Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

  1. #1
    Subscriber Member kit laughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Two suitcases and the latest MBA
    Posts
    1,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Talking Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    So much money for a tiny increase in speed—not to mention the need for an adapter (to G1).

    Can anyone here who has (or had) both mount a convincing argument in favour of the 25/1.4?

    Interested owner of 20/1.7 wants to know!

    TIA, Kit

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    I own both and my camera is a G1.
    Perhaps I'm not a normal user but I very much prefer the Panasonic 25/1.4, or the PL25 for having a short swift name on that big and heavy lens. Cause big and heavy it is with the same size as a Sigma 50/1.4 for a FF camera...
    The main reason for preferring the PL25 is the focus length. Some like a short normal better and then the G20 is the best lens. I like a normal normal, sometimes even a normal on the long side (like the old 55 and 58mm lenses). The second reason is the rendering which while not dramatically different from the pancake still is more to my taste. The third reason is the aperture ring which make the lens a better ergonomic choice, to me, than the pancake. Then there is the sheer size of it; the pancake is too small and manual focusing id fiddly. And yes, half a stop of speed is never wrong, just as the Nokton 25/0.95 is another stop (or at least 2/3 of a stop) faster again.

    It's easy to list the advantages of the pancake though and I guess most users would mention border to border "sharpness", size, weight, price, coolness factor. Lol. For me it is just too small, too impractical and too boring and so it comes to use when traveling only.

    Well, all that is more personal than convincing I guess.

    regards,

    Jonas

  3. #3
    Subscriber Member kit laughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Two suitcases and the latest MBA
    Posts
    1,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Thanks Jonas; and let us now add the Olympus 25/2.8 to the collection; I am most interested in optimum image quality—I just read a very flattering review of this Oly pancake (comparing the IQ to the Leica 25/1.4, too; see here.

    Exciting times, to be sure, in 4/3rds–µ4/3rds land.

  4. #4
    Member marlof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    188
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Thing is, the PL25 is already very good wide open. You don't buy that lens to shoot at f8.

    That said, since my switch from 4/3 to m4/3 I hardly ever use the PL25, even though I have the adapter. It may be a bit better than the 20 1.7, but the latter is far more convenient to me. And convenience was my main reason to switch, I was tired of lugging large camera equipment with me. I don't do much manual focusing, and the aperture ring doesn't work on my Pen cameras. The next time I'll buy camera gear, the PL25 will be traded in.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Quote Originally Posted by kit laughlin View Post
    Thanks Jonas; and let us now add the Olympus 25/2.8 to the collection; I am most interested in optimum image quality—I just read a very flattering review of this Oly pancake (comparing the IQ to the Leica 25/1.4, too; see here.

    Exciting times, to be sure, in 4/3rds–µ4/3rds land.
    Hi,

    I had a look at the review and quote a part of it here:
    • The pancake is sharper overall than is the Leica, particularly at the edges of the frame.
    • The pancake has similar but slightly better contrast.
    • The pancake has a warmer, slightly yellow colour cast.
    • At similar apertures, the pancake produces shutter speeds that are about a third of a stop faster.
    • Purple fringing is not apparent and, if anything, chromatic aberrations are controlled even better in the pancake than in the Leica.
    I don't doubt all that is true. A question mark perhaps for the comment on speed as it is not my experience (comparing to other lenses though, not the 25mm pancake) at all.
    If you care about the image quality mainly the pancake seem to be sharper from border to border and I'm sure that's right. I have owned several copies of the 25/1.4 and while sharp enough it is not critically sharp across the frame. CA, I don't know but it may very well be correct. Then you'll have to adjust the pancake images for distortion sometimes. If that matters or not depends on you.

    For me a lens equivalent to a 50/5.6 is of no use but I can see a landscape photographer making good use of it. It's good with many options.

    What would the Olympus 25mm pancake give you the Panasonic 20mm pancake does not, except for the 5mm difference?

    regards,

    /Jonas

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Kit - there are pretty firm rumors that the m4/3 version of a 25mm f1.4 is going to be released soon. Don't know if it will mimic the design of the 4/3 version but I am waiting for the new lens. I used to own the PL25 but didn't use it as much as I should have. I liked the FOV of the 20mm well enough to make it my walk around lens.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Quote Originally Posted by kit laughlin View Post
    So much money for a tiny increase in speed—not to mention the need for an adapter (to G1).

    Can anyone here who has (or had) both mount a convincing argument in favour of the 25/1.4?

    Interested owner of 20/1.7 wants to know!

    TIA, Kit
    Why not CV 25/0.95?

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    Why not CV 25/0.95?
    The CV is interesting but for me, I would give up the stop for a native m4/3 with AF. Doesn't mean that i would always need to use AF but the option is worth it for me. This assumes the quality on a new 25 is good. If no new 25, I would consider it over the much larger (including adapter) 4/3 lens

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    The CV is interesting but for me, I would give up the stop for a native m4/3 with AF. Doesn't mean that i would always need to use AF but the option is worth it for me. This assumes the quality on a new 25 is good. If no new 25, I would consider it over the much larger (including adapter) 4/3 lens
    Good reason. My personal philosophy is one of "overlaps": best/fastest AF lens I can get in certain focal length supplementing best/fastest MF one of same fl, taking first one with me when I need AF, second one when I can afford MF. In other words, I am likely to get m43 25/1.4 when it comes out to supplement my CV 25/.95.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Presumably the CV 25/0.9 is sharp in the center but a bit softer at the edges. Photozone tests show the Panasonic 20mm having a higher MTF resolution than both the CV and Leica 25mm but I believe the panasonic 20mm was performed on a different camera. The CV/Leica lenses may have out resolved the sensors. HOwever, the panasonic 20mm does seem to be more uniform from center to edge

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    seakayaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    I have owned both and decided to sell the 25/1.4. I am quite happy with the 25/0.95 and the 20/1.7 on my GF1.

    The 25/1.4 produced wonderful photographs and control of the aperture ring as someone else mentioned was a nice feature.

    The lens just did not feel comfortable on the GF1 for me.

    Good luck with your decision.

  12. #12
    Subscriber Member kit laughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Two suitcases and the latest MBA
    Posts
    1,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Thanks everyone; I concur with the groups sentiments here. Can anyone point to a rumour mill (or real site!) where this µ4/3 25/1.4 might be revealed? This lens would be my preference, too. µ4/3 is providing some nice surprises, for me.

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    43rumors.com

    They have actually been pretty darn good about reporting accurate info.

  14. #14
    Subscriber Member kit laughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Two suitcases and the latest MBA
    Posts
    1,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Comparing the 25/1.4 to the 20/1.7....

    Thank you once again, Terry. Cheers to all, KL

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •