Sell Panaleica 15 f/1.7 to buy Sigma 16 f/1.4?

petegiu

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
144
Real Name
Giuseppe Petenzi
I own the PL15 from many years , happy about the final results. Now reading some reviews , I noted that the new Sigma 16 f1.4 seems better. It's huge respect the PL15 but for me this is not an issue.
What are your consideration?
Giuseppe
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,543
Location
USA
What problem are you trying to solve? The lens you have is inadequate for some need you have ?
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,932
Location
Knoxville, TN
If I already owned the Panasonic 15, I probably wouldn't look to replace it with the Sigma 16. If I did not own, I would probably go with the Sigma. It is slightly faster and much cheaper.
 

rezatravilla

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,044
Location
Indonesia
Real Name
Reza Travilla
Sigma is big. You should consider the compactness. Besides, the different weren't significant either.
 

LilSebastian

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2017
Messages
602
Location
Pasadena, CA
Real Name
John
I have the 15mm f1.7 but have not tried the 16mm f1.4. From the reviews I've read and watched, the Sigma was a good overall lens but I believe is better when stopped down from its maximum aperture, so you may not gain much light when searching for best output. Also, ~290 grams or 10 oz heavier and over double the length is significant. Would you carry it with you as often? Would it displace another prime you like to have along side the 15mm? You would also lose the MF/AF switch that the 15mm has on lens, but gain splash/dust sealing on the 16mm. I personally wouldn't make the move.
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,554
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Just want to improve the final quality of the shoots.
Are you unhappy with the quality of the 15mm images?

The 15mm is phenomenal. Even if the 16mm is better, I doubt you tell without a controlled side by side. And I'm not sure it is better. 15mm has great contrast and color rendering, which is not something that shows up on sharpness graphs.

f1.7 vs f1.4 is not that much. It's really only going to help you if you are not getting shutter speeds you need at ISO 6400.

Also 16mm f1.4 gives same bg blur and isolation as a 20mm f1.7. So while it's going to be a little better than 15mm f1.7, it's not exactly mega blur or anything.

16mm is bigger than a 35-100mm f2.8. It's not just bigger, it's like 3 size classes bigger.

No way I'd swap.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I owned the 17/1.2 PRO (a better lens than the Sigma 16/1.4), and sold it for the PL15.

You can’t beat the PL’s size and weight, and the rendering is quite nice.

IMO, keep you PL15.
 

demiro

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
2,853
Location
northeast US
I'm with tkbslc. There would have to be some very specific need that the 16 addresses better than the 15 to make me switch. Otherwise I very much doubt you'll think your shots look better after changing lenses. I would go the opposite way though, to significantly reduce size and weight.
 

dwkdnvr

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
120
Location
Denver
I have ended up with the Sigma 30 and 56, but decided to keep the PL15 rather than swap to go all-Sigma. IMHO the tiny size of the PL15 coupled with the quality and rendering make it a much better choice (for me). For one specific example - it spends a lot of time on a GX85 as a 4k video camera, and I just don't see how the much larger Sigma 16 would work nearly as well in that role.

So, IMHO even if I was buying new I'd lean towards the PL15.
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
245
Real Name
Mike Peters
I have them both. I like them both. Wide open for both they have the same level of sharpness. At f2.0 and smaller the 16 is much sharper. I shoot with the Sigma 30 and 56, so the 16 has a similar look, and they all render contrast and color consistently.

Frankly, I'm lucky that I can have them all. I tend to favor the Sigmas for using with my G and GH cameras and the Panasonic 15/25/42.5 1.7 lenses for using with my smaller GX cameras and for travel.

The Sigma lenses all tend to have very smooth out of focus area, much more so than the 25 and 42.5 Panasonic 1.7 lenses. However the Panasonic/Leica variants are also smooth. But the 25 isn't as sharp as the 30 and I much prefer the 56 focal length over the 42.5.

That said, if you have the 15 and you're happy with it, there's no compelling reason to sell it for the 16 unless you need the extra sharpness closed down or absolutely need the wider f-stop.
 

ibd

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
427
My copy of the PL15mm has phenomenal sharpness, beating out, for example, the 20mm f/1.7. I can't imagine a lens being much sharper. Even if the Sigma is, I probably wouldn't trade it because of the perfect size of the 15mm, and because of the dedicated aperture ring.
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,543
Location
USA
Just want to improve the final quality of the shoots.
If you had been through some of the quality training programs, like Six Sigma, you would realize that this sentence makes no sense. Quality is not some amorphous thing where some is good and more is better. Quality is conformance with requirements.

Specifically, if you are not cropping tiny bits out of your images and you are not making really huge prints, the "quality" of your current lens is almost certainly adequate and, importantly, "better quality" will have no effect on your results. (Several responses have already made this point directly or indirectly.)

One exception to that is if you are interested in pixel-peeping rather than in photography. In that case, life will be a constant effort to buy lenses that produce better and better peeping. Nothing wrong with that as a hobby, but it is not photography. It is a sort of scientific measurement hobby.

A second possible exception is if you are shooting professionally without any knowledge of how your images might be used. But in that case I think there is a pretty strong argument for delivering full-frame or even medium-format images and there is not much argument for concern over tiny differences in M43 lenses.
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,554
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
I just don't think the Sigma 16mm makes much sense on m4/3 given the alternatives. It was really designed for Sony, where it is a 24mm equiv. And, like the PL 12mm f1.4, those are often large when fast. As a 35mm-ish equiv on m4/3, it seems kind of in no-man's land to me. Where it's huge, but not fast enough to be worth the weight penalty. If it were f1.0, then maybe! :)

Sharpness discussion is moot for me, as both are more than sharp enough at any aperture. There are no scenarios where either one would take a shot that is not sharp enough to use for any purpose.
 

demiro

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
2,853
Location
northeast US
My copy of the PL15mm has phenomenal sharpness, beating out, for example, the 20mm f/1.7. I can't imagine a lens being much sharper. Even if the Sigma is, I probably wouldn't trade it because of the perfect size of the 15mm, and because of the dedicated aperture ring.
Yeah. Images "much sharper" than what the 15 produces would be dangerous to handle, imo.
 

ralf-11

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
1,376
you guys are funny - right tho, the OP needs to specify exactly what he means re IQ

the PL 15 does have some vignetting IIRC - only an issue on test targets; a search here will find a few thread on this

OP - if unsure or just want to try, then see if lensRentals or the other place has them to rent
 

Ulfric M Douglas

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
3,709
Location
Northumberland
I own the PL15 from many years , happy about the final results. Now reading some reviews , I noted that the new Sigma 16 f1.4 seems better. It's huge respect the PL15 but for me this is not an issue.
What are your consideration?
The PL 15mm is one of the lenses that I carry around (on a camera, naturally) in my jacket pocket every day.
If I was taking photos which required a bigger lens at 15mm (can't think of any uses right now) I'd think about replacing it ... but no.
It isn't a pancake but was obviously designed to be quite narrow so it fits in a pocket the 'other way' to a pancake. (As does my m.Zuiko 45mm)
Also : it's cool.
 

Robertom

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 2, 2018
Messages
34
Is PL15 automatically corrected in the olympus body (for example, distortion)?

I have pen f and I use jpgs.
 

BPCS

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 15, 2017
Messages
88
I have them both. I like them both. Wide open for both they have the same level of sharpness. At f2.0 and smaller the 16 is much sharper. I shoot with the Sigma 30 and 56, so the 16 has a similar look, and they all render contrast and color consistently.

Frankly, I'm lucky that I can have them all. I tend to favor the Sigmas for using with my G and GH cameras and the Panasonic 15/25/42.5 1.7 lenses for using with my smaller GX cameras and for travel.

The Sigma lenses all tend to have very smooth out of focus area, much more so than the 25 and 42.5 Panasonic 1.7 lenses. However the Panasonic/Leica variants are also smooth. But the 25 isn't as sharp as the 30 and I much prefer the 56 focal length over the 42.5.

That said, if you have the 15 and you're happy with it, there's no compelling reason to sell it for the 16 unless you need the extra sharpness closed down or absolutely need the wider f-stop.
This answer...
At f2 the Sigma is an unbeatable combo of speed and IQ... otherwise there is no real advantage over the PL 15. Wide open centrally, and for close ups, the Sigma also has a small advantage. Basically, not worth changing to the Sigma unless you have a need for say wedding groups in fading afternoon light and can remember to use f2.0... there the resolution of faces to the edge is superb. If you really want a kick in the face upgrade, the Oly 17 1.2 Pro gives you that. Sharp all over from wide open with great colour and contrast. A semi wide is a workhorse for me and I tried them all and only the Oly 17 1.2 Pro presented no limitations... put it on and shoot and sit back and watch it look after you every time.
 
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