Digilux 3 telephoto lens: options...

[pretzel logic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I currently own a Digilux 3 with both the 14-50mm vario Elmarit and the 25mm Summilux. I reckon a nice telephoto would complement these two lenses and I have a few options;

 

Panasonic 14-150mm vario Elmar.

Positive- Autofocus, ois, 300mm equivilant focal length.

Negative- Covers the range of the kit lense, albeit slower.

 

Leica R 80-200mm f4.

Positive- 400mm equivilant focal length, R glass, faster than the panasonic.

Negative- Lack of autofocus and ois, other difficulties with using R glass on Digilux 3.

 

There are also some Olympus lenses which may be suitable.

 

At the moment, the Panasonic and Leica lenses would work out at roughly the same price. I would greatly appreciate any input into the two lenses in use and user experiences, especially of long R lenses on the Digilux 3. Is it really worth my while getting R lenses, or should I just stick to the Panasonic lenses??

 

Regards,

Robert.

[dwind]

I currently own a Digilux 3 with both the 14-50mm vario Elmarit and the 25mm Summilux. I reckon a nice telephoto would complement these two lenses and I have a few options;

 

Panasonic 14-150mm vario Elmar.

Positive- Autofocus, ois, 300mm equivilant focal length.

Negative- Covers the range of the kit lense, albeit slower.

 

Leica R 80-200mm f4.

Positive- 400mm equivilant focal length, R glass, faster than the panasonic.

Negative- Lack of autofocus and ois, other difficulties with using R glass on Digilux 3.

 

There are also some Olympus lenses which may be suitable.

 

At the moment, the Panasonic and Leica lenses would work out at roughly the same price. I would greatly appreciate any input into the two lenses in use and user experiences, especially of long R lenses on the Digilux 3. Is it really worth my while getting R lenses, or should I just stick to the Panasonic lenses??

 

Regards,

Robert.

It was with great trepidation I got the oly 50 - 200 swd as OIS wouldn't work with it.

But, it is a gem, works perfectly even hand held. I've had no jiggle problems with it.

Dennis

[MJLogan]

I have had two copies of the Panasonic 14-150 die on me within a year. In both cases, a small piece or screw came loose inside the lens, rendering it incapable of zooming or focusing. I am currently trying to convince Panasonic to refund my money rather than send me a third copy of this lens.

 

I also have both the 14-50 and the 25 prime. They have been brilliant, so either I've had dreadful luck with the 14-150 or it suffers from a serious design flaw.

[denniswksit]

I would perfer the R lens. I have been using a number of R lenses with my D3 for a considerable period of time and I find that these lenses produced brilliant photos! Of course, manual focus would be a challenge but I have got used to it after playing with it for a few hours. To me, R lenses have a variety of choice and they seem to be better than the Panasonic one.

[ASpes]

I currently own a Digilux 3 with both the 14-50mm vario Elmarit and the 25mm Summilux. I reckon a nice telephoto would complement these two lenses and I have a few options;

 

Panasonic 14-150mm vario Elmar.

... ...

 

Robert.

 

===============

 

Originally Posted by MJLogan

 

I have had two copies of the Panasonic 14-150 die on me within a year.

... ...

 

 

[rant mode ON]

 

I fully sympathise with MJLogan for having been that unlucky with the Pana/Leica 14-150, but every single time this lens becomes the subject of a post he seems to pop the same dry comment.

 

Do not get me wrong, he's absolutely entitled to post it of course, no question, but maybe I'd also appreciate some comments about his results with this lens that he used for a full year after all, just to share with us his full evaluation of the lens and maybe compensate his negative final experience.

 

Let's not forget that the "kit" zoom had for a while a good number of reports of failures for the very same reason (the "loose screw syndrome"), so it's maybe some factory related issue, hopefully solved in later batches, but nevertheless you can usually hear only praises for this lens and its optical quality.

 

Point is that the numbers for the P/L 14-150 are small in comparison, getting one still looks like a Graal quest, and very few users seem to take their time to comment on this lens, so MJLogan negative one is becoming some sort of "final judgement" on it, at least here on LUF, and IMO this is highly undeserved.

 

[rant mode OFF]

 

I have a P/L 14-150 since about 8 month (so I'm getting close to the year boundary :-) ...) and I'm a happy user.

As others have said it's maybe the best 10x zoom around, and is optically pretty good, though not perfect as everything built on this world is a compromise of some sort. Anyway these issues (some distortion at the wide end and some CA at the long one) are pretty well controlled and on the low side even when compared to other less critical lenses.

 

As I already said in other posts this lens is neither the best I have nor can have, but nevertheless it's oustanding in its results, and makes for the perfect lens when you want to travel light, but not light on quality.

Though I'd wish it to be a brighter lens, we have to remember that it gives you the FOV of a 300mm, and all this in a size and weight that are close to the "kit" lens. Besides it is one of the only three lenses that fully complements the L1-D/3 ergonomics.

 

If you care just have a look at my link, most of my pictures from my short walks in recent months are from the 14-150, as it has become my walk-around lens with my D/3. Chance is that what you'll see there might be not to your taste, but anyway I hope you can get the feel of its real use and optical quality. And if a blame is to be, make it on me.

 

Hope this helps.

[MJLogan]

[rant mode ON]Do not get me wrong, he's absolutely entitled to post it of course, no question, but maybe I'd also appreciate some comments about his results with this lens that he used for a full year after all, just to share with us his full evaluation of the lens and maybe compensate his negative final experience.[rant mode OFF]

 

There's really not much else to say. The first lens broke after no more than 100 exposures, and the second after perhaps 1000. So, despite having owned it for a year, I have very little experience with it.

