1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

can anyone do a comparison of the P20/1.7 and the O25/1.8?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by twalker294, Feb 16, 2014.

  1. twalker294

    twalker294 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    543
    Aug 18, 2010
    I am very tempted by the O25 to replace my P20 but I would love to see some comparisons between the two in order to see if it would be worth the trouble to sell my 20 and get the 25. If anybody has both for some reason, I would very much appreciate a few comparison pics at the same aperture, wide open, stopped down, etc.

    Thanks!
    Todd
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

  3. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    Subscribing to this thread ... in hope.
    Actually I do not want to be swayed into buying the new 25mm but its all very crowded and interesting around this focal length on m4/3rds.
    Well worth discussions.
     
  4. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Why not simply upgrade to the PanaLeica 25 and benefit from its wonderful rendering and extra speed? Since you will be sacrificing the pancake factor with either 25.....
     
  5. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
    Get the Olympus 25/1.8, a jewel of a lens from a company thats been making lenses since 1936. It truly is an awesome lens.
     
  6. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    That's all I needed to hear. I'm putting in my order now! :th_salute:
     
  7. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    842
    Feb 20, 2013
    Wow, now that you mention it, from reading everything about the O25 vs the P25, the O25 and P20 seem like a very similar lens! The 20 is smaller and a bit easier to handhold in low-light. Wider, obviously. The O25 will come in two colors, have a tad more background blur wide open, and probably less distortion (not that the 20 is bad). But optically? I don't think it's worth getting in to. Well, not for me anyway. I've been known to be very picky but most of the native m4/3s lenses are good enough lenses for me. I'd take the O25 over the P25 based on size, looks, and price alone because optically they're so similar (and the half stop doesn't seem to be a huge factor with bokeh).
     
  8. Ramsey

    Ramsey Mu-43 Top Veteran

    718
    Jan 9, 2013
    Zagreb, Croatia
    I'd also like to see a comparison.

    P20, although great at perfect conditions, is just not reliable enough for me (actually for my capabilities as a photographer). I have far too much missed shots due to missed/slow focus. The 5mm wider field of view is just not worth IMO it if i can't use it in a indoor environment.

    the slow focus and low light capabilities did not improve as much as i hoped on a 16Mp body, and i'm willing to sacrifice a pancake factor.
    The PL25 did not impress me that much, could be because of me using it on an older body. I'm not a fan of leica look, and the sharpness was not all that (again, i'd rather blame my poor skills than the lens).
     
  9. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Plenty of nifty fifty buyers champing at the bit. It's sure to be a huge success!
     
  10. twalker294

    twalker294 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    543
    Aug 18, 2010
    I know and that's what gets me. The P25 does have its issues but there is just something about the photos that it produces that is awesome. It's not something you can measure or put your finger on, it's just a feel that they have. When I had a Canon, my 80-200/2.8L had that same quality and it was my favorite lens.
     
  11. sinar

    sinar Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Aug 25, 2010
    Gainsborough, England
    One thing i'm not so keen on about the P20 is that it does not focus very close, I'd love to know if the O25 can focus closer.
     
  12. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    Ummm... The P20 has a shorter MFD than the O25 (0.20m vs 0.25m). So the P20 can get 5cm closer than the O25, although it has a 5mm wider FOV.

    Really, the O25 paired with the new MCON-P02 does a hell of a job for a pseudo-macro lens. It will definitely serve my needs (once it shows up that is). And it's only $65.

     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. FlyPenFly

    FlyPenFly Mu-43 Veteran

    448
    Feb 15, 2011
    The p20 focus speed is nearly unusable to me, it also sounds likes some particle is stuck in the focus motor because it makes a Seriously unpleasant sound. I've tried 3 copies. The rendering of the lens is also very poor, it looks a bit harsh and too edged out with some of the poorest bokeh I've seen from a prime lens. The only redeeming quality is that it's a fast pancake.

    Either the pl25 or o25 will be much better in focus speed and rendering.

    However, if I were asked to take the Presidents portrait tmrw between the PannyLeica and the Oly, I would not think more than half a second to take the Panasonic Leica.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. rpringle

    rpringle Mu-43 Regular

    102
    Jan 9, 2014
    I ditched my P20 after I bought my EP5 because the AF was horrendous and I had the banding issue with my copy. Which ruined a couple night shots. I have the 17mm 1.8 that came with my EP5 and the AF is leaps and bounds better. I enjoy the smooth bokeh and color rendition from the Olympus much more. Although I do kind of miss the ultra sharpness I got with the P20 at such a tiny size, however as FlyPenFly stated it was a bit harsh. I would expect the same quality from the Oly 25mm 1.8 as any other Olympus prime to date. I have heard that the Pl25 has a bit more CA on the Olympus body vs Panasonic. But I've never owned one to confirm.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. timg

    timg Mu-43 Regular

    74
    Jun 13, 2012
    I know there's a lot of subjectivity involved here but seriously, we must be using a different lens! :) I'll give you that the P20 is a bit slow and noisy to focus but the IQ, rendering and bokeh are all excellent...
     
    • Like Like x 4
  16. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The 20mm can focus just under 8 inches! However the AF often won't lock on that close and you have to switch to manual. This is an issue for most AF lenses. According to the specs the 25mm's closest focus is just under 10 inches.


    I agree. My 20mm is very sharp with excellent bokeh. I have never had an issue there. The issues I have with it are slow and noisy AF, AF will not lock at closest focus and every now and then it misses focus. So my complaint is that the AF sucks on this lens. The Panasonic 14mm on the other hand does not have these problems except for AF close up{but even there it is far less of a problem than the 20mm}.
     
  17. silver92b

    silver92b Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 7, 2013
    Atlanta, GA
    I had the P20 and I agree with others experience. The autofocus is terrible. The lens was practically unusable with my EM5. I bought the P25f1.4 and it was an awesome lens. Much, much better than the P20 I had. The only issue was the size of it and something about it just did not flow for me so I sold it too. I bought the O17f1.8 and find it quite pleasant to use and seems to have very good IQ. I don't know if I'll keep it though. The O25f1.8 looks really neat and it's awfully tempting to order... I'm sure it is a very good lens that will compare well with the Panasonic primes.

    Even though I like the idea of using primes, I find the P12-35 to be much more versatile. I have the PL35-100 on order too.
    Frankly, I would have gone with the O14-40 but for the higher price and that there is no O40-100f2.8 in production yet..
     
  18. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    I will confess I haven't used the 20mm on the OMD, I now use the 17 instead...but never had cause to complain with the focus speed, the bokeh or the overall look when I shot it extensively on my e-P1

    maybe my shooting style is different or my expectations were lower, but I have fond memories of using that lens, both in the light and the dark

    5215016220_5b1e138103_b.
    The Check by kevinparis, on Flickr

    5330142834_14b4462959_b.
    S1052680 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    5214995132_71bea9c90b_b.
    Fashion Cycle by kevinparis, on Flickr

    6269066539_87d85e767f_b.
    Chocolate… Good! by kevinparis, on Flickr

    more 20mm shots here

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinparis2007/sets/72157625571589409/

    I really wish people didn't express their disappointment in such absolute terms. Preface your gripe with "I found..." or "For the photos I was trying to take...."

    The 20 is a fine lens, and will serve many people well.

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. alex66

    alex66 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    715
    Jul 23, 2010
    I do think a good comparison of the "normals" would be an interesting exercise though ideally it would be done on a couple of bodies say a em10 and GX7 or similar. I would as well as the ones that are classed as standards 20mm, both 25's and Sigma 30 add the Oly 35's and sigma 19 as a lot of people see these as there standard and perhaps the manual focus lenses. The way I see it we have a fantastic choice in this area with 2 17's a 19 a 20 2 25's and a 30, I have had and sold the 17 2.8 and the 30, if the 30 could be an f2 it would be awesome, though its IQ is pretty brilliant as is. In some way it is pretty bad though, the temptation to acquire quite a few is very strong and one I will give in to I can see in the near future a 20 and one of the 25's making their way here, they are different enough for me just by their subtle change in angle of view. I used to have 40,50,55 on an M3 so there is form there, had well into double figures of 50's at one point.
     
  20. lightmonkey

    lightmonkey Mu-43 Veteran

    480
    Dec 22, 2013
    I had the P20 and while I didnt find the AF performance at all slow, I did not find it blazing fast as I had (incorrectly) assumed was true of all M4/3 products. It was mounted on EM5.

    Ultimately I gave it up because I didnt like the color rendering compared to a Fuji X100 at the time. The Fuji's AF was worse but it was an acceptable trade-off at the time.