Thanks for the good comparison! I just sold my 7-14mm on Ebay for a good prize to change the lens. For me the 3x zoom and the filters (also to protect the lense) is a good argument. Also the close focus. I will get the 8-25mm on Monday - I am really excited!
Peter, how about doing a super-wide-angle lens-filter review? I'm speaking about a video discussing the pros and cons of the choices of filter holders and filters available for super-wide lenses. Thanks, Rick
Hi Peter, thanks for supporting my decision. Before I saw your video, I sold my 7-14mm which was one of my diamonds in my collection. But due to „just“ 14mm I decided to change over to 25mm. Of course in a very very few situations I used 2.8 from hand by night, but usually f4 is enough. So I am happy to see that my final decision might make sense. I am still practising my 8-25 :-). Thanks for your video!
I‘ve read that the 7-14 has a strong field curvature. If so, one should not focus and reframe, at least not below f 5.6 or so. That‘s a disadvantage in ergonomics for situations where you have to be fast.
I like that the 8-25 packs smaller, but I actually prefer the focal range of the 7-14, as I like the 17mm over the 25mm focal length. Plus the 7-14 is more protected-feeling since the zooming action is all internal. The only downside of the 7-14 is the requirement to put on a bespoke filter system to protect the front element with a UV filter, but I just keep the lens cap or more often. Thanks for the video!
Would have been good to see this come out a while back but, alas, I already have the 25mm pro as well as the 7-14mm so I think I'll look forward to what comes next! Great video presentation as always, Peter.
Almost a year after my previous comment, I finally bought a copy of the 8-25mm. People who paired the 7-14 with the 12-100 have said that switching became easier when swapping the former with the 8-25 due to the extended reach. Also, the fact that the lens at 8mm has more protection from rain than the 7-14 does at 7 or 8mm influenced my purchase.
I have the Oly 9-18 and would be interested to know how much better the 8-25 is (putting to one side the extra reach) - the 9-18 is very small and light which really suits me for hiking. I use it alongside my Oly 12-45 Pro. The weight and size of the 8-25 is a little off putting especially if the image quality around the 8-12 focal lengths is not significantly better than the 9-18. Would be great to see a 8-25 to 9-18 comparison especially for those of us who already have the 9-18.
As usually, very informative and professional video. Thank you Peter. I am currently using the variable aperture Panasonic 8-18mm, which is nice as well. I like the 2.8 for 8mm for some evening shots, great image quality and the size/weight (315 grams) is great too - not a bulky lens. The new Olympus 8-25 seems to be a very solid competitor tough. The additional reach, making it a 50mm FF equivalent is quite interesting. I can’t wait to try it out. In you video, when you talk about the weight comparison, for the 7-14 you have correct numbers on the screen but you say 100 gr. less, just a little mistake, but it doesn’t really matter. Have a great weekend!
I have both Zuiko 7-14 and 12-100. I still am considering getting 8-25 mostly to eliminate the "switch point" when time is critical. I often find that when using 7-14 is that it's just a "tad too short" for some situations. Likewise, the 12-100 is "not wide enough for some". I feel the 8-25 covers a really useful focal length for street, landscape, and travel photography and will come most scenarios, while the other lenses can be useful to fill in the gaps.
Peter, thanks for a great comparison! I’ve been debating on how best to cover the super-wide space for some time. Weight is an important factor for me as I do a lot of hiking in remote places, which is why I have hesitated on investing in the 7-14. Based on your review, I plan to go with the 8-25 as my primary lens (leaving the 12-45 pro at home) and rely on my Laowa 7.5 f2 when I need a larger aperture for astrophotography and low light scenes.
I buy this lens for filter reason so Peter her thold use, but walk around by this lens a in citylandskap wiht many live off people is very nice F4 is right DOF and 25mm for street photo and 8mm for buldings, sharp, fast and nice all.
Great comparison. I have the 7-14 and it is an amazing lens, and the width at 7 mm does give you a bit more flexibility that I have found useful when shooting landscapes. The filter issue I do recognise. I don’t use them that much but in certain circumstances they would be handy and the specialist filters you have to use are quite bulky and expensive so I have stayed away from those for now. I can definitely see the attraction of the greater versatility of the 8-25 though. With the 7-14 you either have to change lenses more often or you have to have a second camera with a standard range lens. I can see combining the 8-25 with a lens like the OM 12-100 f/4 or the Panny 35-100 f/2.8 as a pretty versatile two lens combination (shame there is no 25-100). Oh, and if you think the 7-14 f/2.8 is heavy, the old 4/3rds 7-14 f/4 was 780g… But then I still use the 50-200mm SWD, which isn’t exactly a lightweight at just under 1kg!
I guess you and Jimmy were on opposite sides of that brick wall at the same time. The step-up is a good approach (I have a few), but does a step-up to 77 clash with the hood? That is an item to check out. Great comparison video, I think you nailed it. Also, the visual tricks on the lenses (focus clutch movement, zooming to the aperture marking, etc.) were nice video touches. I also liked your background colors.
I own the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8, along with a number of other M.Zuiko Pro lenses. The focal range of 7-14mm is very handy when you need wide angle, but I must say, for me personally, the 7-14 is my least used, and least favourite Olympus pro lens. There is noticeable distortion as you move out from the centre, and it is not up to the superb quality of other Olympus Pro series lenses when you are looking at sharpness near the edges. It's not bad by any measure, and these issues are almost certainly related to its ultra wide field of view. Nonetheless, in my opinion, it doesn't quite match lenses like the 12-40 f/2.8, or the 40-150 f/2.8, both of which are simply excellent all round. Finally, the 7-14mm is relatively heavy, expensive, and unable to accommodate standard filters, or threaded filter holders. With OM Solutions bringing out mark II glass for the 12-40 f/2.8, I hope they also decide to rework the 7-14mm with some of these drawbacks addressed in future variants.
Dear Peter, as first thanks. I have a question regarding to lenses. When talking about specs from a lens Olympus say (7-14 f2.8 and 8-25 f4) Why? Because for the 7-14 it is in fact f2.8 and for the 8-25 it is f1.4 and very far away from 4. It does not describe the real values for the diaphragm, those are not real values. What do you think about it?
8:54 Is the 7-14 less sharp in the corners or does it have more field curvature? You may find that the corners are quite good at 7mm but they won't be in the same focal plane as the centre.
If I hadn't already got the 7-14 the 8-25 would certainly be on my shopping list. But I'm not about to buy the 8-25, because I'm quite happy with it and, in truth, it is only used occasionally.
I wish the price difference would be similar on the used market. But there it seems to be the opposite. I use 72mm filters on my 12-40 and 40-150. Seems like a plus for the 8-25. The filtering I use is mainly ND for filming in order to use lower F-Stop for some background separation ... which is harder to get if not almost useless with wideangle F4. Given the used price and that I went the 2.8 route so far probably makes me purchase a 7-14. Although I will for sure miss the 25mm.😆
I've got a love hate relationship with the 7-14mm. It has a propensity to produce lens flair when shooting widest, if the sun is anywhere near the frame, even when stopped down. So I always have to be very careful when composing a shot to know where the sun is. Did you notice any similar tendency with the 8-25mm?
It is a good combo for travel. I would most likely add a 25mm f1.2 or f1.8. But if you are more towards wide-angels then 1 17mm might be a better choice.
I like 8-25mm F4, however, I am not going to get one soon, as I already have 7-14 F2.8 for years. The only filter I would use for digital cameras is the ND filter. With E-M1.3's built-in ND filter, I am not going to have a problem with 7-14 for filters. 8-25 F4.0 is a great design indeed. I might get one later for when I don't want to bring both 7-14 and 12-100 for hiking.
Hello! I have been trying to decide between these two lenses and I came across your video! I am interested in a lens that is good for landscape photography as well as just a good ol' walk-around lens. I would, however, like to try my hand at astrophotography at some point. I know the 7-14mm would probably be the best for astro, but how well do you think the 8-25mm would perform for astro stuff?
8-25mm is a f4 and that might be a bit too dark. The 7-14mm is a bit better, but then 8-25 is a lot better for all around photography. I have them both and after I got the 8-25mm f4 I have not used the 7-14mm f2.8 at all.
