Itching to replace Panny 20 mm1.7 with PL25 mm1.4

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Bhupinder2002, Jan 8, 2012.

  1. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I had some money set aside for Panasonic GX1 but I have decided to keep EPL2 only and buy a new lens instead Now after owning Panny 20 mm1.7 nearly for 18 months , I am thinking of swapping it with PL 25 mm 1.4
    I do love the size of 20 mm 1.7 and quite happy with optical performance .I am just wondering if someone has both lenses and can shed more light on the major differences from IQ point of view . My only two major concerns are PL 25 mm 's noise on Oly bodies and its size .
    Cheers
    Bhupinder
     
  2. speltrong

    speltrong Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    May 8, 2011
    Northern California
    I'd be curious to hear about this too. The PL25 is the lowest prime on my buy list because it's so close to the specs of the 20mm. While I've wished my GF1 would go to ISO 204,800 to get better low-light shots :)P), I've never wished the 20mm went down another half-stop but was three times larger, five times heavier and twice the price. The optics had better be *stellar* for that kind of inconvenience and bulk.
     
  3. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    The optics on the PL 25 are stellar! :wink::biggrin:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Grinch

    Grinch Mu-43 Top Veteran

    813
    Jan 9, 2011
    Canada
    My 20 has been mounted once, since I got a 25, back in August. Mine hasn't rattlesnaked yet...on E-P2 and E-P3. Makes the 20 seem slow to focus, only advantage was a little wider when needed. Oh and you won't twist your wrist off trying to manual focus the 25, the 20 will give you carpal tunnel. Both great lenses, the 25 is just what the 20 should have been for handling and auto focus, size is the trade off(maybe).
     
  5. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    This is extremely YMMV, but here goes...

    I just replaced the 25mm for the 20. The 25 is big, heavy, and super expensive. It is also super fast, super fast at AF, and extremely good optics. But bolted onto the PEN, it defies the point of the whole system IMO. Now if you're doing studio work or using the larger Panasonic bodies, then maybe (though OIS would have been nice). I didn't care about the aperture rattlesnake so much, and the operational speed of the 20 on third gen PENs is poor. But it's sucj a wonderful lens to simply slip into a pocket. And while the PL25 took great pictures and focused in a snap, it just weighed me down too much (in pocket and bank account) to enjoy it.
     
  6. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    Had exact same experience w/PL25, only I was bothered by rattlesnake very much and also min. focusing distance is awkward compared to Panny 20. Even if both are same price I'd stick w/Panny 20 cause PL25 is way too bulky (and quite heavy) to fit in a jacket
     
  7. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Thanks guys. I am feeling much better and hope GAS will pass away .I already picked up Olympus 45 mm 1.8 instead of Panny 45 mm 2.8 an I am happy with it.
    Cheers
     
  8. Dave in Wales

    Dave in Wales Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 5, 2011
    West Wales
  9. kenc

    kenc Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Dec 18, 2011
    They are both amazing lenses, offering great support to anyone's photographic talents and aspirations. I own, and love, the Pl25 and don't see it as being excessively bulky, or wildly expensive, or yadda yadda. I am interested and happy to note that lots of people have an erotically satisfying and philoprogenitive (of fine images) relationships with the 20/1.7. Dave in Wales, I believe, in my heart of hearts, that you and the Zuiko 24mm will get it on together from your first date. About some things, it is probably irresistible to ask advice, but really, you have to decide, and people's advice will be their story, not yours. Get out there and take pictures with that lens (advice to himself of a hopeless gear freak).

    Oh dear. I think this might be another of those posts that I regret in the morning.
     
  10. moccaman

    moccaman Mu-43 Veteran

    281
    Jan 4, 2012
    Australia
    Hands up for the 20mm if you do decide to upgrade and want to sell!
     
  11. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    I guess I'm late to the thread and you've already decided, but to add my 2 cents for those who may search on this question later. I had the 20 and have the 25. They're both excellent lenses optically - I think the 25 may be marginally better, but its a close call - they're both great. So then it just comes down to a tradeoff between speed / speed (AF / Aperture) and size/cost. The 25 is definitely a lot larger and more expensive. But its noticeably better in low light at f1.4 (not that the 20 was any slouch at f1.7) and its MUCH faster to AF in any lighting conditions. The slow AF may be the achilles heel of the 20. The 25 is much better in this regard - about as good as ANY m43 lens. I guess the rattlesnake could be a downside, but I've never heard it. That said, I don't shoot this lens out in bright daylight often - neither of these lenses are my favorite focal length for every day shooting and both were/are low light specialty lenses...

