Panny 25mm 1.4 vs Olympus 25mm 1.8 Reviewed

Started Feb 15, 2014 | Discussions thread
mh2000 Senior Member • Posts: 2,813
"Less than precisely rigorous," maybe

Loga wrote:

Not to mention that he compared the bokeh / DOF in a changing environment. I think this comparsion is simply useless. A tad closer focus to the subject with the Oly and the difference seems to be disappear. So, we should find the real difference with tripod / locked subject.

However, f1.4 vs f1.8 is not that important IMHO. To me, focusing ability is much more a difference. Since I also experienced that the PL25 can miss focus on my OM-D wide open, if the Oly is really that precise, then this is the reason I would buy it over the Pana.

amtberg wrote:

dgrogers wrote:

amtberg wrote:

The bottom line to me for the 25mm FL and MFT is that -- all else being equal -- I want as skinny a depth of field as I can get. It's not that big of an issue at longer focal lengths, because you naturally tend to get narrower DOF, but separation can be hard to achieve at 25mm.

Robin suggests that the difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 isn't significant here, but that's not my experience. Here's a comparison between the two apertures on my Voigtlander 25mm/.95 (roll over image to see the difference):

Given that the lenses both have excellent IQ, and the PL/1.4 can be had for close to the same price, I'd go for the PL over the Olympus. It's purely academic for me as I'm happy with the Voigt and I'm not likely to purchase either lens.

So there is a noticeable difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 on your Voigtlander. The difference between the Panny 25mm f/1.4 and the Oly 25mm f/1.8 isn't nearly as noticeable, at least in Robin Wong's samples. What does that tell us?

I don't think it's clear at all that the DoF difference isn't noticeable between the two lenses. Rather, I don't think Robin is playing it quite straight. Notice in the shots with the peppers, for example, that the Oly shot is focused closer than the PL shot, which makes a big difference re: the background blur? I think he picked his shots to downplay the difference.

I would hardly say this was "useless." "Less than precisely rigorous," sure, but not useless.

If you are designing a shot around the DoF differences between shifting your focus point a few mm, I think you are missing the point.

Typically, when people traditionally compared a 50/1.8 vs a 50/1.4, it was usually based on lens quality differences, not nit picking the differences between f1.8 and f1.4. Looks like only the build quality of the P/L 25 is noticeably better in this case.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow