Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by xdayv, Sep 22, 2011.
even if you already have a PL 25 1.4 in your bag?? why?
Because the 20mm has some magic surrounding it.
I like its angle of view better. It's much more versatile than a 50 mm EFL FOV.
if the next Panasonic is available as a kit with the 25mm (ouch, that'll be expensive) then I may have to let go of the 20mm. Partly because the two are similar enough that I won't need both and partly to raise money.
I wouldn't keep the PL25 if I had a 20/1.7 in my bag, because I prefer the angle of view and size of the 20. If I were rich, I'd keep both, but if I had to choose one (irrespective of price), it would be the 20.
Every time I shoot evening or night shots with the 20mm I'm reminded how great of a lens it is. Small, sharp, bright, rich color.
The 25mm is supposed to be even better, which is saying a lot. Just the same, for the price and size, I'm not sure if I'll be going for the 25mm.
So if I do, it will be a while, and I'll likely keep the 20mm until I really figure out which of the two I end up grabbing for a shoot.
I would get the PL25 if I could afford it, but sticking with the 20 for now.
I am one of those that shelled out the dough and got the 25 1.4. It's even better than the 20 1.7, just let me say that. But besides the cost, it comes at a price of size. When mounted on your camera, the lens is def no pancake.
TOP Mike Johnston had once said: 'Never sell your best lenses!' And I would consider 20 1.7 to be a 'best' lens in M43 land.
I don't know when the novelty of the 25 1.4 might wear off, but if I have a compact EPL3/GF3 type camera and on it is a 20 1.7, I can just about go anywhere with that set up. So I'm keeping it for my GF Pro.
I have both lenses. I feel the PL has better image quality than the P20 (but not by much), but it's much larger. I would say the 20 is still my favorite lens because it's so small and easy to carry around. The PL is also much snappier on my EP3 than the 20, but on my EPL1, they're about the same. Also the PL has that rattlesnake noise issue (not that noticeable indoors, but can be annoying outside).
What's that saying about the best camera being the one that you have with you? Maybe the same applies to lenses? with the P20 being so small and light maybe it encourages people to take their cameras where they would n't normally?????
I ordered the PL25 (should be here today) because I wanted a nifty-fifty equivalent, but also one lens that could do well in very low light indoors and at night. I held off on the Voigtlander, so I felt okay with spending the money on the PL25.
But... I would be really surprised if I sold the 20mm. At a minimum, I think I would keep it around for the ultimate compact/lightweight IQ monster option (i.e. pancake). It looks great on my E-P3 and makes for a very manageable little package.
25 isn't on my wish list anywhere
I want a mf old timey macro lens
Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 App
I went to buy the 25 and I preferred my 20mm. I might buy the 25 eventually but I can't see selling the 20/1.7 its just too good!!
I sold the 20 to help fund the purchase of the 25. If I was looking at either as a main lens, I'd have stuck with the 20 because of the slightly wider FOV and the smaller size. But I tend to shoot wider 90+ percent of the time, so the 20 was pretty much exclusively my ultra low light lens. And the 25 is even better at that particular job. I don't anticipate using this one ALL that much either, after the initial "new lens smell" period, but when I want something neutral for really low light, this is the ticket.
I also have the reasonably fast 12mm f2 and just got the 45mm f1.8 a few minutes ago (just opened it up and popped it on the camera) and I may find I rarely use the 25, in which case I may not keep it long term. Or I might end up loving it. But I didn't have the same love affair with the 20 that so many seemed to have, so I didn't have any trouble letting it go.
I think the vast majority of us are in the other position - we own the 20 already, would you buy a PL25?
For me, the answer is a resounding "no". The aperture and FOV are similar enough to not justify the higher price, the only real advantage I see is the focus speed, and that doesn't offset the size difference for me.
IF the PL25 had included IS, it might be a whole different story. OR if it were less expensive. OR faster aperture. OR smaller. But it's not, so I won't.
I have the "holy trinity" for my DSLR: 28 f/1.8, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8. Of these, I use the 50mm the least, so I will likely skip the purchase of the 25mm for my PEN, and keep the 20mm.
Why would I get rid of it? It is a perfectly good lens and I doubt if the 25mm f/1.4 will make my images significantly better.
Now the question should be if I had neither which one would I choose. I have looked at images from both and boy you really have to split hairs, but I think I would give the nod to the 25 mm. The 25 mm is faster but by only a 1/2 stop. So that makes two plusses on for this lens. The 20 mm is smaller and lighter. That is two plusses for this lens. In the end the 25 mm is $250 more and that is a deal breaker. For me buying the 20 mm and putting the rest towards a 14 mm would make more sense financial and artistically. But your milage may vary.
Agree with you.
I had the 20 and bought a 25. I find myself taking better pictures with the MUCH faster AF on the GH2 with the 25, and it just seems sharper to me.
+1 for the 25.
(Everybody and their brother has a 20 already )
Yes, buy an old-timey manual focus macro lens and an appropriate adapter. :smile:
Please consider disabling your ad blocker for our website.
We rely on ad revenue to pay for image hosting and to keep the site speedy.
Or subscribe for $5 per year to remove all ads and support our efforts.