For more info on StoryBlocks, visit: storyblocks.com/CameraLabs My Olympus 8-25mm review vs the Leica DG 8-18mm and 10-25mm Check prices at B&H: bhpho.to/367liEA // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3hktkis Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: th-cam.com/users/dinobytes Equipment used for producing this video Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY MacBook Pro 13in (16GB / 512GB): amzn.to/3hrwMYD Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic 00:00 - Intro 01:39 - Design and controls 05:38 - Coverage 07:17 - Landscape comparison 11:03 - Bokeh comparison 11:49 - Portrait comparison 12:54 - Focusing comparison 13:49 - Focusing for movies 15:00 - Vlogging comparison 17:26 - Focus breathing comparison 18:16 - Verdict and sample images As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Something Olympus got absolutely right is the feel of these metal lenses. The way they handle, and feel in the hand, is superb. They make you want to hold them, and are pleasant to use. Beginning with the 12mm f2 and 17mm f1.8, the move to the Pro primes and zooms is even better.
I have the Pana-Leica 10-25...I see no reason to let go of it. While so many are concentrating on video, I purchased it strictly for landscape a majority of the time. It really is outstanding. For sure., just walking around or in the city, the 8-25mm will be a great deal lighter. I see it serving a great need due to that and the very nice pricing with the Olympus still attaching the word "Pro" on it. For a $1000 starting price as it hits the markets, it will do well.
Or an Olympus 45 mm 1.8, which has always been the best value lens for portrait. The 8-25 mm with a 45mm covers most the travel photography needs I would believe...
While the Leica lenses both seemed to produce more contrasty results that I preferred, having an ultra wide zoom all the way to normal focal length is great. This video has definitely got me considering the 8-25 as a travel/landscape lens.
This 8-25 f/4 plus the 40-150 f/4 and an E.M1.2/3/OM1 make a very lightweight, bomb-proof combo for backpacking landscapes in any kind of weather covering almost all useful focal lengths. The sharpness on both f/4 zooms is very good to excellent, in my estimation slightly behind (but not by much) the Canon RF f/4 zooms.
Really really really really love the vlogging comparisons. All the reviews I've ever seen for ultrawide angle lenses only talk about it in photo aspects. Really appreciate your work mate. Well deserved new sub 👍
Thanks for the vlogging comparison, that is exactly what I wanted to know about. I use the old olympus 9-18 f4-5.6 for hand held, and ill stick with it after seeing this. It is so much lighter and the results are impressively good. I wanted to see if the 2.8 Leica made a difference in depth of field at 8mm compared to f4. And no, it doesn't. Why wont Panasonic or olympus make an ultra-wide fast prime that isn't fisheye? There are too many zooms already.
I also have the old 9-18 and it's so tiny and sharp. If you need compact and are willing to give up 1mm, then the 9-18 is a good companion for the 12-40, at it's f/4 at the wide end, just like the 8-25. As for wide primes, I gave up waiting and snapped up a Laowa 10mm f/2 as soon as it was available. Sure it's not auto focus, but it has electrical contacts and is the next best thing.
Thanks again Gordon, being a M3/4 user I was just looking yesterday for a comparison of the Leica 8-18 which I own and this new Olympus. I was hoping the Olympus was close to as good since I love the focus clutch. Great review.
Great. Finally, a real review. For landscape photography, this range and water resistance = amazing combination. Recently shooting in Denmark during a beautiful storm (not so beautiful when I saw my basement) I had a 12-40 pro on one body and a 40-150 pro on the other. There was no chance to change the lens. A combination of 8-25 and 12-100 or 40-150 would be great. Definitely a better choice than 7-14mm 2.8. I was curious about the quality on the wide end. I am also interested in the coma and vignette. I am using an 8mm 1.8 and a 7.5 laowa with the tracker for astrophotography. 8mm is perfect but no filterthread, the laowa has thread(great for landscape) but definitely not perfect for astri (vignette and coma). As for the different copies of lenses, it is an interesting issue. A few months ago, everyone was excited about the 16mm 1.8 (because there is absolutely no coma). Some people already know it's not that good. I also had two copies of Oly 17mm 1.2 and one was noticeably sharper between 1.2-1.6. This is something we should always consider when buying a new lens.
I read your comment and I'm curious why you think the 8-25 would be a better choice than the 7-14. I have the 7-14 and I think its the sharpest lens behind my 40-150 PRO. My only big complaint is the distortion when I take shots at any kind of angle. Anyway - curious to hear your opinions.
@@blackice5649 I think this longer range and thread for filters is a huge advantage of 8-25mm. That's all. As for the image quality, i don't care about sharpness anymore. If the photo isn't sharp, it's probably my fault. All pro lenses are great in my opinion. The only problem i have with the older lenses,like 12-40 and 40-150 compared to the new lenses is the lack of contrast and flare when shooting against the light.
It's interesting but it looks like 10-25 oversaturates colors. I found the same results after shooting 42.5 Leica Nocticron and 42.5 Olympus f1.2. Olympus tends to render colors in a more neutral way, whereas Leica makes them more poppy. I lean toward more "true" and neutral colors so I kept the Olympus f1.2, but I did find 42.5 Leica to be pleasing for portraits as it resulted in richer skin tones. Ironically, the imperfection of Voigt Nokton 42.5 and the dreaminess wide open still make it my favorite for portraits. In any case looks like 8-25 is a great lens. Thanks for your review.
@@christan5484 Worth it. I'd say the Leica is actually a better value for what it provides. It's unfortunate, that Olympus and Panasonic never worked out to support each other's lens features such as function buttons, aperture control rings and such though. MFT, some "standard", huh?
In your autofocus tests for stills there is a slight hunting every time before it locks in, despite phase detection. I have the E-M1 II with the 12-100 f/4 and I see the same behavior and I was never sure if I might accidentally turned off the phase detection or if this behavior is really normal because phase detection was specifically supposed to avoid that because the camera knows how far to turn the focus motor without the need for hunting. I never saw this on my Canon cameras back in the day. But this is normal behavior? Good to know! Great review as always, I will probably get this lens.
Ive always wanted a lens with a focal range like this but it never really seems to be available on full-frame. surely if a 24-70 2.8 is exists, a 19-55 f2.8 or something similar is possible. Great vid as always!
I've had both the 8-18 and the 8-25 and I would say the 8-18 is better only for video but if you want to take photos the 8-25 wins hands down. I found the 8-25 to be a little heavier in the vlogging area though.
Thank you for a very thorough review / comparison. I use the Olympus 12-40mm as my everyday walk-around lens, but now I look forward to getting my hands on this one - of course it will be much more useful when there is also a 25-100mm F/4.0 IS ;-)
Nice review. The comparison with the Pan 8-18mm where possible was interesting. Overall I like the Oly 8-25 f4 because of the more useful zoom range and it is still decently portable with good image and video quality. The only plus for the Pan 8-18mm seems to be the wider aperture at the wide end; however in the video comparison, that didn't seem to make much of a difference. Still images may be a different story though and would love to see a detailed comparison with a proper Pan 8-18mm sample.
As I mentioned in the video, I already have two sets of results for the 8-18mm that are absolutely ok, so please do refer to my my original 8-18mm review at cameralabs.com and my 10-25mm review on TH-cam and also at cameralabs.com
Whilst I appreciate the idea of a shallow depth of field for pure portraiture I'm not entirely convinced that it's appropriate for, say, mountain hiking vlogs. I like vlogs that place speaker in the environment thus giving context. Waiting for my copy!
@@brianlaunchbury4491 the blur with a wide angle MFT lens isn’t strong enough to obscure the background completely so you still get plenty of context. But of course this f4 lens still looks lovely. Enjoy!
Great reviev - thank you - but one more question: Is it able to cover a total 90 degree horizontal angle of view ? Example: The camera is positioned in an 45 half angle in a corner of a room , hall or cross gangway. Do you see the left and the right wall ? I call it the 90 degree challenge
Most camera companies quote the actual coverage in degrees and Olympus says 107 degrees for this one at 8mm. BUT it may be across the diagonal, not horizontally, but even then, I'd say it should capture 90+ horizontally.
@@evenaicantfigurethisout I nearly never zoom while shooting video, nonetheless, it's worth mentioning, especially when taking into account that Panasonic 8-18 seems to be parafocal or nearly so.
The closest may be the 350g Lumix S 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 (smaller than this lens come to think of it) or the 500g Leica-certified S Pro 16-35mm f/4 if you don't mind switching to APS-C mode for the 50mm FOV.
my camera is the olympus omd e m1 mark ii, when i record video, i see a significant crop and there is only a fixed aspect ratio of 16:9, does anyone know how to get less crop when doing video and if by any chance we can set in camera custom aspect ratios?
It's a good idea, but sadly not. Most video is recorded in the 16:9 shape. The only exception is the slightly wider Cinema DCi shape on some models. Very old cameras used to shoot in the squarer shape of old TVs, but the quality was poor and they haven't done that for ages. if you desire less wide video, you'll need to crop standard video, which will of course reduce the resolution and field of view further. On your camera, check the stabilisation setting for video as one of them does crop more than the other. It's called MIS1 and MIS2.
