New Panasonic G3 camera - question about the standard zoom lens

The new mirrorless Panasonic G3 is a very compact four-thirds camera
that seems to be just the thing for when you don't want or need to
schlep your DSLR around all day.

It is available with a 14-42mm kit lens... and there is also a
somewhat more expensive 14-45mm lens available.

As far as I can tell, both lenses are image stabilized. Both lenses
have apertures of 3.5-5.6. Both are called "kit" lenses.

So, why does Panasonic have two such similar lenses? What's the
difference between them? Which one is better?

Wally

Wally wrote:
The new mirrorless Panasonic G3 is a very compact four-thirds camera

Micro Four Thirds. It's a mirrorless version of the Four Thirds format
cameras. The original Four Thirds is an SLR.

that seems to be just the thing for when you don't want or need to
schlep your DSLR around all day.

The G3 is, however, in some important respects a cheapened version of the
G2. Compare the two of them carefully before choosing between them. After
the G3 came out, I bought the G2 which was selling at a better price. (I
already had the superb G1, and the G2 is even better.)


It is available with a 14-42mm kit lens... and there is also a
somewhat more expensive 14-45mm lens available.

As far as I can tell, both lenses are image stabilized. Both lenses
have apertures of 3.5-5.6. Both are called "kit" lenses.

Correct.


So, why does Panasonic have two such similar lenses? What's the
difference between them? Which one is better?

The earlier one is the 14-45mm, which came out with the G1 camera and is
definitely the better lens. Unfortunately it is discontinued and may be more
difficult to find, and likely to be more expensive if you do find one. It
was replaced by the 14-42mm kit lens which came out with the G2.

You can find reviews of both lenses at DPReview.com and elsewhere.

Irwell wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:17:09 -0400, Neil Harrington wrote:



The G3 is, however, in some important respects a cheapened version
of the G2. Compare the two of them carefully before choosing between
them. After the G3 came out, I bought the G2 which was selling at a
better price. (I already had the superb G1, and the G2 is even
better.)

I have the G1 which has worked great, what improvements do
you find in the G2 that would justify a change?

The touch screen, which originally I considered a gimmick of little
importance, I find surprisingly useful. Just tapping on something on the
screen that you want the camera to focus on works very well, and in manual
focus it puts the screen in magnifcation mode centered on whatever you've
tapped on. I find it a very nice feature.

In addition, the G2 has a few additional controls. Instead of the left knob
on the top deck switching between MF, AFC and AFS, those are now selected by
lever surrounding the knob while the knob itself selects between four AF
modes. Other minor additions.

Do these things "justify a change" (from the G1)? I don't know. In my case I
was perfectly happy with the G1 but wanted a second body, waited to see what
the G3 would be like, was disappointed in what it turned out to be and
decided to buy a G2 body since that was selling at a very attractive price.
I'm very happy with it as a second body with interesting embellishments, but
don't know if I would trade in a G1 for it if I only wanted one body.