    For me the 25 was an easy call but, as with most things, there's no right or wrong, just tradeoffs.

    -Ray
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. xdayv

    xdayv Color Blind

    Aug 26, 2011
    Tacloban City, Philippines
    Dave
    if it's too hard to decide, keep both. :biggrin:
     
  13. Markb

    Markb Mu-43 Top Veteran

    532
    Jun 9, 2011
    Kent, UK
    Mark
    Keep the 20 and spend the money saved on film. Oh wait, you don't have to :rofl:
     
  14. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Thanks Dave ..
    I think I will get PL25 and then compare myself . If i Like it then I will keep it , otherwise sell the one I less like ..
    Cheers
     
  15. las Palm as

    las Palm as Mu-43 Regular

    I sold the 20mm , because i prefer the 25mm focal. Optically the 25mm its better, and the 20mm raw, have a lot of barrel distortion, if you use , lightroom, aperture, ... there is no problem. I took lot of videos, and for that the 25 its better for a lot of margin. Take care the 25mm lens hood its big.
    But now i receive a gf3 and for rage finders cameras the 20mm its better.
    some photos:
    ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
    ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
    ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
     
  16. lattiboy

    lattiboy Mu-43 Regular

    158
    Dec 16, 2009
    This is an interesting discussion as I'm in a similar boat.

    I've now sold ALL my native M43 lenses in some weird purification process. I figured I'd get down to nothing and then see what I was missing. Also, I only really have the funds (and even this is stretching) for one of the M43 primes.

    I had the Panny 20mm. It is a damn fine lens, but if I only get ONE nice lens, I'd like it to be, you know, "special". This is at best an emotional argument, but it's valid to me.

    So, then it's down to the 45mm and the 25mm.

    -25mm is about $180 more, but it's a Leica (if only in name), has amazing silent AF , amazing sharpness, bokeh, and colors. Also, a stop faster.

    -45mm is about 30% cheaper, has exceptional sharpness and bokeh, and renders lovely colors.

    The thing driving me to spend the extra $$$ is the fact that I have a drawer full of manual primes in the 40-50mm range. All of them faster, many with equal IQ to the 45mm. To get anything near a 20-25mm below f/2 is going to run me damn near $500, with no AF.

    The only thing I don't care for about both is the rather lame MFD. But I have a 50mm Minolta macro, so this is probably not super important.

    So, I guess I'm about 5 hours away from jumping on the Unique Photo deal for $509 with the 25mm unless one of you fine people sways me :)
     
  17. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    The 25/1.4 is only two times the size and two times the weight of the 20/1.7. Yes it's bigger. It amazes me to live in a time when a 7 oz. (200 gm.) lens is considered not only heavy, but too heavy.

    Fred
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. gfspencer

    gfspencer Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Aug 24, 2011
    North Carolina
    I look at the PL25 lens from a different point of view. The bigger lens gives me more to hang on to. :wink:

    Since I got my PL25 I haven't used any of my other lens.
     
  19. speltrong

    speltrong Mu-43 Veteran

    338
    May 8, 2011
    Northern California
    Ahh, you're right - the site I went to was probably using the four-thirds version of the lens (referenced below). Oops :smile: Still, given the choice between a lens that was 5mm (10mm FoV) and a half-stop different than the one I already have and am happy with, and two others that have completely different uses and still good optics, I'd go for the latter.

    Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 G vs 25mm f/1.4 Leica D
     
  20. FastCorner

    FastCorner Mu-43 Veteran

    310
    May 28, 2011
    I'm also deciding between keeping my 20mm or getting the 25mm and thought the difference in use would be small, but within the context of my other primes (Panasonic 14mm and Olympus 45mm), moving to 25mm makes more sense. The 14mm is noticeably wide, and the 45mm is noticeably telephoto. The 20mm has enough of a hint of wide that I feel something distinctly normal would be a better complement to my kit.

    ... but then I look at the 20mm on my GF1 and can't get over how sweet the combo looks.

    :confused::confused::confused: