Luminous prime for MFT (25mmf1.4 or 75mmf1.8) , or 12-40mmf2.8

Speaking of luminous prime lenses for MFT, people generally compare Panasonic 20mmf1.7 and 25mmf1.4 (Cameralabs did that) or Panasonic 42.5mmf1.2 with Olympus 45mmf1.8 or 75mmf1.8 (Cameralabs once again did that).

I personally bought twice the 45mmf1.8, but also sold it twice : it's a wonderful lens, but I could not force myself to change lens between the Olympus 12-40mmf2.8 and this one for a better bokeh, just for a little more than one F stop.

The Panasonic 45mmf1.2 was over my budget, and after reading Cameralabs and the bokeh comparison, I finally decided to find a used 75mmf1.8 at a reasonable price on eBay.

After that, as I noticed that many photos taken with my 12-40 were shot at 25mm, and reading again Cameralabs and comparing the perspective of both 20mm and 25mm lenses, I thought it could be nice to have such a luminous standard lend, finding the prime 20mm (which I also own) was definitely too wide to use it as an everyday and versatile lens.

Olympus is expected to release a 25mmf1.2 at Photokina 2016 ... but I'm sure it will be over my budget too ...

So I managed to find an affordable copy of the Panasonic f1.4 on eBay ...

So now I can compare these two incomparable lens (25mmf1.4 and 75mmf1.8) , which only share their wide aperture ...

So I went near my job in Paris 7ème and tried to shot the same subject with both lenses.

No need for usefulness suspense : the 75mm is much sharper and, in fact, much easier to use, if you have enough space to place yourself at the right distance, given the longer focal and narrower field of view. The biggest problem with the 25mm is the difficulty to have a consistent sharpness on the whole subject : the larger field of view and the shorter distance means the difference of distance between the edge of the subject and the center is over the depth of field at wide apertures.

Moreover, the bokeh and the background is more pleasant with the 75mm.

Let's have a look (need to look at 100% to compare sharpness).

Panasonic 25mm at f1.4

Olympus 75mm at f1.8

Another example, closing a little the diaphragm on the 25mm :

Panasonic 25mm at f2.0

Olympus 75mm at f2.0

Another example in a church (much less light). The wide aperture and the Olympus E-M5 II IBIS allow the use of low or relatively low ISO, so the noise is not a problem (especially using DxO prime noise reduction at 800 ISO)

Panasonic 25mm at f1.4

Olympus 75mm at f1.8

The 75mm allows to reach subjects which can not be framed tightly enough with the 25mm, like this one

Olympus 75mm at f1.8

It's interesting to compare with an older shot taken with the 12-40mm. At bf2.8, I had to use ISO1600 instead of ISO800 and the longest focal was a little short

Olympus 12-40mm at 40mm f2.8

The shot of the other statue is not as good as with the 75mm

Olympus 12-40mm at 24mm f2.8

Of course, as a general purpose lens and using a not-so-wide aperture, the results are very good for the Panasonic 25mm.

Panasonic 25mm at f4.0

But surely not better than the 12-40mm (taken another day and slightly different point of view)

Olympus 12-40mm at 12mm f4.0

The field of view of the 75mm allows to make good panoramic view (with vertical shots)

Panasonic 25mm (stitching 6 shots with Microsoft ICE)

Same point of view (but not same light) with the Olympus 12-40mm

Olympus 12-40mm at 12mmf3.5

On the other side, the amount of details of architecture elements shots you can get with the 75mm is just outstanding

Olympus 75mm

What was the point of this thread? I see a bunch of images, comparisons I guess, that have different light and angles between the 'sets" of comparable images. Are we supposed to believe that the wider primes is equal or "good enough" to the Oly long lens...or the 12-40 is a better option?

I did not want to be pretentious.

I wanted to share my experience that I could not use the 25mm Summilux as high quality general purpose and standard lens capable of isolating a subject.

As a standard lens, the 12-40 is better, and for isolating subject, the 75mm does a better job, and it offers a useful range extension to the 12-40mm

I posted the shots to show sharpness and bokeh in both usages.

I prefer to take the Olympus 12-40 and 75mm, even it is heavier, but not so much, and you don't need a big bag to carry them with the E-M5.

You prefer short telephoto 75 and zoom 12-40.  It has nothing to do with what the 25 can or cannot isolate.  If you want more isolation from the 25, you will have to physically move closer to the subject.  That is the way the focal lengths work.  All shots look fine to me.

Frdric, thanks for posting this. The comparisons may be a little unusual but are of value to me. I do not have any M43 prime lenses and have been considering the Panasonic 25mm and 42.5mm, both f1.7 lenses. So, some similarity wth the lenses you have demonstrated. However, I do have some SLR lenses and decided to try using a cheap manual adapter. The first adapter arrived and the 50mm f1.7 Minolta MD gives quite pleasing results. I posted an image here http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57770143

When the Contax/Yasica adapter arrives I'll be able to try 28mm, 55mm and 135mm.

Thanks for posting. Helpful thread. I have considered both buying the 25 or 75 lenses, so this gives me one more perspective.

The 75 and 25mm lenses you compare are for totally different purposes.

It's nice having a comparison, but this comparison somewhat misleading because while you're taking the same pic of certain objects, you're doing it from totally different physical locations.  I can't take useful pics of kids in my home at 75mm.  My house isn't big enough.  There's too much magnification.  The 25 is great at this.

They all have strengths and weaknesses.

Nice pics.  I can see how much better the 75mm is over the other two lenses.  I wish I can find more use cases for it - I already have a 45mm and a 60mm.

