I’ve used the Leica 25 1.4 since it came out. Your observations are spot on. Only drawbacks to add are it’s noisy if you’re shooting video (some aperture chatter), and while the rectangular lens hood looks cool, I wish it was a bit bigger so you could put it on reversed for smaller packing.
I sold my 25mm F1.4 to get another lens and a the 25mm F1.7, and I have been regretting it ever since. The difference is that the F1.4 has a very unique character. Looking back to the photos and videos I shot with the F1.4, the difference is very obvious. Now I'm looking to rebuy the F1.4. Hopefully I can get it for cheaper than I sold it.
I have watched so many of your videos..I can;t imagine how I missed this one.... but I have to say your descriptions are so right on the money between these two lenses. If all you ever knew was the Lumix,, you would be perfectly happy. I got a chance to use the Leica at a car show a few years ago and, when getting the images on the screen,,realized there was just an extra ...snap (for loss of a better word) to the Leica. This was not a surprise,,, I used Leica rangefinders in the 90s for almost all of my black and white film work. Even wide open, with less than perfect sharpness, the other characteristics of the lens still renders an amazing blend of contrast and texture...and yes,, I love the funky old-school hood--- Design is a funny thing,, I bought into the M4/3 system for size--and the Leica is bigger than my Minolta 50 1.4 from my old full frame film gear... but definitely worth the extra mass with the results you bring home.
Nice and relaxed review 👍 I don’t have the Leica but I use the Lumix 25mm a lot on my Panasonic G80. It is a little soft at F1.7 however as I shoot a lot of video this is less noticeable and I’m happy with the sharpness shooting in 4K. Completely agree that sharpness comes back at f2.8 but for the money (£150 in the UK) I can’t grumble and it was my 2nd lens after the kit.
Ja it is very soft at 1.7 i own 42 1.7 and leica 15 mm 1.7 they are both sooo much sharper than the 25mm 1.7 that i dont want to use it anymore. I want the 1.7 to have super sharp pictures with bokee the lense does not make sense to me if i have to stop down to 2.8 without any bokee. I compared the crapy 12-35 lense one of my panasonics came with and it blows the 25 1.7 away wide open at 25. colors are better and the image is sharper. Of course the 3.5 kit lense has no bokee but its sad that you have to stop down the 1.7 to make it better than the kit.
Thanks for your insights. I'm too cheap to move on from my 20mm f/1.7 Lumix Mark 1 - it was my first MFT lens and has taken me through some years of emotional experience. You're right, in many cases the characteristic rendering may be equalised by small phone displays. But with the closure of Google Plus (my previously favourite social network), Instagram happens to be my main display medium now....
on your review alone I went with the LUMIX and I really like it and it's inexpensive. I always turn to your channel for lens reviews. I like you style. Thank you, Tom in NYC
Dear Mattis. Thanks for the great video. I owned a Lumix G 25mm F1.7 lens for many years and did not have a big problem with the focus shift as you mentioned in another video. Actually I was quite happy with it. However a while ago I wanted to upgrade my lenses to lenses that would perform better in low light situations and had a better build quality. Although I am a huge Leica fan (I own a Leica DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4, Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm/F1.2 and a Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200 mm / F2.8-4.0) I decided to buy for the 25mm prime lens and for the 12-40mm range both M.Zuiko lenses. In my opinion are the M.Zuiko ED 25mm f/1.2 PRO and the M.Zuiko Digital 12-40mm F2.8 PRO a better choice regarding build quality and technical specifications instead what Lumix and Leica can provide in that range.
Always come to your channel for your take on gear. Unfortunately, no longer a Lumix ambassador but that’s okay. You provide valuable input and ideas. Thank you
I bought the Leica lens when it first came out in 2011. It was and still is pricey. Back then, the MFT standard and mirrorless cameras in general, were still relatively new. So they are more expensive. I have had the Leica lens for almost 8 years. It serves me well, and I will not sell it as long as I stay with the MFT system. I use it mostly to shoot studio portraits, so I use it in the optimal sharpness range of around F/4. The lens has very noisy aperture sounds though. Sometimes my clients ask me if my camera is broken because of the sounds. I just tell them that's just the way the lens is. If I had started photography today, I would have chosen the Lumix one instead due to the price difference and the minor differences between the two in terms of quality.
