Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks. Well, whether I'm an ambassador or not, doesn't change me or what I think about photography😀

Thank you.

Thanks!

Thanks, much appreciated!

Thanks so much for your extensive comment and sharing.

Ja it is very soft at 1.7 i own 42 1.7 and leica 15 mm 1.7 they are both sooo much sharper than the 25mm 1.7 that i dont want to use it anymore. I want the 1.7 to have super sharp pictures with bokee the lense does not make sense to me if i have to stop down to 2.8 without any bokee. I compared the crapy 12-35 lense one of my panasonics came with and it blows the 25 1.7 away wide open at 25. colors are better and the image is sharper. Of course the 3.5 kit lense has no bokee but its sad that you have to stop down the 1.7 to make it better than the kit.

Thanks for subscribing!

Thank you!

If you like a lens, you should stick with it. Besides, that 20mm is a nice little lens. Thanks again for your comment.

Thank you!

Thank you for those kind words.

Thanks!

Thanks for your comment.

Thanks, I usually choose what sound good to me. The music is from KZfaq Audio library.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thanks for sharing.

2x the price of Leica

The 12-40 Zoom lens has 2.8 aperture vs the 1.7 aperture for the 25 mm.

Thank you. I don't photograph line charts😀 I live in Helsinki Finland and mostly film there.

Thanks!

Thanks! Absolutely, those two would be viable alternatives.

Thanks you.

Thank you for your comment.

Thanks!

Thanks! The cheap option is an excellent value.

Thanks! This episode was filmed on the Lumix S1R and the Lumix 24-105mm F4 lens.

Thanks!

Thanks! I'm sorry, but I don't know any good G7 tutorials. The included manual is a good starting point.

I remember when the 25mm f/1.4 came out and there were not that many primes back then. It doesn't make sense for you to switch to the Lumix now, but it's true that at f/4 there is not that much difference between the two lenses.

@@mattisulanto True that. My other two primes I use are the Olympus 45 mm f/1.8 and the Lumix 75 mm f/1.8 (this is the sharpest MFT lens).

Thanks!

Thanks.

I have to say I didn’t notice anything unusual.

I know the source of this rumour. Yes the lens has focus shift but, in practice it is of absolutely no consequence, the error is well within the depth of field. I was troubled by these tests and took against my lens as I am a perfectionist. But after a few days I thought, hey, wait a minute, you have used this lens for a year and have some of your best photos from it. I thought, well nobody is more capable of testing a lens than me, I am a Chartered Physicist. So i tested teh hell out of it. The tests on KZfaq were all done on A4 paper printout letters which means essentially macro mode. Well this is the only lens in this class that focusses that close; no similar lens has this problem because it cant even do this test. I looked at my photos and some of the best were in this regime below f2.8 to f4, well the DoF in that range on any normal subject is huge; a cafe would be sharp wall to wall, your focus can be a foot out and you wouldnt notice. My only macro-ish shot was of an insect and that was pin sharp. So yes it has focus shift and the neurotic will find it by careful testing but, in practice, it is of no consequence. This is a stella lens. And by the way, the image will be poor below f5.6 anyway on MFT due to diffraction and is best avoided. Incidentally those KZfaq tests showed no focus shift below f4 so your problems are all diffraction not focus. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, people test for absolutes forgetting that all products are made to certain tolerances chosen to be inside operational parameters. The problems are all in the head, I know I suffered it too, you feel the lens is imperfect and somehow sub-standard but, in practice it will give you some of your best shots and its as cheap as chips; its win win ;-)

@@vicibox the test was done at f4 and that’s where the focus shift occured. No diffraction at f4

Yes, there are all kinds of offers all the time depending on your location.

Thanks. The main problem is Panasonic video AF, not so much the lens.

Did you mean the Lumix Lens (which is known to have poor Video AF)?