@@cameralabs Haha yeah I realised after I wrote the comment and saw a few other videos. Still, good to see someone local with a channel doing gear reviews! Nice to virtually meet you!
You're welcome! Sorry I couldn't present all the results I wanted to here as my 8-18 wasn't looking as good as it normally does. i'd still prefer the 8-25 though now.
@@cameralabs to me the 8-18 wins just by the fact that it has stabilization but I'd love the have both the 8-25 and the 8-18 in my possession, praying that in the future more wide angle lenses will have filter threads 🙏
interesting lens but expensive, with less money (street price) I can find a sony 16-35 f4 which paired with a high res body gives the same coverage, considering also the aps-c crop, and is only slightly bigger if I am not wrong.....
Well, to end up with the same res as, say, an Olympus EM1 II after applying an APSC crop to a full-frame sensor, you'd need about 60mp to start with, so your argument would need an A7r IV.
I think that the arguments holds also with a 42mp camera, considering that its aps-c crop is 18mp, and from 16 to 35 you get a 42mp image with ample margin of different crops, not just the centre, surely this oly lens has more features like the manual focus clutch, but I still think that it is expensive....
@@paololarocca7684 I agree many of the new MFT lenses are expensive and I'd only recommend them to people who already own MFT bodes. If you don't own an MFT body then yes, there are many alternatives to weigh up.
@@paololarocca7684 18mpx crop will not give you better quality than the old 12mpx mft. Not only does the resolution drop, but DR. The real resolution of the photo does not equal the resolution of the sensor. Increasing the resolution twice will give you maybe 40% more detail and much more noise. A German photographer/youtuber Markus Wäger compared the m1miii (20mpx) the 100-400 with the sony a7riv (!!62mpx) and the 100-400. Olympus was clearly better. Other reviewers seem to have no interest in such comparisons. I shot with the d850 an m43 myself and I know what it looks like in real life. There are other problems as well, such as vignette (a problem with any ff lens) and LoCa, faster shutter speed for high resolution sensors. Another real life example is fuji xt3. No prime Fuji lens (except 90mm f2) wide open gives more detail than an oly prime (20mpx vs 26mpx). For example fuji 56 1.2 equals 45 1.2 and 75 1.8 closed to f4. As for the price, I'm not sure. When it comes to build quality, these Oly pro lenses are unbeatable.
@@kamilrakowski23 surely there are more things to consider, also all the features which olympus and in general mft bodies have, for example only in the sony a1 you can tweak shadows and highlights (and not in playback!) while even the most basic oly bodies have this feature.... maybe lenses should be considered essential good items, like food, and have a low tax rate applied, for a start ....
I don't understand why Olympus or Panasonic can't make an ultra wide angle fixed lens. That would be a lot lighter and cheaper than those big zooms, that frankly you never use the zoom feature anyway... Just make a good 8mm f2.8 lens with autofocus for less than 500 bucks, everyone is gonna buy it. The only solution rn is a bunch of zooms, or some chinese manual focus fixed lenses...
Thank you. I don't like when manufacturers make a cheap version and an expensive version of the same thing. You either make it right or you don't. This whole "normal" and "pro" lenses was all marketing - Anddd still didn't help them, they still managed to go bankrupt. Respect your costumers and give them everything "Pro".
What you’re not accounting for is the fact that pros are willing to deal with the added size, cost and weight in exchange for the better build & IQ, but many amateurs would rather have 90% of the IQ for a smaller & lighter lens that doesn’t break the bank. So “better” comes with some significant downsides which is why companies offer both to different types of customers. I highly doubt this is the reason they sold their business. MFT as a whole (especially for still shooters i.e. Olympus) has faced fierce competition from larger format manufacturers like Sony, Canon & Fuji (most of whom also offer pro & non-pro lenses btw). This is the far more likely reason.
Doesn't every camera manufacturer do it though? Entry-level consumers don't need the quality, speed and build that pros or high-end enthusiasts do, so there's always been multiple tiers depending on your needs and budget. If all gear were pro level, only a small number of photographers could afford it.
Everyone, even vaunted Zeiss, makes an "affordable" series in addition to their top-line optics. I'd love the Olympus 25mm f/1.2 PRO, but I cannot justify its size, weight, and cost for the few times I use this focal length. To me, the cheap Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 does a marvelous job. But I did splurge for the PRO zooms--that's where you can see a big difference in quality.
Interesting lens, how ever for that price, and lack of dof, the Sony Xperia 1 ii with raw files, comes in to the play...( I know just 12 mp, but good enough for those days )
It's not dead if people are still making products for it and people are still buying them. Is EF dead? Canon has stopped making new EF lenses and bodies...
Really? $1000 for a M43 lens to make a system, cam + lens, heavier, more expensive and slower and bigger than a Sony A7C? Frankly, if you're interested only in photography why would you buy a M43 today since their smaller sensor offering poorer dynamic range is packaged in a heavier and more expensive way than some of the more recent full frames from Sony? Who's going to buy this? People who made the mistake to invest in M43 lenses?Even Blackmagic cams are moving away from M43 sensors in their 6 k models.
Obviously you've never shot m4/3 or even seen m4/3 photos. Sony does make tiny FF cameras, but if you compare the total system size, weight, and cost, there is no comparison. Yes, your Sony can theoretically take better photos, but would you be able to tell them apart in most instances? Notice that even Canon is panicking, realizing that not everyone wants monster lenses, so they responded with f/11 zooms. (?!)
@@Centauri27 100% if you get the camera settings and your editing right you cant see any difference. Full frame is better in extreme low light or in high dynamic range situations but until now i never had the feeling my camera was not good enough in any way.
@@castielvargastv7931 Exactly! Unless you pixel peep. Even then, there are now powerful and awesome software like DxO PureRAW that can truly bring the noise of m4/3 on par with full frame. And Luminar AI has a "Portrait AI" mode that can simulate very convincingly a blurred background of a FF 85mm f/1.2 lens! As for dynamic range, simply bracketing your shots will usually do the trick.
For more info on StoryBlocks, visit: storyblocks.com/CameraLabs
My Olympus 8-25mm review vs the Leica DG 8-18mm and 10-25mm
Check prices at B&H: bhpho.to/367liEA // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3hktkis
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: th-cam.com/users/dinobytes
Equipment used for producing this video
Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
MacBook Pro 13in (16GB / 512GB): amzn.to/3hrwMYD
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
00:00 - Intro
01:39 - Design and controls
05:38 - Coverage
07:17 - Landscape comparison
11:03 - Bokeh comparison
11:49 - Portrait comparison
12:54 - Focusing comparison
13:49 - Focusing for movies
15:00 - Vlogging comparison
17:26 - Focus breathing comparison
18:16 - Verdict and sample images
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
I want one. You made me an MFT addict long ago. I’m glad Olympus cameras are alive and well.
It's certainly a nice lens!
Something Olympus got absolutely right is the feel of these metal lenses. The way they handle, and feel in the hand, is superb. They make you want to hold them, and are pleasant to use. Beginning with the 12mm f2 and 17mm f1.8, the move to the Pro primes and zooms is even better.
I have the Pana-Leica 10-25...I see no reason to let go of it. While so many are concentrating on video, I purchased it strictly for landscape a majority of the time. It really is outstanding. For sure., just walking around or in the city, the 8-25mm will be a great deal lighter. I see it serving a great need due to that and the very nice pricing with the Olympus still attaching the word "Pro" on it. For a $1000 starting price as it hits the markets, it will do well.
Lovely to see you again Gordon, and thanks. I almost feel I should get this lens now. Take care.
I'm here every week, posting new videos!
Or an Olympus 45 mm 1.8, which has always been the best value lens for portrait. The 8-25 mm with a 45mm covers most the travel photography needs I would believe...
While the Leica lenses both seemed to produce more contrasty results that I preferred, having an ultra wide zoom all the way to normal focal length is great. This video has definitely got me considering the 8-25 as a travel/landscape lens.
This 8-25 f/4 plus the 40-150 f/4 and an E.M1.2/3/OM1 make a very lightweight, bomb-proof combo for backpacking landscapes in any kind of weather covering almost all useful focal lengths. The sharpness on both f/4 zooms is very good to excellent, in my estimation slightly behind (but not by much) the Canon RF f/4 zooms.
Really really really really love the vlogging comparisons. All the reviews I've ever seen for ultrawide angle lenses only talk about it in photo aspects. Really appreciate your work mate. Well deserved new sub 👍
You're very weelcome!
Thanks for the vlogging comparison, that is exactly what I wanted to know about. I use the old olympus 9-18 f4-5.6 for hand held, and ill stick with it after seeing this. It is so much lighter and the results are impressively good. I wanted to see if the 2.8 Leica made a difference in depth of field at 8mm compared to f4. And no, it doesn't. Why wont Panasonic or olympus make an ultra-wide fast prime that isn't fisheye? There are too many zooms already.
