Lumix G3 lens help: I took a wild leap and made a bid on E-Bay. Didn't think I would get it, but did. So I now have a new Panasonic Lumix G3K coming and not a lens anywhere. Yes, I...

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

I took a wild leap and made a bid on E-Bay. Didn't think I would get it, but did. So I now have a new Panasonic Lumix G3K coming and not a lens anywhere.
Yes, I have searched UHH and other places trying to figure out what lens to get. My old Panasonic is a P&S so this lens business is very confusing to me.
I think I want 2 lenses. One good for portraits, I seem to be shooting a lot of those for friends. Another for the local deer who will not come close enough while I have my TS10 in hand.
I trust the shooters on the hog and there opinions are honest ones. So please, and suggestions for a starting lens or lenses would be appreciated.
Thanks, Gary

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

The G3K is an interchangeable lens camera ILC. Panasonic sell ILC lenses. You can also buy Olympus ILC lenses,but Olympus stabilization is in the camera and Panasonic stabilization is in the lens. Dpeview reviews lenses. Just remember you need ILC lenses unless you get an adapter for 4/3 lenses.

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

Yes I have read all the Panasonic and Olympus lens reviews. As I understand it, the lenses are interchangeable if the Panasonic lens has the switch to turn IS off on the lens. Olympus lens on the Panasonic body will have no stabilization.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

I shoot a G3 with two lenses, a 14-42mm and a 45-200mm. I also want a 7-14mm, but they cost well over $900.

craggycrossers Loc: Robin Hood Country, UK

myts10 wrote:

Yes I have read all the Panasonic and Olympus lens reviews. As I understand it, the lenses are interchangeable if the Panasonic lens has the switch to turn IS off on the lens. Olympus lens on the Panasonic body will have no stabilization.

Maybe I can help you out - see my private message to you.

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

Thanks Mogul. I just but a bid of $71 on a 14-42mm on E-Bay. I have read good things about that 45-200mm. I have read some where on the hog that the 35-100mm is very good. Do you have any first hand knowledge about that one?

Mike_B Loc: St. Louis, MO

Look at the Panasonic 25mm prime.....

Tarzan Loc: Brazil

I have a G3, with a 14-42mm, a 45-200mm and a 100-300mm, and the most of the time use the 14-42 for portraits and general urban pictures. For wildlife - I love owls! - the 100-300 is way to go. Hope this helps.

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

Mike B, I don't know much about prime lenses. Have been reading some about them. If I understand it right, the sharpness and quality of an image taken with a prime lens will always be better than any taken with a zoom at the same setting.
In other words, a shot with a 25mm prime is going to be better than than the same shot taken with a 14-42 zoom set at 25mm. Am I right or am I missing something?

myts10 Loc: SE Ohio

Tarzan, thanks for your input. I have read good things about the 45-200mm. and thought that would be enough for me. The deer I want to get are in or right next to a wooded area. I can usually get within 50 yards or so (half an American football field).
How close do you get to fill the frame with an owl with the 100-300mm?

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

myts10 wrote:

Thanks Mogul. I just but a bid of $71 on a 14-42mm on E-Bay. I have read good things about that 45-200mm. I have read some where on the hog that the 35-100mm is very good. Do you have any first hand knowledge about that one?

Sorry about the response delay. I have heard good things about the 35-100 also. But in the end, it still equates to a maximum 200mm lens. The 45-200 was a monetary compromise for me. I would like to try the 100-300, but, for now will have to settle for a lens just about half the price of the 100-300. One day, maybe, I'll be able to pick up a hybrid 300mm lens, which, with the proper adapter will give mr the equivalent of a 600mm lens for birding. Sure, it'll be a manual lens, but focused at infinity and shooting at f/5.6 or 8, I can reach out a lot farther at relatively little expense. My only concern will be choosing a lens that will be capable of acceptable image quality.

Tarzan Loc: Brazil

myts10 wrote:

Tarzan, thanks for your input. I have read good things about the 45-200mm. and thought that would be enough for me. The deer I want to get are in or right next to a wooded area. I can usually get within 50 yards or so (half an American football field).
How close do you get to fill the frame with an owl with the 100-300mm?

The 45-200 is a versatile lens, no doubt, and a deer is much larger than an owl, so, a 200mm may fulfill your needs quite well. as for filling the frame with a medium sized owl with the 300, I must get as close as 15-20 yds. Hard, but can be done. I don't stalk the owls, nor crouch as I approach them, it is sort of silly to try this with animals with an eyesight like theirs. I go straight, in plain sight, and bet in their curiosity. One step, stop. As long as they keep looking at me, another step is possible. A monopod is good help.
As for image quality, I can not detect differences between the 3 lenses.
Best regards.

Guy Johnstone Loc: Ocean Shores WA

The fun thing about these Micro Four Thirds is there are addapters to use most any lens on them. The adapters, most been made in China are pretty cheap and reasonable quality.

I find that rangefinder lenses work best. Some of the Russian rangefinder lenses are extremely good quality. Most are cheep but produce good to great images. Since you are eliminating the rangefinder mechanism and focusing on the sensor you don't have the focus problems that the lenses may have had rangefinder cameras.

I have an Olympia that I bought just so I could put on old lenses on it. It's been a lot of fun. Probably the best lens value I have for it is a Rollei 50 mm I paied $20.00 and it's as good as my Leica 50.