I wanna jump and experiment with m43 as an amateur photographer. I am more into wide angle photography and I do care for low light photography. Would you still suggest the 8-25mm to someone that's not planning to have a faster aperture lens below the 25mm ? Cause to me 8-25mm seems a nice choice for someone if they wanna cover everything below 25mm with it and then another zoom lens for higher focal lengths. Or let me put it that way. I am planning to build a setup of 3 lenses: an ultrawide zoom lens, a prime ( the 17mm olympus or the 15mm panasonic ) or the 12-40mm which is still not as bright as the primes, and a tele zoom lens which doesn't need to have constant aperture ( 40-150 or even the 12-200 ). which ultrawide do i pick ? or do i get the 8-25mm for a 2 lens setup !
I didn't buy the olympus 7-14, because of the filters. I bought the Panasonic 8-18 f 2.8-4, which can use circular filters. In my opinion the new Olympus 8-25 is a bit expensive, compared to the 7-14 and the Panasonic 8-18, only 250 € less, I think if I hadn't already bought the Panasonic, this would be my choice.
Whoever can pay 1000 euros will also have 1250. So the difference of 250 euros is insignificant. 8-25 would have to be significantly cheaper to even consider buying it . Wider angle and one f-stop faster means a lot, especially in architecture photographing .
@@ForsgardPeter You are right as usual :-) I thought a wider angle for architecture and 1 f-stop faster for photography indoor when you don’t have ( or you must not use ) a tripod or a flash ( in a a museum for example ). Thanx for your reply !
When it comes to video I would rather the 12mm 2.0 as it's nice and wide and the length of the barrel is short so it really compares to a 10mm in the zoom lenses but photography I was blown away with the sharpness of the pictures in daylight with the 8-25. Great travel lens 👌 25mm 1.2 and the 12mm 2.0 and that's the trifecta for me. I love Olympus just need 4k 60p to complete the micro 4/3 world.
You helped me make my decision, I'll go with the 8:25 over the 7:14. I'll just have to wait for the port for the underwater housing to come out. Thank you from hot and exciting Libya.
Neither for me. Unfortunately. I would love to use the 7-14mm f2.8, but not having a filter thread on the front lens element is a no-go. And I would want that lens for its f2.8 aperture at the wide end. The Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 8-18mm f/2.8-4 is probably going make the cut, as it has the f2.8 aperture at 8mm while also having a filter thread. Also, it's cheaper and lighter than the Olympus at f2.8. A shame really.
Not at all the same thing. 7mm or 8mm is a LOT wider than 12mm in practice. I use the 12-40 lens as an all-purpose walkabout lens, but when it it time for wide angle 12mm is not enough.
O me the difference from 7 to 8 mm is quite big. The lack of a docus clutch and the poor f4 are dealbreakers for me. The 7-14 2.8 is a much better choice for me.
Thanks for the review. I do like the range of this new lens. With it i would be able to carry one lens instead of two 95% of the time. That would be nice, but i don't want to sell those 2 f2.8 lenses to pay for it. Still needs a filter holder for graduated nd filters. I got a 3d printed slip on ring for the 7-14mm through shapeways for maybe $30 U.S. It accepts the lee 100mm filter holder. To avoid vignetting at 7mm requires being careful but it does work well, hasn't slipped off while hiking and is relatively compact.
Hi Peter, thanks for this one. I'd like your advise. I have a Laowa 7.5mm, a Olympus 12-40mm Pro. I am considering another lens to cover between 7.5 and 12. Would you suggest a Panasonic 7-14 f4, Olympus 7-14 f2.8 pro or the one you are reviewing here the Olympus 8-25mm? Thank you.
The comparison that interests me is the 8-25 v 12-45. I like the 12-45, but the lack of fn button and manual clutch are annoyances for me (I use both frequently on my other lenses). That is almost enough to get me to switch in itself, but the extra 20mm of focal length ability is very convenient in some situations. I wonder if the difference between the 12mm and 8mm focal lengths is big/noticeable?
Yes, you will find the difference in angle of view for each mm of focal length is not a linear gain. 8 mm is way wider than 12 (in film terms, they are 16 and 24, basically two increments of typical primes - 50, 35, 28, 24, 20, 16 - difference). Lots more delta at the short end than at the telephoto end when evaluating focal length.
@@mikejankowski6321 Thanks, that does add something that counter-balances the loss of focal length on the other end of the zoom range. Something to think about.
i have 7-14，one more reason I think to change 8-25 is the micro funtion. And I got 7-14 2nd hand in 4200rmb, the new 8-14 is about 7000rmb, As you say, 2.8 4 not a big problem, I have 17.2 45.2 for night shoting. But all my lens 7-14 40-150 17 45 are inside zone, not like 8-25 outside zone I am from Shanghai China, not easy to follow you chanel (I really love it, and very useful) because the GFW for internet I wish to buy you a coffee soon, when I learn to pay by Visa card. And sorry for my poor English, I wish you can understand me.
At last I keep the 7-14pro for my trip last week, EM12 and EM13 7-14/40-150 2body2lens(17pro and X2adaptor in bag), so I feel 2.8 is useful in the night market than the more 14-25mm longer. I buy you coffee today as I promised, and thanks again.
Questing is: Invest 1000 bugs on 1 lens into a dead system? Olympus gone, Panasonic already on a bigger sensor, to exit smoothly... I changed from Sony apsc to Pen F, regarding the worse sensor. And I notice a big loss in dynamic range, which is the biggest /only bummer for me. BUT I knew that the lenses that I wanted are just too expensive for me (as I have some more and even wayyy more other hobbies as well)! So I own a 8mm manual (CN lens, very good), 12-32, 25 f1. 8, 32mm f1. 2 CN manual, 45 of course, 7-300mm. You see: all cheap but good enough lenses These in a different system would cost more than double or triple. + plus Pen F is a beautiful cam! But I would not invest 1k in 1 lens, if there is no future. otherwise... maybe. You see a product is: 4 P > price, proposition, promotion and place As an argument of that I am thinking of a em1mii as a secondary video device...
@@ForsgardPeter AFAIK is Panasonic the only company who´s building bodies, as Olympus is no more. If Pana stops, no new bodies will come to market. Pana will make more renenue with the bigger sensor series in the near future, as Sony does as well. The Question is not IF but WHEN this will happen.
@@derJackistweg you are very badly informed. Olympus is called om systems now. The company is alive and well. Mft cameras still sell very well. Mft is NOT dead.
![Olympus 8-25mm f4 Pro - [The FIRST lens from OMDS!]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5XWZyoPCwgg/mqdefault.jpg)
Time to go on a walkabout and let's see what we see as a comparison! Thanks so much for your work and production each week!
Thanks
Thank you.
Thanks for the good comparison! I just sold my 7-14mm on Ebay for a good prize to change the lens. For me the 3x zoom and the filters (also to protect the lense) is a good argument. Also the close focus. I will get the 8-25mm on Monday - I am really excited!
Good choice!
Peter, how about doing a super-wide-angle lens-filter review? I'm speaking about a video discussing the pros and cons of the choices of filter holders and filters available for super-wide lenses.
Thanks, Rick
That could be a good topic!
Hi Peter, thanks for supporting my decision. Before I saw your video, I sold my 7-14mm which was one of my diamonds in my collection. But due to „just“ 14mm I decided to change over to 25mm. Of course in a very very few situations I used 2.8 from hand by night, but usually f4 is enough. So I am happy to see that my final decision might make sense. I am still practising my 8-25 :-). Thanks for your video!
Thank you. Good choice!
I‘ve read that the 7-14 has a strong field curvature. If so, one should not focus and reframe, at least not below f 5.6 or so. That‘s a disadvantage in ergonomics for situations where you have to be fast.
Peter, great video. Plan to stay with my 7-14 with Kase adapter since I own both. The f4 is an issue for me since I do night photography.
Thanks for the comparison, looks like the 8-25 might be a very solid & sharp choice.
I like that the 8-25 packs smaller, but I actually prefer the focal range of the 7-14, as I like the 17mm over the 25mm focal length. Plus the 7-14 is more protected-feeling since the zooming action is all internal. The only downside of the 7-14 is the requirement to put on a bespoke filter system to protect the front element with a UV filter, but I just keep the lens cap or more often. Thanks for the video!
Would have been good to see this come out a while back but, alas, I already have the 25mm pro as well as the 7-14mm so I think I'll look forward to what comes next! Great video presentation as always, Peter.
Thanks.