Yes, I'd like an 8 or 10mm prime, but there is a 12 that's really nice.
@@cameralabs a 12 cant really compare to a 8 . I have a 12 and i always want a wider lense, 12 ist just not enough
I also have the old 9-18 and it's so tiny and sharp. If you need compact and are willing to give up 1mm, then the 9-18 is a good companion for the 12-40, at it's f/4 at the wide end, just like the 8-25. As for wide primes, I gave up waiting and snapped up a Laowa 10mm f/2 as soon as it was available. Sure it's not auto focus, but it has electrical contacts and is the next best thing.
Thanks again Gordon, being a M3/4 user I was just looking yesterday for a comparison of the Leica 8-18 which I own and this new Olympus. I was hoping the Olympus was close to as good since I love the focus clutch. Great review.
Thanks, glad it was useful! I like the Leica 8-18 but if I was buying new, I'd get the Olympus now.
Been following you since 2009, and I consider your reviews an invaluable asset.
Thanks!
Great. Finally, a real review. For landscape photography, this range and water resistance = amazing combination. Recently shooting in Denmark during a beautiful storm (not so beautiful when I saw my basement) I had a 12-40 pro on one body and a 40-150 pro on the other. There was no chance to change the lens. A combination of 8-25 and 12-100 or 40-150 would be great. Definitely a better choice than 7-14mm 2.8. I was curious about the quality on the wide end. I am also interested in the coma and vignette. I am using an 8mm 1.8 and a 7.5 laowa with the tracker for astrophotography. 8mm is perfect but no filterthread, the laowa has thread(great for landscape) but definitely not perfect for astri (vignette and coma). As for the different copies of lenses, it is an interesting issue. A few months ago, everyone was excited about the 16mm 1.8 (because there is absolutely no coma). Some people already know it's not that good. I also had two copies of Oly 17mm 1.2 and one was noticeably sharper between 1.2-1.6. This is something we should always consider when buying a new lens.
Glad you found it useful!
I read your comment and I'm curious why you think the 8-25 would be a better choice than the 7-14. I have the 7-14 and I think its the sharpest lens behind my 40-150 PRO. My only big complaint is the distortion when I take shots at any kind of angle. Anyway - curious to hear your opinions.
@@blackice5649 I think this longer range and thread for filters is a huge advantage of 8-25mm. That's all. As for the image quality, i don't care about sharpness anymore. If the photo isn't sharp, it's probably my fault. All pro lenses are great in my opinion. The only problem i have with the older lenses,like 12-40 and 40-150 compared to the new lenses is the lack of contrast and flare when shooting against the light.
Excellent video, great to have this comparison - thanks Gordon!
You're very welcome!
It's interesting but it looks like 10-25 oversaturates colors. I found the same results after shooting 42.5 Leica Nocticron and 42.5 Olympus f1.2. Olympus tends to render colors in a more neutral way, whereas Leica makes them more poppy. I lean toward more "true" and neutral colors so I kept the Olympus f1.2, but I did find 42.5 Leica to be pleasing for portraits as it resulted in richer skin tones.
Ironically, the imperfection of Voigt Nokton 42.5 and the dreaminess wide open still make it my favorite for portraits.
In any case looks like 8-25 is a great lens. Thanks for your review.
It is interesting the compare the character of different lens designs...
Is it just me or does it appear the Olympus lens has better color saturation than the Leica lenses?
I find the Leica puncher with more contrast.
Gordon's complexion looked more accurate (and sharper) on the big Leica, though. For broader shots, the Zuiko colour sometimes looked better.
The 10-25 Leica is a very appealing lens - if you can stomach the size and weight.
And price :( (50% more?)
@@christan5484 Worth it. I'd say the Leica is actually a better value for what it provides. It's unfortunate, that Olympus and Panasonic never worked out to support each other's lens features such as function buttons, aperture control rings and such though. MFT, some "standard", huh?
true but i use olympus pro lenses with my gh5 anyway. i love olympus lenses@@weisserth
Great review as always, thanks Gordon!
Thanks!
In your autofocus tests for stills there is a slight hunting every time before it locks in, despite phase detection. I have the E-M1 II with the 12-100 f/4 and I see the same behavior and I was never sure if I might accidentally turned off the phase detection or if this behavior is really normal because phase detection was specifically supposed to avoid that because the camera knows how far to turn the focus motor without the need for hunting. I never saw this on my Canon cameras back in the day. But this is normal behavior? Good to know! Great review as always, I will probably get this lens.
I noticed the same hunting with EM5 Mk 3 and 12-45mm f4 Pro. Was a bit surprised.
Nice review, I'm really thinking of selling my PL8-18 for this new O8-25 Pro, such a useful range.
Got mine 8-25mm and its awesome! :)
I find it surprising how hard it is to find.
I would love to see your review of the OM 20mm f1.4… and 150-400mm :)
Ive always wanted a lens with a focal range like this but it never really seems to be available on full-frame. surely if a 24-70 2.8 is exists, a 19-55 f2.8 or something similar is possible. Great vid as always!
Thanks, and yes, it's a perfect focal range! Panasonic has something similar in full-frame for L-mount with the 20-60mm.
I've had both the 8-18 and the 8-25 and I would say the 8-18 is better only for video but if you want to take photos the 8-25 wins hands down. I found the 8-25 to be a little heavier in the vlogging area though.
Extremely well done!
Thanks!
Thank you for a very thorough review / comparison.
I use the Olympus 12-40mm as my everyday walk-around lens, but now I look forward to getting my hands on this one - of course it will be much more useful when there is also a 25-100mm F/4.0 IS ;-)
Great combo!
If only there will be a 25-100mm f4. Or you could get the 12-100 f4.
Nice review. The comparison with the Pan 8-18mm where possible was interesting. Overall I like the Oly 8-25 f4 because of the more useful zoom range and it is still decently portable with good image and video quality. The only plus for the Pan 8-18mm seems to be the wider aperture at the wide end; however in the video comparison, that didn't seem to make much of a difference. Still images may be a different story though and would love to see a detailed comparison with a proper Pan 8-18mm sample.
As I mentioned in the video, I already have two sets of results for the 8-18mm that are absolutely ok, so please do refer to my my original 8-18mm review at cameralabs.com and my 10-25mm review on TH-cam and also at cameralabs.com
Excellent presentation Sir
Thanks!
Such a useful and tempting lens..
..
I'm tempted!
Fantastic comparison! Really very useful…
You're welcome!
One does like a well-behaved lens - it’s hard to give one a time out.
I don't tolerate poor behaviour!
Great hiking lens. For vlogging I’d go for a wider aperture because the out of focus background just looks prettier.
Yep, a great all-rounder. I also love the shallower depth of field, but I don't want to lug around the 10-25
Whilst I appreciate the idea of a shallow depth of field for pure portraiture I'm not entirely convinced that it's appropriate for, say, mountain hiking vlogs. I like vlogs that place speaker in the environment thus giving context. Waiting for my copy!
@@brianlaunchbury4491 the blur with a wide angle MFT lens isn’t strong enough to obscure the background completely so you still get plenty of context. But of course this f4 lens still looks lovely. Enjoy!
Great reviev - thank you - but one more question:
Is it able to cover a total 90 degree horizontal angle of view ?
Example: The camera is positioned in an 45 half angle in a corner of a room , hall or cross gangway.
Do you see the left and the right wall ?
I call it the 90 degree challenge
Most camera companies quote the actual coverage in degrees and Olympus says 107 degrees for this one at 8mm. BUT it may be across the diagonal, not horizontally, but even then, I'd say it should capture 90+ horizontally.
Thanks
8-25 does not seem to be parfocal when zooming (0:25-0:30)
indeed. nice catch.
@@evenaicantfigurethisout I nearly never zoom while shooting video, nonetheless, it's worth mentioning, especially when taking into account that Panasonic 8-18 seems to be parafocal or nearly so.
do we know if this lens is parfocal?
it's a shame it's missing a (declicked) aperture ring.
Me encantaría si funcionará la doble estabilización con mi GH5
Really appreciate this
Thanks!
Ho boy, do I love that 10-25 f1.7. Bigger, yeah, but the results are worth it for me.
It was really nice to use it again...
@@cameralabs Everyone who has one seems to love using it. It is a very special lens.
I hope for a similar full frame lens with an focal length range 16-50mm
it's a great range
I believe Tamron are working on a 16-70 for Sony's mount if that's relevant to you.
The closest may be the 350g Lumix S 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 (smaller than this lens come to think of it) or the 500g Leica-certified S Pro 16-35mm f/4 if you don't mind switching to APS-C mode for the 50mm FOV.
You've reactivated my curiosity about the 10-25mm :/
Yes, i think i've done that for a few folk!
Have tried many times Gordon to hear the name of the lense you mentioned right at the end but cannot hear it clearly due to the speed you talk at,
No problem, it's the Lumix G 42.5mm f1.7
@@cameralabs thank you kind sir
hi gordon, how about this oly 8-25mm to replace pana 8-18 + 10-25 ？
If the speed is OK, then why not.
This may be an excellent lens.
However, the size of this and other Pro lens are not a great fit with other than the Pro sized bodies.
my camera is the olympus omd e m1 mark ii, when i record video, i see a significant crop and there is only a fixed aspect ratio of 16:9, does anyone know how to get less crop when doing video and if by any chance we can set in camera custom aspect ratios?
It's a good idea, but sadly not. Most video is recorded in the 16:9 shape. The only exception is the slightly wider Cinema DCi shape on some models. Very old cameras used to shoot in the squarer shape of old TVs, but the quality was poor and they haven't done that for ages. if you desire less wide video, you'll need to crop standard video, which will of course reduce the resolution and field of view further. On your camera, check the stabilisation setting for video as one of them does crop more than the other. It's called MIS1 and MIS2.
hmmm the 10-25 from leica has the best image in my opinion.
the 10-25 is an excellent lens
Hmmm, didn’t realize Olympus was still making cameras!
They probably started this lens before the takeover, but yes, they are still making new products.
Did not not hear about the new EP7? Launched in tandem with this lens with great fanfare.
A fellow Brighton Olympus user?!! Greetings!
Hello there! I'm a reviewer, so I use all the systems, but I do have quite a lot of my own M43 gear.
@@cameralabs Haha yeah I realised after I wrote the comment and saw a few other videos. Still, good to see someone local with a channel doing gear reviews! Nice to virtually meet you!
@@tomrandall6539 you too! Maybe see you around town sometime!
Nice demo… the Leica f/1.7 has jelly bean bokeh.
Water at the beach looks cold.
it's England, what do you expect?
fucking love you man, that the thing that i wanted, the 8-25 vs the 8-18 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
You're welcome! Sorry I couldn't present all the results I wanted to here as my 8-18 wasn't looking as good as it normally does. i'd still prefer the 8-25 though now.
@@cameralabs to me the 8-18 wins just by the fact that it has stabilization but I'd love the have both the 8-25 and the 8-18 in my possession, praying that in the future more wide angle lenses will have filter threads 🙏
interesting lens but expensive, with less money (street price) I can find a sony 16-35 f4 which paired with a high res body gives the same coverage, considering also the aps-c crop, and is only slightly bigger if I am not wrong.....
Well, to end up with the same res as, say, an Olympus EM1 II after applying an APSC crop to a full-frame sensor, you'd need about 60mp to start with, so your argument would need an A7r IV.
I think that the arguments holds also with a 42mp camera, considering that its aps-c crop is 18mp, and from 16 to 35 you get a 42mp image with ample margin of different crops, not just the centre, surely this oly lens has more features like the manual focus clutch, but I still think that it is expensive....
@@paololarocca7684 I agree many of the new MFT lenses are expensive and I'd only recommend them to people who already own MFT bodes. If you don't own an MFT body then yes, there are many alternatives to weigh up.
@@paololarocca7684 18mpx crop will not give you better quality than the old 12mpx mft. Not only does the resolution drop, but DR. The real resolution of the photo does not equal the resolution of the sensor. Increasing the resolution twice will give you maybe 40% more detail and much more noise. A German photographer/youtuber Markus Wäger compared the m1miii (20mpx) the 100-400 with the sony a7riv (!!62mpx) and the 100-400. Olympus was clearly better. Other reviewers seem to have no interest in such comparisons. I shot with the d850 an m43 myself and I know what it looks like in real life. There are other problems as well, such as vignette (a problem with any ff lens) and LoCa, faster shutter speed for high resolution sensors. Another real life example is fuji xt3. No prime Fuji lens (except 90mm f2) wide open gives more detail than an oly prime (20mpx vs 26mpx). For example fuji 56 1.2 equals 45 1.2 and 75 1.8 closed to f4. As for the price, I'm not sure. When it comes to build quality, these Oly pro lenses are unbeatable.
@@kamilrakowski23 surely there are more things to consider, also all the features which olympus and in general mft bodies have, for example only in the sony a1 you can tweak shadows and highlights (and not in playback!) while even the most basic oly bodies have this feature.... maybe lenses should be considered essential good items, like food, and have a low tax rate applied, for a start ....
There's more to life than bokquet
The oly 8-25mm f4 looked bright
Than the panisonic f2.8
I don't understand why Olympus or Panasonic can't make an ultra wide angle fixed lens. That would be a lot lighter and cheaper than those big zooms, that frankly you never use the zoom feature anyway... Just make a good 8mm f2.8 lens with autofocus for less than 500 bucks, everyone is gonna buy it. The only solution rn is a bunch of zooms, or some chinese manual focus fixed lenses...
there's lots of fisheyes, but I agree, an ultra wide prime would be nice
@@cameralabs I have the 8mm f1.8 that's fun to use and useful for virtual tours, but it doesn't replace a rectilinear lens.
@@pbenjlo I agree, I have that lens too
I don't like Olympys system in any respect but love your videos a lot even about Olympus :-) Thumbs up
Thanks!
lol what you said just made no sense whatsoever
Thank you. I don't like when manufacturers make a cheap version and an expensive version of the same thing. You either make it right or you don't. This whole "normal" and "pro" lenses was all marketing - Anddd still didn't help them, they still managed to go bankrupt. Respect your costumers and give them everything "Pro".
What you’re not accounting for is the fact that pros are willing to deal with the added size, cost and weight in exchange for the better build & IQ, but many amateurs would rather have 90% of the IQ for a smaller & lighter lens that doesn’t break the bank. So “better” comes with some significant downsides which is why companies offer both to different types of customers.
I highly doubt this is the reason they sold their business. MFT as a whole (especially for still shooters i.e. Olympus) has faced fierce competition from larger format manufacturers like Sony, Canon & Fuji (most of whom also offer pro & non-pro lenses btw). This is the far more likely reason.
Doesn't every camera manufacturer do it though? Entry-level consumers don't need the quality, speed and build that pros or high-end enthusiasts do, so there's always been multiple tiers depending on your needs and budget. If all gear were pro level, only a small number of photographers could afford it.
I cannot afford the Pro range of lenses, so the normal range suits me fine. That's why I did not go APS-C or FF because their lens prices are insane!
Everyone, even vaunted Zeiss, makes an "affordable" series in addition to their top-line optics. I'd love the Olympus 25mm f/1.2 PRO, but I cannot justify its size, weight, and cost for the few times I use this focal length. To me, the cheap Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 does a marvelous job. But I did splurge for the PRO zooms--that's where you can see a big difference in quality.
Interesting lens, how ever for that price, and lack of dof, the Sony Xperia 1 ii with raw files, comes in to the play...( I know just 12 mp, but good enough for those days )
It's always important to compare options.
Still cannot believe m43 is not dead.........or is it?
It's not dead if people are still making products for it and people are still buying them. Is EF dead? Canon has stopped making new EF lenses and bodies...
@@cameralabs LOL...I love applied logic across the board. That was funny and timely, Gordon!
Really? $1000 for a M43 lens to make a system, cam + lens, heavier, more expensive and slower and bigger than a Sony A7C? Frankly, if you're interested only in photography why would you buy a M43 today since their smaller sensor offering poorer dynamic range is packaged in a heavier and more expensive way than some of the more recent full frames from Sony? Who's going to buy this? People who made the mistake to invest in M43 lenses?Even Blackmagic cams are moving away from M43 sensors in their 6 k models.
This is not for you, it's aimed at people who own and are happy with M43 cameras.
Dynamic range of m43 is NOT poor. If you need more while editing your picture something is wrong with your photographer skills
Obviously you've never shot m4/3 or even seen m4/3 photos. Sony does make tiny FF cameras, but if you compare the total system size, weight, and cost, there is no comparison. Yes, your Sony can theoretically take better photos, but would you be able to tell them apart in most instances? Notice that even Canon is panicking, realizing that not everyone wants monster lenses, so they responded with f/11 zooms. (?!)
@@Centauri27 100% if you get the camera settings and your editing right you cant see any difference. Full frame is better in extreme low light or in high dynamic range situations but until now i never had the feeling my camera was not good enough in any way.
@@castielvargastv7931 Exactly! Unless you pixel peep. Even then, there are now powerful and awesome software like DxO PureRAW that can truly bring the noise of m4/3 on par with full frame. And Luminar AI has a "Portrait AI" mode that can simulate very convincingly a blurred background of a FF 85mm f/1.2 lens! As for dynamic range, simply bracketing your shots will usually do the trick.
£900 for an improved Kit lens for a dead format ? No thanks, nice review.
It's not dead if they're still making products for it. By that logic, is EF dead?
@@cameralabs very true
Gh6 is coming and many new lenses. Who is dead?
why are you wasting your time watching videos (and commenting) on a dead format? go back to taking your cat photos.
Hmmm..it's not a kit lens and it's not a dead format. I guess you don't mind making two stupid statements in one sentence. Nice job!