14mm 2.5 vs 17mm 1.8

Started Jan 31, 2014 | Discussions thread
sebiruns Contributing Member • Posts: 776
Re: Lens sharpness

sebiruns wrote:

Nobody says the Sigma is not a good lens. But first of all the PL25 is rather 3x the price - not 4x. And it has two more f-stops which cannot be measured in value. If you need that the price is what it is. And the better the lens the more you pay for just a little bit of extra quality. It is that way in every system. Look at Canon L lenses. The prices are not justifiable if you look at the added picture quality at comparable apertures. Same goes for Leica glass which costs thousands. Compared to these we are talking about a lens that has a very cheap price for what it is offering.

The last time I checked the 25mm was 4x the cost of the Sigma.

Anyway I thought this thread was about the 14 and 17.

At B&H the Sigmas cost 199$ and the PL25 is 529$. So this far from 4x. But you are correct. We have lost ourselves on a side-argument. Pana14 vs Oly17 was the discussion. I think the OP had too high expectations for the Oly. I love the lens for its built quality and the focus distance scale which makes manual prefocus a breeze but when it comes to actual sharpness it is just average for a prime lens. The 12-40mm zoom is sharper at 17mm wide open than the 17mm stopped down to f2.8. So I think the 50% higher price compared to the pana 14mm f2.5 is probably for the 1 f-stop you get, better built and the focus scale - which is plenty if you ask me. For sharpness improvement alone (if there is any at all) the price difference is too high in my book.

 sebiruns's gear list:sebiruns's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Olympus PEN-F Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow