Defective Oly 25mm lens

D Knisely wrote:

I said you are expecting too much because the Olympus 25/1.8 is simply NOT a great lens. Perhaps every now and then, somebody gets incredibly lucky with a great copy, but I doubt very much that your copy is out of spec.

It does not review well, and it isn't stellar. That's why it is also cheap. For that matter, Nikon and Canon 50mm f/1.8 lenses are designed to be cheap and aren't all that great, even in the new Nikon G version or the Mk II version from Canon. They are OK, but they aren't pro lenses.

I picked up the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 @$99 (two copies, actually), and they are both OK. Not great; not terrible, but OK. For the price, I'm happy. I wasn't expecting a pro lens. Don't confuse this lens with the Olympus 45/1.8, 12/2, 75/1.8, etc. It is not in the same league (as is the case for the 17/1.8).

I disagree for multiple reasons:

-The 25/1.8 is well-reviewed, especially for its sharpness. Many comment on its large area of central sharpness even wide-open, which I would agree with if not for the decentering to spoil it. Not sure why you ranked this below the Olympus 45/1.8, which is an older, less optically-complex, but identically-priced, lens that is now made in Vietnam. Theoretically, the 25/1.8 outperforms the 45/1.8 in the corners.

-I don't consider the 25/1.8 cheap, either in relative or absolute terms. I've had much greater success finding acceptably centered copies of Oly's cheaper or equivalently priced lenses (e.g., 14-42 II R, 40-150 R, 45/1.8) and even the 17/1.8, which is more expensive but received more mixed reviews. I never had to go through one bad copy of any of them before I found a copy that was excellent, unlike the 25/1.8 where I couldn't after 5 copies. Today I bought a Panasonic 20/1.7 II new for almost half the price of a 25/1.8 retail price, and the first one I tried (and bought) was perfectly centered.

And I've also tried multiple copies of Canon and Nikon's nifty fifties which were 1/2 to 1/4 the price of the 25/1.8 and didn't have such decentering issues. Canon in particular should be applauded for making such remarkably consistent lenses without decentering for their newer STM lenses. I'm guessing their automation technology has a lot to do with it.

Oly is by no means the only offender of producing a number of decentered lenses (still better than Sony in my opinion - at least it seems limited to this lens), but it's not something that I think can be excused anymore simply because a lens 'only' retails for $400.