I remember when the 25mm f/1.4 came out and there were not that many primes back then. It doesn't make sense for you to switch to the Lumix now, but it's true that at f/4 there is not that much difference between the two lenses.
I really like your videos my friend! As you said: you can't go wrong with any of those lenses I really wanted the Leica but I decided to buy 2 Panasonics instead for the same price: So I got the 25mm f1.7 and the 42.5mm f1.7 which is a bargain with ibis, I would love to have the Leica versions instead but maybe in the future.
I use my Leica 25mm 1.4 for interviews a lot, and the only drawback is that you can't let it go in autofocus as it constantly hunts for focus. So it is a great lens if you use it on a tripod and in MF mode.
What sets the Leica apart are the colours mostly. Hard to describe but I guess those who kknow camera's and lenses even just a bit, like me, can see it is a Leica. I have a book of some traveller to the Himalayas and his pics have Leica written all over every pic. Love it. But personal.
If I only we as exceptional as a photographer….Far from it! It is just the Leica colours I (think I) can distinguish. I now have the 56 mm F1.4 Sigma. In the three short days I have it I am really impressed. But I would not be able to distinguish it from my adapted Canon FD 50 mm F1.4. Yes: it is much sharper wide open, but the colours etc look really the same (which is not bad at all!).
The problem with the G lens is that it has bad focus shift. You will really notice the problem when taking pictures in bright daylight or situations that require smaller apertures. This causes it to mis-focus creating soft and out of focus images every time it uses smaller apertures. This is because Panasonic forces the camera to focus the lens at 1.7 regardless of how bright it is outside and at the last instant it shuts down the aperture you have it set for or whatever it calls for, (for instance at 5.6) then takes the shot. The difference in focus shift between 1.7 and 5.6 is tremendous causing blurry images! I've noticed it with this lens. This can be easily fixed in lens or body firmware but has never been addressed. It is well worthwhile to check out the following youtube video. It is well explained, and most people have no idea what this is and why it happens. Do a search for "What is focus shift and why every photographer should be aware of it" by the channel called "Camerahoarders". Skip to 8 minutes in the video for the work around. The work around is tedious and really not practical. When I did the work around, the images were properly sharp so it's not the fault of the glass in this lens (it's just mis-focusing). It's a bummer because otherwise this would be an outstanding lens. When shooting video, this problem doesn't apply as long as you focus while shooting video, or when you have full autofocus on. I never use full video autofocus with panasonic cameras because it's a known video ruiner :)
I know the source of this rumour. Yes the lens has focus shift but, in practice it is of absolutely no consequence, the error is well within the depth of field. I was troubled by these tests and took against my lens as I am a perfectionist. But after a few days I thought, hey, wait a minute, you have used this lens for a year and have some of your best photos from it. I thought, well nobody is more capable of testing a lens than me, I am a Chartered Physicist. So i tested teh hell out of it. The tests on RU-vid were all done on A4 paper printout letters which means essentially macro mode. Well this is the only lens in this class that focusses that close; no similar lens has this problem because it cant even do this test. I looked at my photos and some of the best were in this regime below f2.8 to f4, well the DoF in that range on any normal subject is huge; a cafe would be sharp wall to wall, your focus can be a foot out and you wouldnt notice. My only macro-ish shot was of an insect and that was pin sharp. So yes it has focus shift and the neurotic will find it by careful testing but, in practice, it is of no consequence. This is a stella lens. And by the way, the image will be poor below f5.6 anyway on MFT due to diffraction and is best avoided. Incidentally those RU-vid tests showed no focus shift below f4 so your problems are all diffraction not focus. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, people test for absolutes forgetting that all products are made to certain tolerances chosen to be inside operational parameters. The problems are all in the head, I know I suffered it too, you feel the lens is imperfect and somehow sub-standard but, in practice it will give you some of your best shots and its as cheap as chips; its win win ;-)
I got the lumix G free with my G9 and already had the leica 1.4. I have to say I really don't agree with your comments about focusing. The lumix g is noticeably faster, just snaps straight into focus. It's also much quieter, in fact silent. Obviously it's a more modern lens so that's not surprising. You also didn't mention that the lumix g has a noticeably shorter close focusing distance which means that for many subjects you can blurrier backgrounds just by moving closer to the subject. I also found that the difference in sharpness is minimal. Yes the leica is sharper, if you pixel peep, but in real life use its difficult to tell. The leica does have slightly nicer rendering though. After 6 months of comparing I sold the leica for enough money to buy the Olympus 45mm 1.8 so have 2 great lenses for the price of one
Thanks really helpful review, I like that you concentrate on how the lens performs both technically and artistically rather than just showing charts with lines etc. Where were you filming?
