M.zuiko 9-18 + Leica 25/1.4 or M.zuiko 12/2 + Panasonic 20/1.7

Discussion in 'This or That?' started by krixoff, Mar 11, 2014.

  1. krixoff

    krixoff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 11, 2013

    I have M.zuiko 12/2 and Panasonic 20mm. I want wider than 12mm. I can't afford 7-14 but i found someone whom want to trade his M.zuiko 9-18 and interested by my 20/1.7 version II. It could be a good deal, what do you think? Then i can sell my M.zuiko 12/2 for to buy a Leica 25/1.4. The M.zuiko can up to 18mm even if aperture is f/5.6.

    So from
    M.zuiko 12/2 and Panasonic 20/1.7
    M.zuiko 9-18 + Leica 25/1.4

    The cons with M.zuiko 9-18 versus M.zuiko 12/2:
    -Bigger than M.zuiko 12/2
    -less shaper than M.zuiko 12/2
    -less lighter

    The cons with Leica 25/1.4 versus Panasonic 20/1.7:
    -Bigger than Panasonic 20/1.7
    -less sharper than Panasonic 20/1.7 at f/1.7 and f/2

    What do you think? Trade my Panasonic 20/1.7 II for the M.zuiko 9-18, is it a good deal?

    Thank you.
  2. jurgen

    jurgen Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 27, 2014
    I don't think so. You lose a lot of speed to go from 24mm to 18mm (equivalent). I would keep the 12, personally - bird in hand and all that.
  3. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Real Name:
    I would keep the 12mm & 20mm. If anything, you may want to sell the 20mm and get the new Olympus 25mm (that's what I did). I never realized how slow the 20mm focused until putting the 25mm on my camera, and it was instantaneous (the focus that is). Plus, you'll have a very nice Olympus trio (12/25/45). I have the same, except all my lenses are black.

    The 9-18 is a really slow lens, and even with IBIS on your GX7 you're still going to have either really slow shutter speeds or high ISO. The 12mm is a fantastic lens, and if you really do need a slightly wider view you can always take two images and stitch them with a program like Microsoft ICE.
  4. krixoff

    krixoff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 11, 2013
    Thank you! You are right, i always forget to take two pictures before to stich them.

    I got 20mm v1 and sold it for to buy Pana 25/1.4. It was too big and no really sharp (20mm is sharper than 25/1.4 at f/1.7 and f/2) for me, but it was a very fast lens. Sold it and bought 20mm v2 with GX7.
  5. moccaman

    moccaman Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 4, 2012
    I think the 25mm lens has more than just sharpness to offer, it has that immersive character of a leica lens, it can grab the subject and give them a dimensionality that other lenses miss. Pixel peeping is of no interest to me, printing 12x8 size shots is what interests me and the results from the 25mm are often winners.

    Yes the 20 is very sharp, I have both as well as the 9-18, while I really like the 9mm for its huge stage, its more a tripod landscape lens, and likely will only get used when I am on holidays and presented with architecture or landscape that begs for a huge wide image. I have the 7.5 too and while its a fun lens for capturing that geometric anomoly or adding an interesting twist (pardon the pun) to a scene, I have had very limited environments where I could actually use it.

    I reckon the 12mm is one I would use more for landscape if I had it, the 25mm has very fast focus and is nice for capturing people, indoor and night stuff. Would be interesting to see how good the new Oly 25mm is wide open, and I am interested in seeing the pana/leica 15mm and what it can do. 24-35mm is one SLR range I would like to have in a fast prime.
  6. krixoff

    krixoff Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 11, 2013
    Yes, i agree with you. 25/1.4 have more "characteers" that i didn't get with 20/1.7. thanks for your reply.
  7. BigTom

    BigTom Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 23, 2011
    Panny 20 for a 9-18 is a great deal. Whether or not its a great idea depends entirely on whether or not you want an UWA. 9mm is massively different from 12mm.