PDA

View Full Version : E-M5 and 14-54 Mk II anyone


Doug H
25th July 2012, 12:15 PM
I sold my 12-60 as I found the autofocus irritating slow when taking portraits with the E-M5 as I ended up so often missing the expressions I wanted.
While I like the 45 for single person portraits, I'm just not (yet) that much of a prime person and while I like the idea of the Pana 25 f1.4, the 14-54 MkII seems a better bet for a high quality lens.

Is its autofocus comparable to the m4/3 lenses? All the m4/3 lenses I've used are so quiet and quick but I do miss the quality, range and apertures of the 12-60. The Panasonic 12-35 is just not long enough for me to be interesting.

Any other comments?
Thanks
Doug

StephenL
25th July 2012, 12:37 PM
I've only used this lens on an E-P2, where autofocus was OK but not to m4/3 standards, and I believe this is still the case on the E-M5. Pete (Snaarman) will be able to comment better.

snaarman
25th July 2012, 12:45 PM
I do indeed use the 14-54 Mk2 on the E-M5 regularly. It looks kinda serious on the front of the smaller camera but not out of proportion. I find the 45mm looks a bit too small.

I have a lot of respect for the 14-54, it rarely disappoints as regards image quality. Having said that, the 45mm is a very good lens indeed, probably even sharper than the 14-54 at it's long end.

However, there's no comparison when it comes to AF. The 45mm and the 14-45mm Panasonic are near instant AF compared to the 14-54. I just did a couple of trial shots and it takes 1.5 to 2 seconds to focus. No problem with landscape but just slightly slow for portrait I would suspect. Certainly nowhere near as fast as the 45mm.

Hope that helps..

Pete

Doug H
26th July 2012, 08:57 AM
Thanks guys,
Sounds like a hire is in order before doing anything else to see if it would work for me.
Doug

Ross the fiddler
26th July 2012, 10:52 AM
I use it too, allowing for the slower focussing when using it, but at least it focusses reliably on static subjects & produces nice images with a larger aperture (& sharper) than the kit lenses.

Howi
26th July 2012, 11:04 AM
It would be quicker to MF the 12-60, why do you need AF?
The 12-60 is one of the better lenses to MF.

Ross the fiddler
26th July 2012, 11:46 AM
It would be quicker to MF the 12-60, why do you need AF?
The 12-60 is one of the better lenses to MF.

But the 14-54 II will AF quite OK for static subjects.

Doug H
28th July 2012, 06:22 PM
It would be quicker to MF the 12-60, why do you need AF?
The 12-60 is one of the better lenses to MF.

My hand/eye coordination is even slower than the 12-60 and a lot less accurate - age and arthritis! I Do have some legacy lenses which I have used for static subjects, but once I started to use the 45, they have not had much use!
Doug

JonSchick
28th July 2012, 07:50 PM
I loved the 14-54 ii on my E-1, and bought the mk ii for faster autofocus on m43. It's ok for still subjects but hardly speedy, and when I did some obsessive pixel-peeping by comparing to the Lumix 14-45, I decided the 14-54 wasn't worth keeping - my copy of that little Lumix lens outperformed the Zuiko at most focal lengths, so unless the faster aperture is critical to you, I wouldn't bother.

Doug H
28th July 2012, 08:25 PM
Thanks Jon,
that's very useful to hear; it is the faster aperture I'm looking for though.
Doug