I have the Leica. My one gripe is the lens hood, it is not reversible, so the lens takes up more room than it should in the bag. It is certainly not a deal breaker, but just so people know. I wonder if there are any lens hoods in the current Lumix range you can replace it with? If so I would consider that just for ease of transport (if anyone knows let me know?). Apart from that I have been very pleased with my choice (I bought it second hand, so it didn't 'break the bank' either :-) ).
I bought one of the metal hoods they sell on Amazon (search for "Maxsimafoto LH46GF") for the 20mm 1.7 which (I believe) has the same 46mm filter thread. A lot of 25mm 1.4 users also use the same hood (if I remember rightly what I read at the time) so might buy a second one myself for my own 25mm 1.4 at some point. Haven't noticed any vignetting at all with the 20mm so the 25mm should be fine. One thing to look out for is there's some inconsistency with these hoods regarding caps. I bought a similar hood for the 12-32mm kit lens zoom, I think the filter thread was 37mm but the thread the outer side of the hood was slightly smaller/larger so it wouldn't accept the cap. So had to buy a 43mm lens cap as the hood had two outer threads. The 46mm one was fine and the same cap fit, but I bought a new cap for it anyway, one with pinch grips in the middle, only because the buttons on the very edge of the standard cap were hard to press when reaching into the hood...
Shoot, I thought the Leica would be a nice replacement for my Lumix one, but I think the difference wasn't too large enough. I think i'll look at at replacing my 12-60 kit instead. Thanks for the video :-)
thank you. for this Video Matti, now I want to exchange my Lumix 25mm for the Leica :)..not that I am unhappy with the Lumix, but you made me curious....
I mean...I paid brand new $150 for the Lumix 25mm, can I really complain? Also I've dropped it a couple times with no damage. I use it on my Olympus and chromatic aberration is very low and easy to fix. I would hope the extra amount you pay for the Liaca, it should have less chromatic aberration for the camera to adjust. That is one thing that separates the basic prime lenses from the pro grade for Olympus because their bodies don't compensate for the chromatic aberration. I would buy another Lumix lens based on my experience.
I loved your review, it was not just informative but the sense of composition of your shots is amazing. It's simply great. I also love the focal length you shot the video in. Could you please provide information on what lens you used to shoot the episode?
Bought the 1.7 lumix last week, it saved me money for an Oly 60mm (Sorry Panasonic)... But Hello Panasonic my GX8 gets a brother... The G9 is on it's way😀 That said I now appreciate my lovely GX8 even more... It is a perfect marriage with the 50mm 1.7... Excellent for Street Photograhpy... The G9will be for Makro and Nature and Landscape Thanks Panasonic your GREAT👍
I actually had the Leica 25 mm f/1.4 for a short period of time, but found that it does not work well on my Olympus body (EM-5 MkII at that time) - the aperture was constantly active (or so it seemed/sounded), and it added to the shutter noise. Very strange. Optics and build quality are fine, and newer firmwares on Olympus cameras might improve the behavior of this lens on OM-Ds.
@@mattisulanto Thanks for your answer! I might give it a second try some day, at least to see if the problem is gone. Or I might go Panasonic (but I doubt that, I like Olympus cameras too much ;-)).
Thank you, Matti! now is about the only time I can actually spend hours learning how to with Lumix g7, and I have just ordered the G 25, hope to get it soon. Maybe you know of a VERY beginner but quite detailed tutorial for G7 ?
If you are going to do a lens test video please can you upload in 4k, it is very hard to see a difference in 1080p with youtubes compression. Otherwise good video
interesting video, thank you. i have the Leica f/1.4 and I have to say I'm very disappointed with it. I use it on a G9 body and the aperture blades are REALLY noisy. Anyone else have this problem?
It does make quite a noise when you change aperture in MANUAL mode. In A-mode or S-mode, it's silent when the aperture is being changed automatically by the camera. However, unlike newer lenses that don't make any sound at all when the camera is set on SILENT MODE and you press the shutter, the Leica f1.4 emits a low "scratching" noise when you do. It would be quite audible when shooting in a very quiet environment like a church wedding or funeral. Don't know why Matti didn't mention that, as it seems to be a character flaw of the Leica f1.4. BTW, I'm talking about the 1st version of the lens w/c I got 2nd hand for $260.00. Other than the noise and the fact that you can't reverse the lens hood, I'm loving it!
One one hand... On the other hand... Seems like you need three hands to make a decision between the two lenses. I took the easy way out (maybe) and ordered a used Leica 25mm. I was a little concerned about the possible focus shift on the Lumix 25mm mentioned in another video. We’ll see how that goes.
@@JSyntax It's the mic that comes with the Rode wireless filmmaker kit. I think it's the same as the Smartlav, but with different connector. Mine is a recycled version, that had a broken connector that I replaced.
I just bought a Lumix G25mm f/1.7 but I have trouble focus when shooting youtube videos. It won't focus when I set on video M mode (I have G9) unless I have somebody sit on the chair then I manually focus on the object. Could you tell me how I can keep my subject focus? Thank you!!
There are so many options on the G9 autofocus that it would take too long to explain all. Make sure the AF is on. It should focus either by tapping the screen or touching the shutter button. If you turn on the face detection, it should automatically find your face when you enter the frame.
I just ordered the Leica lens and I'm swallowing really hard because I see a lot of mixed reviews online, apparently there is quite some sample variation.
Hi Matti, nice videos Ilike it. I Just bought the Panasonic Lumix 25mm 1.4 Mk II and observed some sounds from the focus when I changed the focus. Did you have the same exprience on that? Best regards, Andi
I own the Lumix G f/1.7, but due to its terrible focus shift I can't get any really sharp results out of it. I'm thinking of buying Leica f/1.4, but I'm not sure it will be much better. Olympus f/1.2 is very expensive for a m43 standard lens.
People talk a lot about that focus shift issue, but I can't see any of it. Do you have any image samples that you can show with the aperture info, maybe a link.
@@mattisulanto When I bought the Olympus 12-100 f/4, I wanted to compare it against all my prime lenses. I took a simple picture of my balcony view. By no means it was a scientific test, because I didn't repeat the shots and AFAIR I used autofocus. At that point I found that 25 f/1.7 was the only one which didn't make the green leaves sharp. I just thought it was its limitation. drive.google.com/open?id=14wZWArsyQllyXypsENZOWvWDbn6djcns Recently I came across the Camerahoarders review and I assumed this is the explanation of what I was getting. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-M_RQDgRp6qk.html
@@mattisulanto Not sure my previous answer went through, because it contained a GDrive link. When I bought the Olympus 12-100 f/4, I wanted to compare it against all my prime lenses. I took a simple picture of my balcony view. By no means it was a scientific test, because I didn't repeat the shots and AFAIR I used autofocus. At that point I found that 25 f/1.7 was the only one which didn't make the green leaves sharp. I just thought it was its limitation. Recently I came across the Camerahoarders review and I assumed this is the explanation of what I was getting. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-M_RQDgRp6qk.html Find me on FB or otherwise if you're interested in the sample photos, as YT will cut out the links.
In the video I say "This is the third video I'm filming with the Lumix S1R..." English is not my first language, but I think that means my video camera is the S1R.