But the commentaries on your comparative analysis of the three lenses doesn't make much sense (to me at least).

miketala wrote:

I can't take useful pics of kids in my home at 75mm. My house isn't big enough.

I use the Oly 300mm. I had to buy a bigger house to use it in.

Frdric BERNARD wrote:

I did not want to be pretentious.

I wanted to share my experience that I could not use the 25mm Summilux as high quality general purpose and standard lens capable of isolating a subject.

As a standard lens, the 12-40 is better, and for isolating subject, the 75mm does a better job, and it offers a useful range extension to the 12-40mm

I posted the shots to show sharpness and bokeh in both usages.

I prefer to take the Olympus 12-40 and 75mm, even it is heavier, but not so much, and you don't need a big bag to carry them with the E-M5.

Well, isolating the subject is a relative thing. The PL 25 1.4 is quite capable in this regard, you only have to know how to use it. The 75mm brings the background much closer to the subject, that's why you feel what you feel. That's a possible use case if you want to kill the background totally. However, with the PL 25 1.4 you are able to tell the story which includes the background blurred. The blur effect becomes stronger if the background is further away.

Thank you all for your posts.

I know these lenses are incomparable, as I said as an introduction. But both being fast lenses for MFT, it made sens to me to shot same subjects (in these cases it was possible as I could change my point of view accordingly to the focal) and compare.

I think my taste leads me to longer focal for better subject isolation. But of course you need space. Moreover, if you look the uncolored statue in the church, or the mother with her daughter, you notice, with the 75mm, their "falling gaze" because I was just too far from the ideal distance to watch it. So distance can be a problem in some cases.

But a short luminous prime is still useful, especially when you don't have a big enough house

I appreciate the 75mm for example on the beach as there is enough room, and moreover my family is more comfortable when taking shots if I'm not "on" them with a short focal. And for the background you just need to see the scene takes place near the sea, you don't need details.

At home, the 25mm will be more adequate, at the condition I can use a wider aperture than f2.8 (if I can do with narrow depth of field, which may be a problem with moving or "complex" and multiple subjects in the frame, two or more playing kids for example), otherwise, the 12-40 will do the job, sharper.

I experienced that the 75mm allows more depth of field on the subject and "kills" more the background. The 25mm does just the opposite, so it's not so easy to use.

That said, after looking at these shots, and some others, I think that my copy of the 25mm may be de-centered, as the bottom edge of the frame is much softer than the opposite edge. Taking shots of a flat and gridded sheet of paper confirmed that. As I don't have an heavy use of the lens, I sent it to Panasonic support. Let's wait and see.

Nice shot !

I have an adapter for Nikon lenses, but it won't give the same convenience and lightweight than a native MFT lens.

The "funny" thing I found is a tilt adapter I use with a 28mm (which gives a 56mm equiv). Cheap solution !

The only other Nikon lens I kept is a ... catadioptric 500mm which gives a 1000mm equiv. "Bof !" I don't use it often ! Hard to frame with that !

Frdric BERNARD wrote:

Thank you all for your posts.

I know these lenses are incomparable, as I said as an introduction. But both being fast lenses for MFT, it made sens to me to shot same subjects (in these cases it was possible as I could change my point of view accordingly to the focal) and compare.

I think my taste leads me to longer focal for better subject isolation. But of course you need space. Moreover, if you look the uncolored statue in the church, or the mother with her daughter, you notice, with the 75mm, their "falling gaze" because I was just too far from the ideal distance to watch it. So distance can be a problem in some cases.

But a short luminous prime is still useful, especially when you don't have a big enough house

I appreciate the 75mm for example on the beach as there is enough room, and moreover my family is more comfortable when taking shots if I'm not "on" them with a short focal. And for the background you just need to see the scene takes place near the sea, you don't need details.

At home, the 25mm will be more adequate, at the condition I can use a wider aperture than f2.8 (if I can do with narrow depth of field, which may be a problem with moving or "complex" and multiple subjects in the frame, two or more playing kids for example), otherwise, the 12-40 will do the job, sharper.

I experienced that the 75mm allows more depth of field on the subject and "kills" more the background. The 25mm does just the opposite, so it's not so easy to use.

That's why I said that with the 25mm, if your goal is to blur the background, then the further background the better. And if your subject is further from you, then it will have more depth of field ( = it will look sharper). Balancing these variables can lead to beautiful pictures, but I agree, it needs some practice But don't give up the 25mm so easy!

And forget the sharpness problems, I suggest! My copy was decentered too. This is only a problem for low-light, big DOF scenes. Shoot at f1.4 with a relatively close subject, and the rest of the picture will be blurred away. Or stop it down to f8, and decentralization does not matter anymore (if yes, then that is a really wounded lens!).

That said, after looking at these shots, and some others, I think that my copy of the 25mm may be de-centered, as the bottom edge of the frame is much softer than the opposite edge. Taking shots of a flat and gridded sheet of paper confirmed that. As I don't have an heavy use of the lens, I sent it to Panasonic support. Let's wait and see.

With the shot at f4 I published, decentralization was not a problem, but as I have the 12-40, I don't need a 25mmf1.4 lens to shot at f8 or even at f4

I wish to use this lens mainly at f1.4 or f2. That's why I sent it to Panasonic for adjustment.

It's far easier with the 75mm to have your subject far from you (more DOF) and a blured background, but it's true that the 25mm's larger field of view lets more see the context of the scene, even if it is blured. I keep the 25mm !

As I said, the 45mmf1.8 did not satisfy me, perhaps because it's a strange balance (a "warm soup"), talking about the field of view, between these two extremes that are the 25mm and 75mm. If I need this field of view, I have it with the 12-40. If I need the bokeh, I prefer the 25 or 75.