of that. It seems to actually ruin the video. I've used it almost exclusively on a tripod with stabilization turned off or in a dimly lit blues club hand held where judder like that wouldnt be noticeable if present.

[@biscuitsalive]

+Peter Seo as I explained in my test. Normally you are completely correct. But it was blowing 30+ kts and even with a heavy tripod my camera was shaking lots. So it would have been worse with no IS.

[@biscuitsalive]

+Peter Seo have a look on my channel for those tests. Not the best test I could have done. But both cameras were bolted together for as fair comparison asi could do on the day.

[@EnidAgnusDei]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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?

[@EnidAgnusDei]

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.

[@nolejd50]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Thanks you, much appreciated.

[@r.l.7160]

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".

[@igetsmart]

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.

[@subliminallyinc]

Rest in peace friend!

[@smalltalk.productions9977]

thinking of adding this lens to my g7 kit for a safari to tanzania. i wonder if 280mm is long enough to capture images of giraffes, elephants and zebras. was going to use the 14-140mm as my do-it-all especially because low light should not be an issue with all of that sun. i was going to use the panasonic 25mm/1.8 as my other lens for low light portraits. thank you for your effort and your sharing. thumbs up.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Thanks for the kind words. Your choices are pretty ideal, I'd say. In the dusty conditions you are likely to encounter out in the field, lens changing is best avoided and you'll almost certainly want shots of the safari vehicle in situ and various things like termite hills which would necessitate a lens change with a 100-300 or 100-400. Also, the safari people will get you pretty close to most of the animals so the 140mm end should be plenty. There will always be exceptions but all bases can't be covered whatever you take. Plus, if you display your pix on a tablet, say, you can crop in to 2048px or so with no quality loss (on the tab), effectively giving you a 280mm.

[@618Fishing]

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!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

+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.

[@damancandance1]

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

[@soundknight]

nice final comments David. I'm thinking about up grading from gx1 with pz 14-42 to gx8 with something like this.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

+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.

[@soundknight]

+David Thorpe cool rock on, thanks for the advice.

[@XHItube]

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

[@SethLadd]

Thanks for confirming. Enjoy the lens!

[@davidlisney2597]

I have the "newer" one, I am just a hobbyist but also find that this lense pretty well lives on my GX8. It has taken me a long time to find this review although I have watched many of your other videos. With such a wide range of focal length I thought this lense would be severely compromised but it exceeds my expectations. Another plus is that it supports dual OIS with the GX8.

[@davidthorpe7732]

I second all of that, David. Little compromise evident at all.

[@davidlisney2597]

Thank you for the reply David, I always felt a bit of a social leper amongst photographers for using a zoom lense. I feel a little vindicated now!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

When I started out on my apprenticeship on a local newspaper, the chief photographer told me never to be bothered about what people thought when I was taking a picture. He said that the picture would still be on their mantelpiece long after they'd forgotten who took it.

[@mariejojones]

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?

[@JessDemant]

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

[@r.l.7160]

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?

[@farouklens]

Awesome video David great work as usual!

[@robertlennon6923]

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 ?

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Thanks, Robert! The newer version has some weather sealing. Optically they are identical.

[@corrbox2]

Interesting review. I am considerinhg this lens. Thank you for your advise and help. :)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Glad it was helpful!

[@superhashi]

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!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

It's a tough call between the Olympus and Panasonic superzooms, both excellent lenses of their type. If I had an OM-D I'd probably buy the Olympus, why pay for lens IS that you won't need? And the GX7 will have it too. The Panasonic is £70 more but I'd probably make my personal decision on the feel of the lenses in which case the Panasonic comes out better in my view. Plus, you pay extra for a lens hood with the Olympus! Either way, you have a very, very versatile and good performing lens.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

They are very different lenses but if I were to have one or the other it would be the 14-140. For me, the extra zoom range would more often be useful than the extra speed of the 35-100. Quality wise, as far as I could make out, no practical difference.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

***** 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.

[@YourTrulyFriend]

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! :)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ooSVcmmufZeAfNk The super zoom reviewed here is a good example of the advantages of the format, in fact

[@YourTrulyFriend]

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. :)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@koolkutz7]

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.

[@colintclai]

Another great review. Makes me want to buy it.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

You're welcome, thanks John

[@paultaylor5513]

Nice review as always. Thanks David. Are you interested in the GX7? It may be the camera to finally replace my GF1.

[@ChrisWilliams-rc9ic]

I got this lens in a kit with the G6 [as a stop gap to go away with prior to (I thought)] getting the GX7... then the EM1 was announced. Anyway, even though the G6 will be replaced as my mainstay shooter, I'll certainly be holding onto this lens. I've had 'superzoom' lenses [for APSc] in the past and thought all the compromises were just something you had to live with for the convenience of all that focal length in one optic. None where nearly as small as this lens - and nowhere near as good!

