Panasonic Leica 8-18mm F2.8-4 vs Olympus 8-25mm F4 Pro

[Andrew Ellis]

HI all,

I'm currently the owner for some years now of the venerable Panasonic Leica 8-18 F2.8-4 lens, which is a nice sharp copy. However I've always wished it had a little more focal length to make a truly one lens city shooting set up. Enter the Olympus 8-25 F4 Pro which seems to have the ideal focal length for this duty. For instance, I'm going NYC for a week in September, and thought the Olympus lens would perhaps be the perfect walk about lens ?

My question is, has anyone swapped from the Panasonic Lens to the Olympus one, and can give some thoughts good or bad about the swap. For instance, whilst it would be very nice to have a 16-50mm (FF equivalent range), you do lose the F.28 aperture at the wide end, which I've found useful as light levels drop.

What's everyone's thoughts, is it worth the addition $$ to upgraded to the Olympus lens or should I just stick with the Panny version ?

--
Lets make pictures, not war........

 

[glassoholic]

I've never missed more than 18mm. If I need more than 18mm, I need a lot more than 18mm....so my 12-100 goes back on.

My 8-18 is my second most useful lens.

 

[jeffharris]

HI all,

I'm currently the owner for some years now of the venerable Panasonic Leica 8-18 F2.8-4 lens, which is a nice sharp copy. However I've always wished it had a little more focal length to make a truly one lens city shooting set up.

Sounds like you already answered your question. An ultra-wide to “normal” zoom is pretty damn compelling!

Enter the Olympus 8-25 F4 Pro which seems to have the ideal focal length for this duty. For instance, I'm going NYC for a week in September, and thought the Olympus lens would perhaps be the perfect walk about lens ?

My question is, has anyone swapped from the Panasonic Lens to the Olympus one, and can give some thoughts good or bad about the swap. For instance, whilst it would be very nice to have a 16-50mm (FF equivalent range), you do lose the F.28 aperture at the wide end, which I've found useful as light levels drop.

What's everyone's thoughts, is it worth the addition $$ to upgraded to the Olympus lens or should I just stick with the Panny version ?

Sell the 8-18mm.

I have a 7-14mm f4 and would love the 25mm end of the 8-25mm.

I could see pairing the 8-25mm with the 35-100mm f2.8 or 50-200mm for hiking.

 

[mmd90]

your answer should be here https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-four-thirds-lenses/olympus-8-25mm-vs-panasonic-8-18mm/

 

[epozar]

There is no the "perfect lens" for anything.
You may as well find a fish-eye lens is best for those "against the sky" dramatic city shots.. or 75mm for across-the-street.. or..or
IMO just add a *small* telephoto to your existing setup.. perhaps Sigma 60/2.8 or 56/1.4
Bring along several ND filters.. ND64 and 1000 .. a mini table-pod .. you don't have to picture *everything* ))

--
Emil Pozar, http://www.alpfabet.com

 

[Promeneur]

I'm the same as glassoholic. I rarely miss more than 18mm with the PL 8 - 18mm and if I do I also want to go longer. Generally, beyond 35mm at that point. Where I do like 25mm is if I am shooting street photography and want a bit more distance from the person I'm photographing.

A 35 - 100mm will be handy on your trip to NYC. Have a great time here, the photo opportunities are endless!

 

[Trolleyman]

Since i got my 9mm/1.7 hardly ever miss the 8-18. Like most zooms mainly got used at either end of the range or in my case usually at 8mm.

No interest at all in the 8-25, dislike those wind out before use type lenses.

 

[EarthQuake]

HI all,

I'm currently the owner for some years now of the venerable Panasonic Leica 8-18 F2.8-4 lens, which is a nice sharp copy. However I've always wished it had a little more focal length to make a truly one lens city shooting set up. Enter the Olympus 8-25 F4 Pro which seems to have the ideal focal length for this duty. For instance, I'm going NYC for a week in September, and thought the Olympus lens would perhaps be the perfect walk about lens ?

My question is, has anyone swapped from the Panasonic Lens to the Olympus one, and can give some thoughts good or bad about the swap. For instance, whilst it would be very nice to have a 16-50mm (FF equivalent range), you do lose the F.28 aperture at the wide end, which I've found useful as light levels drop.

I find that with ultra-wide lenses, I generally want more in focus, so I end up shooting at F4-8 anyway. And in low light at 8mm, you can drag the shutter speed pretty low even hand-held. Especially with Olympus' recent bodies, up to 4 seconds in my experience. But 0.5-1s even with the IBIS in the old-gen bodies (original EM5/EM1).

Where a larger aperture would be nice is the long end, but both lenses are F4 here.

What's everyone's thoughts, is it worth the addition $$ to upgraded to the Olympus lens or should I just stick with the Panny version ?

I would say if you don't mind the expense and the size/weight difference, go for it.

 

[Albert Valentino]

I considered this a few months ago when Olympus had a good sale on the 8-25. I passed because when I checked ebay to see what the 8-18’s were selling for I realized I would likely net only about $400 after fees and shipping as demand was weak.

Another factor I consider is that both lenses look good on big bodies but should I even decide to get a OM5 type body, the 8-25 would be a bit front heavy while the 8-18 would be perfect.

Right now the 8-18 and 12-100 are my two main lenses. A bit big and heavy cobo but okay. The 8-25 paired with my little 40-150r would make for a sweet lightweight walk around setup. The 8-25 and 12-100 would start to become a small burden. Truth is, 25mm is my least used FL, so for now I am sticking with the 8-18, especially since I know I have a greqt copy

--
Truth never fears scrutiny.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

It's great to have the two options. Between them, I'd opt for the 8-25 for its feature set and to have a one-lens ultrawide-to-standard option. But if I owned the 8-18 I doubt I'd make the swap, just carry a second lens instead.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[buratino]

- on my EM5 III body. I wonder how 8-25 would work. While I usually do not zoom during the video, 8-25 is for sure not parfocal, and I have seen in somebody's review it can lose focus for a moment while zooming in. Anybody's experience?

 

[ahaslett]

your answer should be here https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-four-thirds-lenses/olympus-8-25mm-vs-panasonic-8-18mm/

Thanks for posting that. Conclusive as far as my interests are concerned.

Andrew

 

[X_Holger]

I had a good copy of the 8-18 for some years and sold it some months ago.

The 8-25 is a really versatile lens, F4 vs. F2.8 at 8mm is not such a big deal for me.

I have the impression that the 8-25 has more micro contrast than the 8-18.

If you really need a fast UW lens then there's the PL 1.7/9mm ...