panasonic 25mm f/1.7 or panasonic 20mm f/1.7 (pancake)?

[agentlossing]

I haven't heard of such a thing...

 

[davidzvi]

I haven't heard of such a thing...

There was some issue, as I think about it more I think it was one of the reasons for the lens OIS priority option that first came as a firmware update? But I can't remember when or which cameras had the issue.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

Looking for a prime lens for my Olympus E-PM1. ...
I would prefer the 20mm focal length, but it's not a huge factor.

while I've always sought a nice shallow DoF "Normal" I found after buying a 20mm (were too expensive for my blood for so long) that I genuinely enjoyed the slightly wider look. It reminded me instantly of my first 35mm camera (an Agfa rangefinder with a 44mm lens, which when printed on typical 8x10 paper was more or less the same as the 20 is)

For the EPM I would agree that the pancake makes sense, however just check that AF is suitable for your needs as I've read that the Oly bodies may not focus fast enough with it. Myself I would switch to MF and (by act of focusing) engage the magnification on screen to confirm focus fast.

I find that on my GF the 20mm is perfectly fitted to the manner of operation:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

but I myself find that the 25 is a bit unweildy on compact bodies.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

your post makes me suspect you'd be similar to me there.

The 25 is a lovely lens, but if taking advantage of the shallow DoF care needs to be taken to ensure focus is where you want it, not off a little either side.

I find that the 20 is excellent for "general picture taking".

This blog post has some impressions embedded with some general scenery images taken in my first few weeks with the 20mm
in my view ...: the Rabbit Proof Fence

The 25 is a fine lens too, and I'm enjoying it.

 

[madmaxmedia]

Yeah, like I said above, the difference in FOV is way more than you'd think for 5mm! I couldn't ever get used to the 20mm for that reason.

The best way to compare focal lengths is the % difference between 2 focal lengths, rather than the numerical difference.

45mm to 50mm? Not that different.
14mm to 20m, or 20mm to 25mm? Pretty significant difference!

 

[Turbofrog]

It's funny, I think I must be quite different from the average M4/3 user - when I opened the 25mm/1.7 box I thought "that's it? it's tiny!" I was really quite shocked at how small and weightless it is. Larger, certainly, than the 20mm/1.7 but the perception when used on the camera (even small gripless ones like my GX1) is that lens isn't even there. It weighs nothing.

Clearly I'm far too used to the 14-140mm, the huge 11-22mm, and all my metal manual lenses...

 

[tkbslc]

The best way to compare focal lengths is the % difference between 2 focal lengths, rather than the numerical difference.

45mm to 50mm? Not that different.
14mm to 20m, or 20mm to 25mm? Pretty significant difference!

I definitely understand that. Still, at first glance, you wouldn't think 4/5th the focal length would be so much wider.

 

[Dave Reynell]

I would agree, but also must add that the focal length difference is greater than the numbers would seem to indicate. 20mm is almost wide angle. 25mm is not.

Yes, the 20mm is almost wide angle, but the 25mm is too close to the so-called "nifty-fifties", simply too "tight" for everyday use. I lived with one on my Pentaxes for decades, until I could afford a 35mm w/a lens. Like a breath of fresh air !
The 20 f1.7 is, without a jot of doubt, my favourite lens.

 

[PeeBee]

I was under the impression that Panasonic's OIS wouldn't activate on the early PENs, and I'm sure I've read other posts to that effect here too, however I've just tried my 45-200mm on my EPM1 and OIS seems to be doing something. The 45-200 has an OIS switch on the barrel. A second or so after switching on, the screen image is more stable and I can here a sound difference too. There are no menu controls to specify the OIS mode though like on Panasonic bodies, so it seems to be simply on or off via the barrel switch, and I'm wondering if the lenses without a switch will work at all? My 14-42 isn't to hand right now so I can't try it. Maybe someone else can clarify because I'd love to be proved wrong on this occasion?

Quoting myself feels so wrong, but to update on this topic, I've managed to get my P14-42mm out of storage today and can confirm that it's OIS does not work on the EPM1. Both camera and lens have the most recent firmwares too.

 

[onewheeltom]

Yes, the 20mm is almost wide angle, but the 25mm is too close to the so-called "nifty-fifties", simply too "tight" for everyday use. I lived with one on my Pentaxes for decades, until I could afford a 35mm w/a lens. Like a breath of fresh air !
The 20 f1.7 is, without a jot of doubt, my favourite lens.

B&H delayed my order until March. After further thought, I realized that I preferred the wider focal length and did not like the size of the 25, so I cancelled the order. Whatever I get will be 20 or wider. Just ordered a second body, so now it's probably going to be the BCL 9mm or a wide angle zoom in addition to the 14-42 and the 40-150 lenses that I have.

--tom

 

[HarryS]

-Nice testing Turbofrog. Every so often, I vary my 14-42 and marvel at the difference in focal lengths.
-EM5 model 1, EPM1, EPL3 and earlier Olympus bodies cannot use lens OIS unless the lens has an on/off switch. For lenses w/o a switch, they automatically turn off lens OIS leaving IBIS as the only IS option.

The new FW releases on some Panasonic zooms allow the GX8 to use both OIS and IBIS. I doubt that extends to Olympus.

