Help Me Decide: Lumix 12-35 vs Voigtlander 17.5 & Lumix 14 f/2.5

noahtruth

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
15
I like doing a myriad of different things from portraits to street to video, etc. All of it is sort of a hobby for now but I'm getting more and more invested with time.

A wide angle is essential for street shots (14mm is plenty wide) but I also would like something for more intentional use and will give me great IQ. This is where the Voigtlander comes in.

However, I also like shooting video (music videos, commercials, etc.) and the OIS of the 12-35 is REALLY intriguing as I prefer a lighter, handheld setup. I'm using a GX7 body so camera shake concerns me w/out OIS.

So basically, the trade off seems to be IQ vs OIS for video.

Frankly, I'm not a huge fan of zooms as I currently am using a 14-45 but 95% of my photos are at 14mm. Obviously the 12-35 would be a step up in IQ though.

So which direction would you go? Would the Voigtlander blow the Lumix out of the water stopped down to 2.8 and beyond?

FYI, I also plan on purchasing a 45 1.8 down the road either way.
 

manzoid

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
141
I'm not one to tell you what you can and can't compare, but those are 3 pretty different lenses...

Not too long ago I was seriously considering the 25mm Voigtlander, the 14mm pancake and one of the 2.8 zooms. I went with the panasonic zoom when I saw a good deal.

My heart said Voigtlander, but I went with the zoom because I knew for me the autofocus and versatility of the zoom would out weight the shallow depth of field and low light shooting of the Voigt.... And while the pancake was tempting, I just couldn't see much advantage if I was set on buying one of the fast zooms.

Anyway a couple important factors you didn't comment on-
How important is size?
How important is weight?
How important is price?
How important is autofocus?

Also it's been a while since I read the reviews, but wile the Voigt may be much better at 2.8 in the center, I think the corners were a little soft on the normal range 0.95 primes. For the 17.5 I think I remember reading that field curvature was an issue and stopping down still wouldn't make for sharp corners at some distances... Might be something to look into if you are a pixel peeper.
 

noahtruth

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
15
I'm not one to tell you what you can and can't compare, but those are 3 pretty different lenses...

Not too long ago I was seriously considering the 25mm Voigtlander, the 14mm pancake and one of the 2.8 zooms. I went with the panasonic zoom when I saw a good deal.

My heart said Voigtlander, but I went with the zoom because I knew for me the autofocus and versatility of the zoom would out weight the shallow depth of field and low light shooting of the Voigt.... And while the pancake was tempting, I just couldn't see much advantage if I was set on buying one of the fast zooms.

Anyway a couple important factors you didn't comment on-
How important is size?
How important is weight?
How important is price?
How important is autofocus?

Also it's been a while since I read the reviews, but wile the Voigt may be much better at 2.8 in the center, I think the corners were a little soft on the normal range 0.95 primes. For the 17.5 I think I remember reading that field curvature was an issue and stopping down still wouldn't make for sharp corners at some distances... Might be something to look into if you are a pixel peeper.
Yeah, I'm basically in the same predicament. Heart says Voigt. Head says Lumix. Go figure.

Size and weight wouldn't be an issue as I'd mostly use the Voigt for specialty purposes and gigs. The 14 pancake would be my main walk-around/street lens.

Price difference is about $100-200 when throwing in the pancake. I'm not too concerned about paying a bit more for two primes.

Autofocus isn't much of an issue as I don't use it all that much when shooting portraits/low light/video. Plus, the GX7 has focus peaking.

Also not too concerned about the edges of the Voigtlander as I'd mostly be using it in the .95-2.8 range and bokeh would probably disguise a lot of lens distortion. I'm also more into the "artsy" look than having tack sharp images.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom