Sorry, missed this last post.Peter, performance looks good from your samples here and on Flickr. Are you happy with the lens?
Once the MFT 25/1.4 comes out the 25/0.95 becomes significantly less appealing. The LensTip review shows that it doesn't sharpen up until f/2, whereas the Panny 25/1.4 will be pin-sharp from f/1.4 (based on (non-micro-) four-thirds resolution data) and off-the-charts sharp at f/2.Rats. The more I see of this lens the more I like it. I may have to rearrange my own lens purchasing plan. It will be interesting to see how it compares in quality and price to the projected Panny 25/1.4.
Probably, but only if Panasonic produce the lens with a direct mechanical focus ring. I hate fly-by-wire focus for those situations when AF doesn't hold up.Once the MFT 25/1.4 comes out the 25/0.95 becomes significantly less appealing.
It is a bit hard to reconcile those 2 charts as although they are both measuring the same thing, the measurements are expressed in different units. Does anyone know how to convert from one unit of measurement to another?
One thing that can be said of both lenes is that edge performance lags behind centre permance quite a lot up to f/4 on the Voigtlander and f/5.6 on the Panasonic. The really odd thing about the Panasonic, while the edge performance is actually pretty good, it doesn't get better on stopping down. I wouldn't say that that is really an issue as it starts off pretty good.On stopping down the image quality improves very quickly so by f/1.4 we can enjoy a fully sharp image reaching the level of almost 53 lpmm. The rest of performance can be called outstanding without any doubts.
Very well said. Although I'm possibly in both camps as I can't imagine replacing either my AF 20/1.7 nor my MF 50/1.1In the end, I don't think there are many people who would be interested in the Panasonic AF lens that would be interested in the Voigtlander and vice versa.
My ratio is the other way around My view is that there are times with MF is useful.Well I have both the 25mm f/0.95 and the AF 20 f/1.7 and both shall remain in my kit bag. I use them in the ratio of around 10:1 but there are times when AF is useful.
Photozone says LW/PH is line width divided by picture height. So assuming the lines are spaced at twice their width I'd guess that the conversion would be lw/ph = lpmm x 13 x 2? Making 80 lpmm equate to 2080 lw/ph. Could be wrong...It is a bit hard to reconcile those 2 charts as although they are both measuring the same thing, the measurements are expressed in different units. Does anyone know how to convert from one unit of measurement to another?
But like mainlinephoto here in aus, they're waiting on the next Feb shipment - all stock has been sold out.