I've been watching almost all your video and found them great...However, I've bought a GH5 and while being a newbie in video at this stage ( the corona virus will -I hope- give me time to learn since I'm in the Italian Red Zone south of Parma) I was wondering which lens would you advice me to look for a great low light and bokeh ? I'm a little lost since I fully understand that gears can be appropriate for Photography (where you excells to explain and video...But I suspect that you probably would also know the video area...I was thinking on the Olympus 17 mm F1,2 or maybe the EICA DG VARIO-SUMMILUX 10-25mm / F1.7 ...But might be wrong as often ☺️ Thanks a lot for for reading and maybe for the answer ? In aaddition, maybe it's not the right place to post this but havent seen a PM or website..
Thanks! If you can afford the Leica 10-25mm F1.7, it's the best video lens in my opinion. It's expensive, but for video it's simply amazing. You'll get enough background separation and pretty nice bokeh too, if you shoot wide open. You are going to need a variable ND filter too to able to shoot wide open outside. I have a Nisi Pro ND-Vario 1.5-5 stops, which is really high quality and does not soften the image. Five stops is not quite enough, though, on a bright day and you may have to stop down to about F2.8-4. Check out Nisi website for more details.
@@mattisulanto Thanks so much...indeed it's a price but..I prefer buy something that will keep me satisfied for years..strange to say this in this context...A warm hello from Parma , my wife and I went to Helsinki last june...amazing trip..
I bought the leica for $400 awhile back and absolutely love the characteristics it gives to the picture. Too bad it was stolen. I still want another but I'm not ready to drop down so much money on it when I already have the olympus 12-40mm f2.8
@@benny910 Versatility wise, hands down the 12-40mm. That lens is on my camera 90% of the time. When I had the Leica, I only use it occasionally bc it's a prime lens. However, the lens produces a very unique look to all my photo that I can't get from any other lens I have owned before or since. If you take a lot of photo at 50mm, then go with the Leica. It's worth the money. If you want one lens the covers the most commonly used range, 24-70mm, then you can't go wrong with the 12-40mm.
@@peace4myheart thanks for the insights. I have the 17mm and 45mm prime as well as the Lumix 12-50mm f3.5 which has been surprisingly outstanding for a kit lens. Just seeing if it's worth upgrading my zoom to either the Oly or Pana F2.8 or picking up a used Leica for $300-400 CAD
@@benny910 Wow, I really want the Lumix 12-60mm bc that covers 95% of the range I use. Only thing is I have the Olympus 12-40mm already and I am very happy with it. When I started out, I was a prime lens user. I had the 17mm, 25mm, 45mm, and the 50-200mm. I shoot family photos most of the time, while on occasion, I shoot nature and street photography for fun. I had to constantly change the lens for family photo so it wasn't very practical. After my 25mm got stolen, I sold my 17mm and 50-200mm, and bought the Oly 12-40mm, kept the 45mm for portrait, bought an oly 14-150mm for traveling. From what you have, the 12-60mm, I feel buying the Oly 12-40mm is a little redundant. Unless you really want the constant aperture for low light shooting, I think the 12-60mm is a great lens and has dual IS function if you have a compatible panasonic body, which helps a lot with low light. Depends of what you shoot, I think you are pretty much covered for general purposes. You should look at the 25mm as a specialty lens in the same term as your 45mm, but you need to think about what you use it for. No point in spending so much if it doesn't get a lot of use. Anyway, happy shooting.
I have just bought the Leica 25 F1.4 mk1 i think the aperture sounds more louder clicking than the Lumix 25 F1.7. Is this normal, do you remember if your did that to? :)
I review the lenses that are available for me. I can't buy every lens I review and no one sends them to me for free. I own some Panasonic gear and I can easily borrow it too. However, if you have other brand lenses and you are willing to support my channel, please send me some lenses and I promise I'll review them. Please check out Peter Forsgård's or Robin Wong's channels for Olympus.
@@mattisulanto and there are many of those, I asked David Thorpe and he to could not find it ,given that both he and yourself are indeed photographers of note this may be one of those 'it's happened to one or two people therefore its inherent in the lens as a whole' thanks
It seems very odd to buy an f1.4 lens and have to stop it down to get it sharp. I suppose the question is, how soft is soft? I haven't been able to find any good sample images on Flickr, and there's no point looking on IG. :-(
@@hughjohns9110 That is an opinion, your opinion and you are entitled to it, of course. However, there are many happy users of the Leica 25mm F1.4 who think it's a great lens. It's still also one of my favorite MFT lenses even though I have not been a brand ambassador for 2.5 years. My opinion is based on my own experience, not on reviews. But, if you are only interested in sharpness wide open, this lens is probably not for you.