I bought one of the metal hoods they sell on Amazon (search for "Maxsimafoto LH46GF") for the 20mm 1.7 which (I believe) has the same 46mm filter thread. A lot of 25mm 1.4 users also use the same hood (if I remember rightly what I read at the time) so might buy a second one myself for my own 25mm 1.4 at some point. Haven't noticed any vignetting at all with the 20mm so the 25mm should be fine. One thing to look out for is there's some inconsistency with these hoods regarding caps. I bought a similar hood for the 12-32mm kit lens zoom, I think the filter thread was 37mm but the thread the outer side of the hood was slightly smaller/larger so it wouldn't accept the cap. So had to buy a 43mm lens cap as the hood had two outer threads. The 46mm one was fine and the same cap fit, but I bought a new cap for it anyway, one with pinch grips in the middle, only because the buttons on the very edge of the standard cap were hard to press when reaching into the hood...

Thanks for watching.

I remember the same aperture noise when I tried this lens on some Olympus camera years ago.

@@mattisulanto Thanks for your answer! I might give it a second try some day, at least to see if the problem is gone. Or I might go Panasonic (but I doubt that, I like Olympus cameras too much ;-)).

Yes aperture chatter is a reality on that lens with the Oly bodies. You get used to it...😀

I admire people like you who can identify a lens just by looking at a photo. I've never been able to do that.

If I only we as exceptional as a photographer….Far from it! It is just the Leica colours I (think I) can distinguish. I now have the 56 mm F1.4 Sigma. In the three short days I have it I am really impressed. But I would not be able to distinguish it from my adapted Canon FD 50 mm F1.4. Yes: it is much sharper wide open, but the colours etc look really the same (which is not bad at all!).

If it’s a clacking/rattling sound it comes from the aperture mechanism, not from autofocus.

Many thanks for sharing your opinion.

There are so many options on the G9 autofocus that it would take too long to explain all. Make sure the AF is on. It should focus either by tapping the screen or touching the shutter button. If you turn on the face detection, it should automatically find your face when you enter the frame.

sulantoblog Thank you! Have a great weekend.

It's a cheap Boya system, but I'm using a mic from a Rode wireless kit.

@@mattisulanto so it's a rode mic? Smartlav?

@@JSyntax It's the mic that comes with the Rode wireless filmmaker kit. I think it's the same as the Smartlav, but with different connector. Mine is a recycled version, that had a broken connector that I replaced.

@@mattisulanto Ty! It sounds great. I guess a cheap wireless sound system has no negative effect on a quality lapel mic.

@@JSyntax Yes, the Boya system works well and can use two transmitters, which is nice for interview for example.

If you watch other videos on my channel, you'll see that I switched to 4k some time ago.

@@mattisulanto nice, not that long ago though as this came out in March

I've heard about the focus shift, but I can't see it myself. Until I see it with my own eyes, I consider it an urban legend😀

@@mattisulanto and there are many of those, I asked David Thorpe and he to could not find it ,given that both he and yourself are indeed photographers of note this may be one of those 'it's happened to one or two people therefore its inherent in the lens as a whole' thanks

I did it manually in FCPX, but you can make in Motion and After Effects too. Here is some sort of tutorial how to do it in FCPX: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/j8qcgrJ_vODLhYE.html

Thanks! If you can afford the Leica 10-25mm F1.7, it's the best video lens in my opinion. It's expensive, but for video it's simply amazing. You'll get enough background separation and pretty nice bokeh too, if you shoot wide open. You are going to need a variable ND filter too to able to shoot wide open outside. I have a Nisi Pro ND-Vario 1.5-5 stops, which is really high quality and does not soften the image. Five stops is not quite enough, though, on a bright day and you may have to stop down to about F2.8-4. Check out Nisi website for more details.

@@mattisulanto Thanks so much...indeed it's a price but..I prefer buy something that will keep me satisfied for years..strange to say this in this context...A warm hello from Parma , my wife and I went to Helsinki last june...amazing trip..

@@mattisulanto sorry I've been too fast to click "enter"..In case the family budget would'nt be sufficient what would be one or 2 alternatives ☺️

@@christianlaurent5807 I hope the very best for the both of you and I hope you'll stay healthy in this global mess.

Thanks for watching!

It's a nice lens, but it has a clear character, that you have like to appreciate the lens.

sulantoblog The lens arrived and I am beyond pleased. I absolutely love it.

@@jonlouis2582 Happy to hear that😀

Sounds great!

