T
thearne3
Guest
Interesting comparison to the 20 1.7. From what I can see, the sharpness is comparable. However, the 25 1.4 shows significant blue CA around the white stripes in the man's jersey...
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
m43rd Lumix Leica DG 25/1.4
- Thread starter biglouis
- Start date
biglouis
Well-known member
Darn! I thought it was too good to be true. I wonder if the camera needs a firmware update to cope with the lens?
LouisB
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
The new lens looks interesting to me. Having said that, though, I have made some nice images with the 20/1.7—and although I have the 14/2.5 and the 45/2.8, the 20 is on the G1 80% of the time.
Still looks interesting, though.
Still looks interesting, though.
Jonathon Delacour
Subscriber Member
Way more bulky! Yet bulky (and heavy) in a totally satisfying way. It's ironic that I abandoned Nikon bodies because they were too heavy and bulky but wound up with a Canon pro body. And if I were to go back to Nikon (unlikely, because hardly any 3rd party lenses can be adapted to Nikon bodies), I'd want a D3x.
I was never the slightest bit interested in Canon bodies/lenses but the Canon 1D series body plus Leica/Zeiss lenses suits me perfectly. Go figure.
I might be tempted by the rumored Mark II version of Canon's 35/1.4L (AF would be nice on occasion) but the Canon lens would have to match the quality of my Contax C/Y 35/1.4. We'll see...
m3photo
New member
Re: Dpreview comparison
And to mine, the visible difference in distortion in the man's face in the image taken with a 40mm equivalent versus a 50mm; neither the recommended focal length for portraits but the 20/1.7, much as I like it is definitely not for face shots!
Re: Dpreview comparison
Don't you think big part of that perspective change, if not all of it, is attributable to DPR's getting closer to subject with 20 than they did with 25? It is obvious they are closer because person occupies more percentage of real estate in shot with 20 even though opposite would have been true if both were shot from same distance.
... and in one where they kept aperture apples to apples they did not keep perspective apples to apples, while in other they did not keep neither aperture nor perspective apple to apple, nor was seemingly white balance.
m3photo
New member
Re: Perspective Change
I say 'declared' because now we can see more comparisons in DPR's article it seems to me that in 35mm terms it looks more like the difference between a 35mm lens and a 50mm, the increased depth of field, albeit taking into account the f/1.7 to f/1.4 factor, is also significant.
OK but only very slightly closer so as to fill the frame with the same amount; it's the difference between a 40mm and a 50mm, it doesn't warrant such a variation in distortion. I'm not knocking the 20mm for what it is, an excellent lens which I also use, I am however still surprised at the comparison with a lens that is only marginally longer in declared focal length.
I say 'declared' because now we can see more comparisons in DPR's article it seems to me that in 35mm terms it looks more like the difference between a 35mm lens and a 50mm, the increased depth of field, albeit taking into account the f/1.7 to f/1.4 factor, is also significant.
pellicle
New member
feel a bit that way about the oly lenses I have ... keeps me thinking of a 5D
Re: Perspective Change
If they have kept center of head in center of shot and kept sizing same then we would be talking but as taken those shots are worthless for any comparison and very misleading.
It is much much more than "slightly". Height of head on shot with 20 is approximately 20% bigger when it should have been opposite and whole layout of a shot indicates height and angle of shot have changed too which will cause huge change in perspective, especially with shots taken so close.
If they have kept center of head in center of shot and kept sizing same then we would be talking but as taken those shots are worthless for any comparison and very misleading.
m3photo
New member
Re: Perspective Change
I have impression you misunderstood me. I didn't mean "more than slightly distorted due to lens", I meant DPR got much closer to subject than necessary to have playing field level when taking a shot with 20 and that is what butchered perspective, not the difference in focal lengths.
m3photo
New member
Agreement
My point is precisely that if they have to get THAT much closer and the supposed difference is only between a 40mm and a 50mm equivalent then perhaps the distortion in the pancake lens shows that it's not a very straightforward slightly wide "normal" lens, the fact that we see it now is thanks to being able to compare it directly with the newer lens which does seem to behave as a normal lens does. Phew!
OK, I think I'm thrashing this one too far:
My point is precisely that if they have to get THAT much closer and the supposed difference is only between a 40mm and a 50mm equivalent then perhaps the distortion in the pancake lens shows that it's not a very straightforward slightly wide "normal" lens, the fact that we see it now is thanks to being able to compare it directly with the newer lens which does seem to behave as a normal lens does. Phew!
Re: Agreement
That is the danger of from the hip shooting, it is not just worthless but it easily misleads.
As I said, keep size of subject same and then we will talk if perspective on 20 is suffering as much.
They did _NOT_ have to get that much closer. They got _MUCH_ closer than they needed to. They needed to get only as close to make height of head same, but they ended up getting so close that head is 20% bigger, plus they changed angles.
That is the danger of from the hip shooting, it is not just worthless but it easily misleads.
As I said, keep size of subject same and then we will talk if perspective on 20 is suffering as much.