That is a very good question. This video is already more than two years old and I can't remember exactly. I guess I wanted to show real photos and not test photos, because I don't like taking test photos. I'm sure there are "proper" comparisons too, if you google.
@@mattisulanto thanks for the answer. I meant at least like the same shot and not identical ones, especially the ones used for pixel peeping which I agree is no useful thing in the real world of looking at photographs!
Where are you shopping?? I bought the 25 1.7 over a year ago for €119 new! - ok, there was a special on, but even then it was no more than €159, used you can get them barely above €120, the prices you show for both are way OTT
The prices vary and I just show them so you can compare the two. To get the idea that the other one is much more expensive. I too have seen the Lumix G for even €95 new, but that was a special deal.
@Uncaged. These lenses cost a lot more in the UK. The lumix 1.7 is £150 new, and the leica 1.4 is a whopping £450. A cracking lens no doubt, but not at that price!
@@nickking7494 I buy from the UK mostly because it's actually cheaper than here in Ireland. It's only the very odd time there will be a bargain, like the time I got the 1.7 - I see the 1.4 going used on the likes of MPB regularly for less than £300, in fact right this minute there's a bunch of them on there in excellent condition for £279
@@Cagey7531 surprised that the UK prices are cheaper than Ireland, thought it would be the other way round. Always good to keep on the lookout for a bargain. I got my 1.4 from gumtree, one year old, mint condition for just under £200, so I cant complain.
@@nickking7494 You only need look at online camera stores from Ireland, try connscameras, their prices are shocking. And because they still do well, people expect to get more for their gear when selling on after buying from them. Even their used prices are worse than some UK new
I did it manually in FCPX, but you can make in Motion and After Effects too. Here is some sort of tutorial how to do it in FCPX: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YdlOONWzgUM.html
Nice review, Thinking of the Olympus pro 1.2,, I have the Lumix G, its a really small Nice lens. For now I ll stick to it, because my Instagram images (:-)) are pretty good with it. I have the 12-100f4 olympus for the rest (mind blown) . I had an interesting offer on Leica lens second hand guess am gonna pass that one. thanks again.
If I were you I would stay with what you have, its better. The olympus has 20 lens elements and, whilst it is sharp wide open edge to edge (its designed for wide open portraiture under studio lights), it renders a lifeless dead image when used generally. This of course doesnt matter to commercial ProTogs as their images all have very shallow DoF; they dont take hyperfocal images. In fact, its so dead I can see the effect even in RU-vid reviews (usually with the reviewer pointing to the dead image and saying how sharp and wonderfull it looks; I wont comment, giggles, turn the sound down and look, its blatantly obvious); it is that marked. Let me help get your eye in, look for the rainbow flare that comes from coatings on 40 surfaces. The Lumix G on the other hand is very sharp and renders images dripping with microtones, having only 8 lens elements, that give my Leicas a run for their money. I have no idea why this lens is so cheap, its really good. If you must buy Olympus buy the f1.8 as all the Premier f1.8 models are stunningly good and blow the Pro lenses away. Frankly, I think the Pro lenses are optically poor; no lens should have more than 14 elements; more glass indicates poor design using many components to sharpen at the expense of image quality. If you doubt me, the best lens in the world is the Leica f0.95 Noct and that has 7 elements and costs $12500; reducing glass in a fast lens is very expensive hence, Olympus brings the cost down by adding glass and reducing quality. Go figure, no such thing as a free lunch ;-)
@@vicibox Thank you so much for the reply. Full disclosure, I went GAS, and got the Pro as it went on a 35% off in sale. I think i will keep for few months and see how it goes and maybe sell it if I dont see an absolute dominating results compared to Lumix 25 1.7. Apart from hobby, I shoot small gigs for friends and family mainly events. and at times Need that extra stop of light. I will test it out with my trusty 1.7 and see the results. So far the 1.2 pro I have only taken few shots. Does not blow away with results , playing with Dof , will test it out and see how it goes. For travel it will be my Lumix baby, Yeah I agree with You . Panasonic is selling this darn cheap. NEver tried the Oly 1.8 25 mm (I have the Oly 45 mm 1.8 and thats fabulous, shot an outdoor wedding with it and I liked the pictures.) The Lumix baby struggled a bit at dimly lit place. but I havent played a lot with shadows. Will try to pitch both out and see the results. I usually venture out at night to take pictures and street too. Guess as U said its mainly built for the studios. So far handling wise its big, ( I need my EM5ii grip to go with my 1.2 pro) or the balance is weird.