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Thanks Colin.

[@fucq67]

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.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@sweeperdave1]

Damn, I miss David Thorpe.

[@Pieee7]

I'm not really into zooms (i don't mind missing a shot or two - and i'm on a budget) but your videos are awesome and this seems like another very nice lens for micro4/3.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

I agree with edshots's advice.

[@Darbkin]

I'm looking at using this lens on the new Panasonic Lumix GX7 for creating my GigaPan panoramas.

[@deane9050]

Hi David brilliant video again, what panasonic camera would you invest in for video but to use for occasional stills. thank you Jeff

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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.

[@spatnaspolecnost]

So I got it in a kit with G80 and... don't buy it for video. It has quite awful rolling shutter+in lens stabilization distortion happening. It's my understanding that some cameras have no problem with it, but it seem that dual IS does not work well together. It's the jitter you can find threads about, but even if you stabilize it in post the footage is all wobbly if you kniw what to look for. Also at 140 mm it's impossible to not notice. The only solution is to turn off the stabilization via the button on the lens but that turns off IBIS as well, I haven't found a way to turn off only the in lens stabilization and keep IBIS. It's great for photos and tthe image quality is great, but I'm thinking of getting rid of it for another non stabilized zoom lens of similar focal lenght (oly 14-150 thoughts?).

[@davidthorpe7732]

As you've found, there's no way to use lens or body stabilization separately. The Olympus equivalent doesn't have the same IQ as the Panasonic 14-140 but it is still more than acceptable. On the G9, before the firmware upgrade, some people found that not sticking to the 180° helped. So, at 30fps, use a shutter speed of 1/75th or so.

[@baze3SC]

Yeah, wife is a factor one has to consider along with other optical properties :) Just wondering if you noticed the Tamron 14-150mm f/3.5-5.8 Di III VC by chance.

[@JohnnyMotel99]

I had one of these lenses and found the zoom action a bit sticky. I later tried the Oly 12-100 and found that zoom much better damped.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

The focusing on mine is not at all sticky so yours must have been a bit off. The Olympus Pro zooms do have smoother, butterier(?) actions but they are a different class of lens and there would be something wrong if they weren't better. I haven't tried the 12-100 but it's seems a pretty good lens, certainly covering a very useful focal range.

[@pangaeadesign]

David; thanks for this review, I've been wanting to add another lens to my Lumix G3 I've already taken your advice on the Olympus 45mm f1.8 and wow. But now I'd like to upgrade the kit 14-42mm for either version of the 14-140. I notice that right now the older version is being sold for $449US which is about $400 less than the original list price. Since they're so close in spec's this deal seems like a no-brainer. I'm going to lend it to my daughter who is headed to Beijing for a two-week photography school and they've suggested she bring her "best camera" but also one that is portable. Her camera is a Nikon D40x which seems very unwieldy especially with a few lenses. I just thought you'd like to know about the adjusted pricing on the older 14-140 which seems to be the same on a bunch of sites lately. Thanks again.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

Hi John, I think I said in the review here that if you already had the older 14-140, there was no compelling reason to sell it and buy the new one. That would apply just as much if there was a big price differential too. In the UK they are both similarly priced. What a great trip to photography school and I can't think of any one lens that would serve her better!

[@pangaeadesign]

David Thorpe Thanks again for your comments and suggestions. I've had the 14-140 (older version) for a couple of days now and I'm very glad I bought it. You were right about he considerable size and weight of this lens, but for what it can do it's well worth the trouble. Plus, my budget prevailed in this case. Shooting with this lens has been a lot of fun, and the resulting photos are spectacular (in my non-professional opinion). I know my daughter will enjoy it too. I'm sending her with the Lumix G3, the Panasonic 14-140, and the Olympus 45mm f/1.8. I think the Panasonic 20mm would be a useful addition to the kit, but that'll have to wait for another time. It would be really nice if Panasonic would re-issue the (not very well loved) 14mm f/2.5 with specs to equal their 20mm, that would be very tempting.

[@KutWrite]

Haha! "Tigher and shorter isn't always a good thing, as a trip to Walmart will tell you." But of course, I knew what you meant and appreciated the plus side (as opposed to the plus size) of that metaphor.

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

😀

[@philipgowdy]

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

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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 :-)

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

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?

[@DavidThorpeMFT]

If you can live without the extra .5->2 stops, no not really. The f2.8s are certainly sharper than the new 14-140 (as they ought to be given the price and 3x zoom as opposed to 10X) but in day to day use you'd not see it unless you really looked. But....if you really are after the best quality and/ or you shoot regularly in low light, the faster zooms cannot be beaten.