It does make quite a noise when you change aperture in MANUAL mode. In A-mode or S-mode, it's silent when the aperture is being changed automatically by the camera. However, unlike newer lenses that don't make any sound at all when the camera is set on SILENT MODE and you press the shutter, the Leica f1.4 emits a low "scratching" noise when you do. It would be quite audible when shooting in a very quiet environment like a church wedding or funeral. Don't know why Matti didn't mention that, as it seems to be a character flaw of the Leica f1.4. BTW, I'm talking about the 1st version of the lens w/c I got 2nd hand for $260.00. Other than the noise and the fact that you can't reverse the lens hood, I'm loving it!

Yes! It almost made me not buy it but I just bit the bullet

Maybe, I'm not sure. I shoot RAW, so it doesn't matter much.

If they were the same, wouldn't it matter?😀 Thanks for commenting.

Thank you!

If I were you I would stay with what you have, its better. The olympus has 20 lens elements and, whilst it is sharp wide open edge to edge (its designed for wide open portraiture under studio lights), it renders a lifeless dead image when used generally. This of course doesnt matter to commercial ProTogs as their images all have very shallow DoF; they dont take hyperfocal images. In fact, its so dead I can see the effect even in KZfaq reviews (usually with the reviewer pointing to the dead image and saying how sharp and wonderfull it looks; I wont comment, giggles, turn the sound down and look, its blatantly obvious); it is that marked. Let me help get your eye in, look for the rainbow flare that comes from coatings on 40 surfaces. The Lumix G on the other hand is very sharp and renders images dripping with microtones, having only 8 lens elements, that give my Leicas a run for their money. I have no idea why this lens is so cheap, its really good. If you must buy Olympus buy the f1.8 as all the Premier f1.8 models are stunningly good and blow the Pro lenses away. Frankly, I think the Pro lenses are optically poor; no lens should have more than 14 elements; more glass indicates poor design using many components to sharpen at the expense of image quality. If you doubt me, the best lens in the world is the Leica f0.95 Noct and that has 7 elements and costs $12500; reducing glass in a fast lens is very expensive hence, Olympus brings the cost down by adding glass and reducing quality. Go figure, no such thing as a free lunch ;-)

@@vicibox Thank you so much for the reply. Full disclosure, I went GAS, and got the Pro as it went on a 35% off in sale. I think i will keep for few months and see how it goes and maybe sell it if I dont see an absolute dominating results compared to Lumix 25 1.7. Apart from hobby, I shoot small gigs for friends and family mainly events. and at times Need that extra stop of light. I will test it out with my trusty 1.7 and see the results. So far the 1.2 pro I have only taken few shots. Does not blow away with results , playing with Dof , will test it out and see how it goes. For travel it will be my Lumix baby, Yeah I agree with You . Panasonic is selling this darn cheap. NEver tried the Oly 1.8 25 mm (I have the Oly 45 mm 1.8 and thats fabulous, shot an outdoor wedding with it and I liked the pictures.) The Lumix baby struggled a bit at dimly lit place. but I havent played a lot with shadows. Will try to pitch both out and see the results. I usually venture out at night to take pictures and street too. Guess as U said its mainly built for the studios. So far handling wise its big, ( I need my EM5ii grip to go with my 1.2 pro) or the balance is weird.

@@lateralridge Well there you have it, that is exactly what it was designed for, low light gigging, shot wide open. You cant resolve volume and depth when the DoF is a few inches, you essentially are getting a very sharp flat field. Photographers now never seem to understand that lenses are designed for a purpose and that optimising one set of features degrades others. These lenses are poor for street and landscape; for that you need a well corrected, low glass prime that is optimised for hyperfocal distance. I use the Olympus 17mm f1.8 which is stunning as is my 45mm f1.8. Panasonic and Voightlander seem to make the best fast lenses for MFT but I have no use for the extra stop so I can spend my money on something else = have fun ;-)

@@lateralridge P.S. I have suffered GAS as well over the last 3 years. Alas I blew £5grand on Leica and in truth I much prefer my Panasonic GX9 - sigh

Vici Martynov so much bla bla about „dead images“ i see pictures taken with the oly pro and in my opinion it blows away any other lense for mft

In the video I say "This is the third video I'm filming with the Lumix S1R..." English is not my first language, but I think that means my video camera is the S1R.

@@mattisulanto Oh my bad, sorry, and thank you for your time and limitless patience.