@@lateralridge Well there you have it, that is exactly what it was designed for, low light gigging, shot wide open. You cant resolve volume and depth when the DoF is a few inches, you essentially are getting a very sharp flat field. Photographers now never seem to understand that lenses are designed for a purpose and that optimising one set of features degrades others. These lenses are poor for street and landscape; for that you need a well corrected, low glass prime that is optimised for hyperfocal distance. I use the Olympus 17mm f1.8 which is stunning as is my 45mm f1.8. Panasonic and Voightlander seem to make the best fast lenses for MFT but I have no use for the extra stop so I can spend my money on something else = have fun ;-)
The Sigma 30 mm F1.4 is a bit more sharp. Also, the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 is more sharp than 25mm F1.7 and is like the 25mm F1.4. For resuming (sharpness only) : Sigma 30mm F1.4 > Panasonic 25mm F1.4 = Panasonic 20mm F1.7 > Panasonic 25mm F1.7
I'm sure there are comparison available, if you google. I have never used the Olympus lens, but I can say right away, that it's bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive compared to these Leica/Lumix lenses.
I've owned both, I got the leica second hand. I really wasn't happy with the soft look of the f1.7 plus it just felt cheap (because it was). To be honest the leica glass is lovely in image quality but it's really a piece of shit; it's noisy and sloppy in focus, unpredictable in tracking all focus settings suck on this lens (AF CAF MF) It doesn't have the same quality casing as later leica lenses and for a 50mm equivalent to not have an aperture ring and a manual/auto focus switch is just a shitty deal if you want to shoot street or videography. This lens needs an update - PANASONIC I LOVE YOU BUT ARE YOU LISTENING?? I'm going to replace mine with a zoom I think whilst I will keep my 15mm and 42.5mm f1.7 lenses.
We have very different experiences on these lenses, but I of course, I can't say yours is wrong. I agree though, that the 25mm f/1.4 could benefit from an update and maybe make f/1.2 at the same time.
Your reviews are so weird, random images at random f stops .... how about taking same images of the same subject with same f stop and give us a real comparison .....omg some people are so weird
@@mattisulanto you don't get my point, a comparison is about "comparing", and that means putting them in the same situation,or as close as possible and see the differences, for example same photo of the same subject one the maximum aperture, of course that is only in the case that you want to actually help people with your reviews and not waste anyone's time..... very weird approach..... good luck with your future reviews mate
@@thatdeephouse1207 That is your interpretation of comparison. For example Collins dictionary says: "When you make a comparison, you consider two or more things and discover the differences between them." That's what I did in the video. I just did not do it the way you expected and that got you upset. I'm sure you'll get over it soon. All the best😀
@@mattisulanto Yes, exactly, i think that who doesn't get it is you mate, the 2 things are the 2 lenses in this case, and discovering the differences is what i mentioned, comparing 2 persons skills with one of them playing soccer and the other basketball is impossible, u must put them in the same situation, it seems like u have a problem on understanding that, i can give you 200 examples but you would not get it, as you live in this perspective that you are never wrong, and i can tell this just with the 2 answers that u gave me on my comment, it's very hard to improve when you dont accept a mistake, but again, maybe it is not your intention.... I've met a lot of persons like you that would never accept a critique and i feel very bad for them because they would never get better at anything, and again maybe is not what you are looking for, u should search again what a comparison means, maybe a detailed explanation because obviously you have problems on interpretating the definitions. Good luck with your life
