Hi Godfrey, I have the Hexanon too. It's so cheap and very good. But it's not like a 0.95. I love my 25mm 0.95.
...
The other option is the 40/1.4 of the old Olympus PenF or the 42/1.2 PenF, but these lenses are now way way too expensive on ebay, and just a bit too long, with a stronger tele compression effect. I find the 70mm full frame tele gives a more normal perspective, it can even look like a 50mm, just tighter and fatter bokeh.
I had the Pen F 40/1.4 at the same time as I had the Hexanon AR 40/1.8. The two lenses are nearly identical twins with regard to rendering qualities ... I sold the Oly lens because I could use the Konica on both FourThirds SLR and Micro-FourThirds where the Oly was only usable with the mFT mount. I wish Olympus had made a fast 35 to 40mm lens for FourThirds SLR, just like I wanted a fast 17 to 19mm lens as well. But they didn't, and I doubt they ever will. The Summilux 25/1.4 ASPH (FT SLR) is very nice. The wonderful 14-35/2 is just too big, heavy and expensive.
I don't know how a 70mm lens can produce a look that's shorter than a 40mm lens..? doesn't make sense. The Olympus Pen 70mm f/2 produces a beautiful look, however, with a bit of compression and a very nice feel. Used that one quite a lot with the G1.
Given Micro-FourThirds and a choice between the Summilux 25/1.4 and Voigtländer 25/0.95, it's a bit of a toss up. Both are excellent lenses, I've seen a lot of work with both of them. Now that Voigtländer has made a 17mm f/0.95 as well, I'd probably buy both Voigtländers and stick with the Konica 40 and Pen F 70 mm if I were buiding up a Micro-FourThirds kit again. That way the camera works the same way with my entire lens kit, rather than one way with the normal and a different way with the other lenses. Makes for fewer mistakes.
Fun stuff. I enjoyed my Olympus and Panasonic FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds gear, and I still enjoy the E-1, although I use it rather infrequently at the moment. Too many other things are keeping me busy.