 

[pellicle]

Yeah, like I said above, the difference in FOV is way more than you'd think for 5mm! I couldn't ever get used to the 20mm for that reason.

considering people (me included) worry about 4mm when using 24mm V 28mm on full frame I always scratch my head about exactly so many being surprised over what is 10mm in full frame.

not intending to pick on you, just piqued my observation is all.

naturally the wider from normal you go the more 5mm influences things and the more tele the less.

 

[Turbofrog]

considering people (me included) worry about 4mm when using 24mm V 28mm on full frame I always scratch my head about exactly so many being surprised over what is 10mm in full frame.

not intending to pick on you, just piqued my observation is all.

naturally the wider from normal you go the more 5mm influences things and the more tele the less.

Usually because of your last point, I find it more useful to think in terms of percentages when it comes to focal length. So going from 40-50mm equivalent is 10mm, but it's 25% longer. Going from 24mm to 28mm on FF is 4mm, and is 17% longer. So not that much more difference overall, and going from 40-50mm would be the same as from 24mm to 30mm (or 12 to 15 in M4/3 terms) when it comes to perceptible difference in field of view.

 

[pellicle]

Usually because of your last point, I find it more useful to think in terms of percentages when it comes to focal length.

makes sense to me ... had not given it that much thought, I just whack them on and have a look.

I recall when I had my first 35mm camera, it had a 44mm lens on it (rangefinder fixed lens) ... I found that a good focal length for general scenery. When I moved to 50mm (on an OM1) I found it a little tighter than I liked.

Perhaps thats why I love my 20mm Pana?

 

[LOZ]

I have two Pany 20 1.7s, one on a Pany GF-2 and the other on an EPL-5. While image quality is great on both cameras the lens focuses much quicker on the Pany GF-2.

When compared to the Oly 45 1.8 on the EPL-5, focus time is noticeably slower with the Pany 20 1.7.

 

[aphasiac]

I love the p20/1.7 pancake. It's such a nice portable lens, with amazing quality and special rendering.

I took my EM10II out the other day, shot around 300 photos at the park, in a restaurant and then in a museum. When I got home I realized I never changed lenses; everything was taken with the little 20mm! It's very versatile.

That said, the focus is slow for moving subjects, and its harder to pop the background due to that 5mm (you also get some facial distortion up close). If you're mainly going to photograph people or kids, the 25mm might be better.

 

[onewheeltom]

Since I started this thread over a month ago. What has happened since then? :
- ordered the 25mm 1.7
- bought a 40-150mm
- 25mm order was pushed back to March, realized that I preferred wider and the lens was bigger than the 20mm (lose/lose for me) so I cancelled it.
- Ordered a E-PM5 body at the end of 2015

I had a chance to spend a few minutes with a friends Pany 12-32mm pancake, am now waffling between that and a 9mm BCL (more flexibility vs. more wide/smaller). If the 9mm BCL lives on my old E-PM1, then I would just likely stick with the 14-42mm kit lens for now.

Unlimited funds solves this problem easily, but I feel like I need to spend some time shooting with the E-PM5 (arrives today) before making any more purchases. It has been quite an interesting discussion though.

--tom

 

[ahinesdesign]

My wife recieved a Panny 25mm 1.7 for Christmas, so I've gotten to shoot with it a little and compare to the 20mm. The new 25mm focuses very fast, and feels ok on the camera (almost weightless as others have said, which is at odds with its size). It doesn't feel that big, but I am used to the Olympus Pro zooms... Image quality isn't something I've looked at closely yet, but so far I'd say its similar appearance to the 20mm yet lacks the "20mm quality" that many like so much. If anything, the 25mm is more consistent across the frame. Haven't shot in tough lighting to determine anything about flare resistance.

 

[Easalazar]

I actually had both. To me the 20mm feels a bit heavier/ better build quality over the 25mm. The 25mm felt quite plasticky and hollow to me. I got the 25mm from Adorama for the $99 sale not too long ago and it already had a decent amount of dust behind the front element with minimal use, something that has never happened to me with any of my other lenses. I ended up returning it not just because of that but also because it didn't impress me. I felt that the lens was quite soft opened up and only got decently sharp when stopped down to f4 - f5.6, the 20mm is much sharper at f2.8 for me at least. I did like the background blur it produces and how much faster and much much quitter it focuses compared to the 20mm but that's not too surprising. Overall I preferred the 20mm solely based on build quality and IQ, the only thing that lets it down is its old focusing system. That was the only reason why I sold it.

Here are a few shots with the 25mm

PC190110

• Easalazar
• Jan 5, 2016

 

[LowriderS10]

I've had a ton of 50s in the past (FF terms) and then I bought Canon's first ever EF pancake, the 40 2.8 STM. I instantly fell in love with the FL. It's such an awesome walkaround FL, at least for me. It's perfect for a one lens, lightweight walk about town. (Less suited for portraits, if that's what you're thinking of doing with it).

The fact that we have a 40mm equiv lens that goes all the way down to f1.7 in a tiny package is too awesome to pass up!

Plus, it's impressively sharp and has great colours...

 

[agentlossing]

All of the things people bring up about the 20mm (as well as the consistently awesome examples in the image thread) tempt me to repurchase this lens. I had a version II copy for awhile which had an alarming tendency on the GM1/5 of obtaining false focus. No other lens I've used produced the odd totally out of focus shot like that one. I may try a used version I and see if I can't take more to it, perhaps I had a dud!