I can do that and it's normal.

Do you know if the MK2 sounds as much as the MK1 :)

@@mikaelhamberg154 I have not compared those two, but I'd say there is not much difference.

25

The Sigma 30 mm F1.4 is a bit more sharp. Also, the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 is more sharp than 25mm F1.7 and is like the 25mm F1.4. For resuming (sharpness only) : Sigma 30mm F1.4 > Panasonic 25mm F1.4 = Panasonic 20mm F1.7 > Panasonic 25mm F1.7

I review the lenses that are available for me. I can't buy every lens I review and no one sends them to me for free. I own some Panasonic gear and I can easily borrow it too. However, if you have other brand lenses and you are willing to support my channel, please send me some lenses and I promise I'll review them. Please check out Peter Forsgård's or Robin Wong's channels for Olympus.

That is a very good price.

People talk a lot about that focus shift issue, but I can't see any of it. Do you have any image samples that you can show with the aperture info, maybe a link.

​@@mattisulanto When I bought the Olympus 12-100 f/4, I wanted to compare it against all my prime lenses. I took a simple picture of my balcony view. By no means it was a scientific test, because I didn't repeat the shots and AFAIR I used autofocus. At that point I found that 25 f/1.7 was the only one which didn't make the green leaves sharp. I just thought it was its limitation. drive.google.com/open?id=14wZWArsyQllyXypsENZOWvWDbn6djcns Recently I came across the Camerahoarders review and I assumed this is the explanation of what I was getting. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g8WChKeYt9aaoZ8.html

​@@mattisulanto Not sure my previous answer went through, because it contained a GDrive link. When I bought the Olympus 12-100 f/4, I wanted to compare it against all my prime lenses. I took a simple picture of my balcony view. By no means it was a scientific test, because I didn't repeat the shots and AFAIR I used autofocus. At that point I found that 25 f/1.7 was the only one which didn't make the green leaves sharp. I just thought it was its limitation. Recently I came across the Camerahoarders review and I assumed this is the explanation of what I was getting. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g8WChKeYt9aaoZ8.html Find me on FB or otherwise if you're interested in the sample photos, as YT will cut out the links.

If you could choose between the Leica and the Olympus 12-40 2.8 which would you recommend?

@@benny910 Versatility wise, hands down the 12-40mm. That lens is on my camera 90% of the time. When I had the Leica, I only use it occasionally bc it's a prime lens. However, the lens produces a very unique look to all my photo that I can't get from any other lens I have owned before or since. If you take a lot of photo at 50mm, then go with the Leica. It's worth the money. If you want one lens the covers the most commonly used range, 24-70mm, then you can't go wrong with the 12-40mm.

@@peace4myheart thanks for the insights. I have the 17mm and 45mm prime as well as the Lumix 12-50mm f3.5 which has been surprisingly outstanding for a kit lens. Just seeing if it's worth upgrading my zoom to either the Oly or Pana F2.8 or picking up a used Leica for $300-400 CAD

@@benny910 Wow, I really want the Lumix 12-60mm bc that covers 95% of the range I use. Only thing is I have the Olympus 12-40mm already and I am very happy with it. When I started out, I was a prime lens user. I had the 17mm, 25mm, 45mm, and the 50-200mm. I shoot family photos most of the time, while on occasion, I shoot nature and street photography for fun. I had to constantly change the lens for family photo so it wasn't very practical. After my 25mm got stolen, I sold my 17mm and 50-200mm, and bought the Oly 12-40mm, kept the 45mm for portrait, bought an oly 14-150mm for traveling. From what you have, the 12-60mm, I feel buying the Oly 12-40mm is a little redundant. Unless you really want the constant aperture for low light shooting, I think the 12-60mm is a great lens and has dual IS function if you have a compatible panasonic body, which helps a lot with low light. Depends of what you shoot, I think you are pretty much covered for general purposes. You should look at the 25mm as a specialty lens in the same term as your 45mm, but you need to think about what you use it for. No point in spending so much if it doesn't get a lot of use. Anyway, happy shooting.

@@peace4myheart good call on that one. Nice convo! I have samples on my Instagram: @benjamin_tr, where can I see your work?

