Upgrade to from 25mm 1.7 to 25mm 1.4 ?

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Zuri, May 10, 2016.

  1. Zuri

    Zuri Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Apr 20, 2016
    Hey guys

    I bought the 25mm from B&h when it was on in pre order for 99$. It was. A great deal.

    This lens is pretty much the one I use the most (the other one is 14-140mm mark I, mostly for videos).

    Do you think upgrading to the 1.4 25mm will hhav significant difference? Expesially on sharpness and low light. Worth the upgrade?

    Thanks!
     
  2. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    Worth is a very subjective thing. If you shoot a lot of low light and do not mind or require a shallow DOF, every bit more of light you can get will be a benefit. 1.4 to 1.7?? Maybe not as much of a jump from say a 1.8 to 1.2.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I wouldn't personally call it a significant upgrade. It will be a minor one. In terms of low-light performance, the actual transmission (true light passing through the lens) of the two lenses is T1.9 for your lens vs T1.7 for the Panasonic Leica, which is a difference of 1/3 stop. So for low light, rather than having your camera at ISO 6400, you can set it to ISO 5000. So not a big difference there.

    In terms of sharpness, the f1.4 won't be sharper when used wide-open than you are used to with your f1.7 lens. It may be slightly sharper when stopped down by 1/3 stop, but then you don't get any light advantage.

    If you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, I'd recommend looking at a lens that will let you do something you can't already. Maybe see if there are any other kinds of photography you'd like to try out. A longer lens like the 42.5/1.7 or a macro could be more interesting.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Zuri

    Zuri Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Apr 20, 2016
    Thanks for the responses.

    I'm not keen on spending mone if it's not really worth it.

    I already got the 42.5 1.7mm but truth to be told I rarely use it and thinking on selling it. It's the first lens I bought together with my GX7, but since purchasing the 25mm I rarely find situations where I need 42.5mm (I use the camera mainly for family photos and videos).
     
  5. tpitch14

    tpitch14 Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Mar 31, 2010
    PA
    I had a similar thought, but am now considering adding the PL 15mm to my mix... or waiting to see what comes out down the line
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    I would say that in 90% of the cases you'll stop down to f2 anyway to get a bit more contrast and you'll probably need to consult EXIF to identify which shots were 1.4 and which were 1.7

    The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence
    Cattle_eating_grass_through_barbed_wire_fence.
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    No
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror!

    947
    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Clint
    It's a great lens, but since you have the other one, it's probably not worth it.
     
  9. Gary5

    Gary5 Mu-43 Veteran

    310
    Jan 15, 2014
    There's going to be an Olympus 25mm F1.2 later this year. I would wait to see what that's like.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. NoSeconds

    NoSeconds Mu-43 All-Pro


    Everyone needs the PL15 in their life!!! :2thumbs:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    贾一川
    Upgrade only if you really love the rendering of the 1.4, I know I do. It's not about sharpness or low light capabilities, the character of a lens is more than that.
    16060972552_9b1ac7a0ef_z.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  12. NoSeconds

    NoSeconds Mu-43 All-Pro


    I've really tried hard to like my PL25 but I just can't warm up to it... I much prefer the results, focal length and render of my P20 and truth be told I find they both have the same focusing characteristics in low light, ie. hunts around a bit...

    I'm glad I got my copy second hand and will be moving it on shortly...
     
  13. tpitch14

    tpitch14 Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Mar 31, 2010
    PA
    Ha!! Definitely seems that way... Might even render my 25 useless...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    The PL25 has its own 'look' to its images. If you value that sort of subtlety, then it's worth it. I really like it and own it. But as a general rule, a premium product (subtle/exclusive qualities) will never beat a competent value product in sheer bang for buck. So, if you make buying decisions by dividing results by price, you will always buy the competent value-product lines. Fact.

    [edit: the above post by jyc appeared while I was typing, and is a great example]
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    That's a brilliant photo.
     
  16. Zuri

    Zuri Mu-43 Regular

    156
    Apr 20, 2016
    Thanks guys, I guess it's not worth it.

    Do you think it's worth looking at 12-35mm if I already have 14-140mm? I'm mostly doing outdoor shootings with the zoom lens with lots of videos.
     
  17. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    The 12-35 is a bit wider, has a faster aperture, and is a bit sharper.

    Do you often find that you need to really boost the ISO when you're using the 14-140?

    The best way to look at new equipment to get is not to see what's available and then see how you can justify it, it's to see what you really want/need and then find the proper equipment to do it.
     
  18. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I had the 14-140 II, and sold it for the 12-35 & 35-100 f/2.8, for a couple reasons:
    • 12mm vs 14mm is a HUGE difference in terms of wide angle coverage
    • The f/2.8 lenses are indeed sharper than the 14-140 II (it's expected, as you're comparing 3x zooms with a 10x zoom)
    • The f/2.8 aperture on the long end is a big advantage in terms of DoF and shutter speed
    • Two weather resistant lenses for my two weather resistant bodies (GH4)
    I was very happy with the move, but if you don't need the weather resistance, extra WA coverage, or speed up to 35mm, there's not much point to making the purchase IMO.