 

I bought it as an all-purpose travel lens, because I found myself wishing for more zoom reach than the 14-50 provides. There's room in my travel bag for only two lenses, and I often use the 25mm prime. So I left the kit lens at home and set off for three weeks in Europe--where the 14-150 promptly died. Seven months later I did it again, and the second lens promptly died. Between the two experiences, there were the two months it took to get a replacement (I've told the frustrating tale of those two months in a different thread, so I'll spare you the details), and two short trips to Tuscany and London. I rarely need a long zoom for personal or professional reasons unless I'm traveling, so it sat in my equipment closet most of that time.

 

In practice, I sometimes missed the speed of the 14-50, since I tend to shoot wide-open when possible. In those cases, I'd mount the 25mm and see if I could reframe the subject and "zoom" with my feet to get what I wanted. I found the 14-150 took a bit longer on average to autofocus, but that was a very minor issue and hardly worth mentioning. When the lens was working for me, it worked well. It allowed me to get shots I could not get with the ket lens, and, apart from being slower, it seemed to produce similar results. Since I think the kit lens is brilliant, I suppose that's high praise.

 

I post about the lens when the subject comes up because, with so few data points, I have no idea whether my story is unusual. I, too, wish that there were lots of posters sharing their experiences. If I were a lone voice in a crowd of positive comment (especially on this forum, where comment tends to be well-informed), I'd assume that my tale of woe was simply bad luck, and not feel compelled to warn potential buyers when they ask about the lens.

[denniswksit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

at one time, I was considering to buy the P/L14-150mm. however, after consulting those comments on this site, I gave up the idea. Eventually, I have turned to use the legacy Rs, which I do not regret for a second.

[ASpes]

at one time, I was considering to buy the P/L14-150mm. however, after consulting those comments on this site, I gave up the idea. Eventually, I have turned to use the legacy Rs, which I do not regret for a second.

 

In fact I considered it a few times since my first E-1 a few years ago, most of the R glass is outstanding, but each time I felt the Oly lenses suited better my working habits, and this while keeping the optical quality, especially with the top grade ones. Just personal choices of course.

 

Anyway your comment shows exactly what I was ranting about, too little feedback makes a single negative, pounded each time by the same user, too much visibile and significant, and making other possible users feeling unsure about this lens.

 

I won't say it all again but the P/L 14-150 is definitely a good lens, the compromise for size has been more on brightness than on optical quality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one to have it around here.

I understand that Leica commitment for 4/3 is not mainstream any longer, but on LUF having a 4/3 camera, even if it's a Digilux 3, has always felt like being the "son of a lesser god".

Point is maybe that we have little to say about our D/3's other than they work no problem and are letting us have pretty good results. No big news actually ... (:-))

[pretzel logic]

Aspes, I had a look at your zenfolio gallery, some great images in there. My primary concern with the 14-150mm is the overlap with the kit lens focal range, albeit slower. If you own both lens do you find yourself going for the speed of the kit lens or the extra reach of the 14-150mm?

 

Still keen to see photos taken with R lenses, and any input on the 80-200mm f4 lense in particular, as it is the lense I would probably go for if I decided on an R lense. Problem with them is manual focusing, how difficult is it likely to be at 400mm equivalent using the dark-ish viewfinder on the Digilux 3?

[Karlumix]

Surprised at the comments about the 14-150 being "much" slower than the 14-50. The half stop (f/2.8 to f/3.5) is not that big a deal and while the f/5.6 at 150mm is 1.5 stops slower at the long end, that is at 150mm. Check the metadata at the 14-150 set to 50mm and max. aperture shows it about f/4.

 

When shooting available light, I usually use my LC-1 with the f/2-2.4 Summicron. I am considering the 25mm f/1.4, but it becomes another lump to carry.

[ASpes]

Aspes, I had a look at your zenfolio gallery, some great images in there. My primary concern with the 14-150mm is the overlap with the kit lens focal range, albeit slower. If you own both lens do you find yourself going for the speed of the kit lens or the extra reach of the 14-150mm?

 

Still keen to see photos taken with R lenses, and any input on the 80-200mm f4 lense in particular, as it is the lense I would probably go for if I decided on an R lense. Problem with them is manual focusing, how difficult is it likely to be at 400mm equivalent using the dark-ish viewfinder on the Digilux 3?

 

Glad you enjoyed some of my site. Those are mostly from my short walks around the city and the country around it, and that's where I came to best appreciate the P/L 14-150. Going around having in my hand just one camera and one lense instead of my bag full of big glass, it's still sometimes nothing short of amazing and a real pleasure.

 

Yes, you're right in saying it overlaps the range of the "kit" lense, actually it extends it significantly, so the kit one will become your backup and be used in lower light.

The one stop you loose (in average across the range) is not a big issue in full daylight, and you can play with the long end of the zoom to get some nice OOF effect.

In not so good light it's not the best solution of course but not that bad either, as the OIS is a real help. After all, there's no lense (or camera) which is the best choice for every situation we can meet, so it's always either a compromise or having different tools.

 

As for the legacy Leica R lenses, I can just say that I have seen some wonderful shots from them. Most of them are great lenses and some can be had for a good price (mind the "most" and "some"...), but I'm sorry to say they're not my cup of tea.

The biggest deal-breaker for me is the manual focus, though the L1-D/3 will help you with the focus confirmation LED. Anyway, size and weight apart when compared to the P/L 14/150, even if they're set full open, the full manual operation makes them rather slow and cumbersome to use.

My best suggestion is to try them first hand and judge by yourself how they fit your way of shooting.

If you're looking for examples, unless somebody here can point you to a site of their own, imo your best chance is to search the Oly groups on DPR and Getdpi, you should find a fair number of them.

 

Best of luck.