The prices vary and I just show them so you can compare the two. To get the idea that the other one is much more expensive. I too have seen the Lumix G for even €95 new, but that was a special deal.

@Uncaged. These lenses cost a lot more in the UK. The lumix 1.7 is £150 new, and the leica 1.4 is a whopping £450. A cracking lens no doubt, but not at that price!

@@nickking7494 I buy from the UK mostly because it's actually cheaper than here in Ireland. It's only the very odd time there will be a bargain, like the time I got the 1.7 - I see the 1.4 going used on the likes of MPB regularly for less than £300, in fact right this minute there's a bunch of them on there in excellent condition for £279

@@Cagey7531 surprised that the UK prices are cheaper than Ireland, thought it would be the other way round. Always good to keep on the lookout for a bargain. I got my 1.4 from gumtree, one year old, mint condition for just under £200, so I cant complain.

@@nickking7494 You only need look at online camera stores from Ireland, try connscameras, their prices are shocking. And because they still do well, people expect to get more for their gear when selling on after buying from them. Even their used prices are worse than some UK new

That is a very good question. This video is already more than two years old and I can't remember exactly. I guess I wanted to show real photos and not test photos, because I don't like taking test photos. I'm sure there are "proper" comparisons too, if you google.

@@mattisulanto thanks for the answer. I meant at least like the same shot and not identical ones, especially the ones used for pixel peeping which I agree is no useful thing in the real world of looking at photographs!

It's not always about sharpness😀

@@mattisulanto no, but reading between the lines of various reviews, it seems like this lens is not as sharp as it should be.

@@hughjohns9110 That is an opinion, your opinion and you are entitled to it, of course. However, there are many happy users of the Leica 25mm F1.4 who think it's a great lens. It's still also one of my favorite MFT lenses even though I have not been a brand ambassador for 2.5 years. My opinion is based on my own experience, not on reviews. But, if you are only interested in sharpness wide open, this lens is probably not for you.

@@mattisulanto well there lies the problem. Reviews are all I can go on without committing the money to buy one.

@@hughjohns9110 That can be a problem, because we all have slightly different preferences and opinions.

I'm sure there are comparison available, if you google. I have never used the Olympus lens, but I can say right away, that it's bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive compared to these Leica/Lumix lenses.

That's ok, no need to be a fan😀There are plenty of lab tests around. You probably know of Dxomark and Opticallimits.

@@mattisulanto nope, thanks for the info though; don't get me wrong really like your channel! and what you do there.

Plus that dam lens hood! FUGLY (25mm f1.4)

We have very different experiences on these lenses, but I of course, I can't say yours is wrong. I agree though, that the 25mm f/1.4 could benefit from an update and maybe make f/1.2 at the same time.

Someone has to make the weird reviews too😀 KZfaq is full of many kinds of comparisons and I'm you'll find what you like if you search a little.

@@mattisulanto you don't get my point, a comparison is about "comparing", and that means putting them in the same situation,or as close as possible and see the differences, for example same photo of the same subject one the maximum aperture, of course that is only in the case that you want to actually help people with your reviews and not waste anyone's time..... very weird approach..... good luck with your future reviews mate

@@thatdeephouse1207 That is your interpretation of comparison. For example Collins dictionary says: "When you make a comparison, you consider two or more things and discover the differences between them." That's what I did in the video. I just did not do it the way you expected and that got you upset. I'm sure you'll get over it soon. All the best😀

@@mattisulanto Yes, exactly, i think that who doesn't get it is you mate, the 2 things are the 2 lenses in this case, and discovering the differences is what i mentioned, comparing 2 persons skills with one of them playing soccer and the other basketball is impossible, u must put them in the same situation, it seems like u have a problem on understanding that, i can give you 200 examples but you would not get it, as you live in this perspective that you are never wrong, and i can tell this just with the 2 answers that u gave me on my comment, it's very hard to improve when you dont accept a mistake, but again, maybe it is not your intention.... I've met a lot of persons like you that would never accept a critique and i feel very bad for them because they would never get better at anything, and again maybe is not what you are looking for, u should search again what a comparison means, maybe a detailed explanation because obviously you have problems on interpretating the definitions. Good luck with your life

@@thatdeephouse1207 Like I said, you'll get over this and your life will be normal again soon😀