Almost a year after my previous comment, I finally bought a copy of the 8-25mm. People who paired the 7-14 with the 12-100 have said that switching became easier when swapping the former with the 8-25 due to the extended reach. Also, the fact that the lens at 8mm has more protection from rain than the 7-14 does at 7 or 8mm influenced my purchase.
I have the Oly 9-18 and would be interested to know how much better the 8-25 is (putting to one side the extra reach) - the 9-18 is very small and light which really suits me for hiking. I use it alongside my Oly 12-45 Pro. The weight and size of the 8-25 is a little off putting especially if the image quality around the 8-12 focal lengths is not significantly better than the 9-18. Would be great to see a 8-25 to 9-18 comparison especially for those of us who already have the 9-18.
That would be interesting to compare those too lenses. Let's see if I can get a hold of the 9-18mm.
@@ForsgardPeter that would be great
As usually, very informative and professional video. Thank you Peter. I am currently using the variable aperture Panasonic 8-18mm, which is nice as well. I like the 2.8 for 8mm for some evening shots, great image quality and the size/weight (315 grams) is great too - not a bulky lens. The new Olympus 8-25 seems to be a very solid competitor tough. The additional reach, making it a 50mm FF equivalent is quite interesting. I can’t wait to try it out. In you video, when you talk about the weight comparison, for the 7-14 you have correct numbers on the screen but you say 100 gr. less, just a little mistake, but it doesn’t really matter. Have a great weekend!
Thanks, you too!
Hi Peter, I enjoyed your video. Mate, they are both great Olympus lenses but I'm staying with my 7-14mm 2.8, cheers.
I'm agree with you ! 👍
Really great video as I wanted to see how much wider it was at 7mm compared to 8mm and your sample images answered that got me, thank you
Glad I was able to help.
I have both Zuiko 7-14 and 12-100. I still am considering getting 8-25 mostly to eliminate the "switch point" when time is critical. I often find that when using 7-14 is that it's just a "tad too short" for some situations. Likewise, the 12-100 is "not wide enough for some". I feel the 8-25 covers a really useful focal length for street, landscape, and travel photography and will come most scenarios, while the other lenses can be useful to fill in the gaps.
I think 8-25mm will fill that need quite well.
Peter, thanks for a great comparison! I’ve been debating on how best to cover the super-wide space for some time. Weight is an important factor for me as I do a lot of hiking in remote places, which is why I have hesitated on investing in the 7-14. Based on your review, I plan to go with the 8-25 as my primary lens (leaving the 12-45 pro at home) and rely on my Laowa 7.5 f2 when I need a larger aperture for astrophotography and low light scenes.
Glad it was helpful!
Unfortunately I cannot afford either of these. If I could I would go for the 8-25. Ideal for photowalks.
Then get the Laowa 10 mm f2.0 😀
@@hauke3644 thank you, good suggestion.
I buy this lens for filter reason so Peter her thold use, but walk around by this lens a in citylandskap wiht many live off people is very nice F4 is right DOF and 25mm for street photo and 8mm for buldings, sharp, fast and nice all.
Thanks for this!
Great comparison. I have the 7-14 and it is an amazing lens, and the width at 7 mm does give you a bit more flexibility that I have found useful when shooting landscapes. The filter issue I do recognise. I don’t use them that much but in certain circumstances they would be handy and the specialist filters you have to use are quite bulky and expensive so I have stayed away from those for now.
I can definitely see the attraction of the greater versatility of the 8-25 though. With the 7-14 you either have to change lenses more often or you have to have a second camera with a standard range lens. I can see combining the 8-25 with a lens like the OM 12-100 f/4 or the Panny 35-100 f/2.8 as a pretty versatile two lens combination (shame there is no 25-100).
Oh, and if you think the 7-14 f/2.8 is heavy, the old 4/3rds 7-14 f/4 was 780g… But then I still use the 50-200mm SWD, which isn’t exactly a lightweight at just under 1kg!
Got mine 8_25mm F4 And Its awesome! I switched my 12-40mm f2.8 to my second body Now 🙂
I guess you and Jimmy were on opposite sides of that brick wall at the same time.
The step-up is a good approach (I have a few), but does a step-up to 77 clash with the hood? That is an item to check out.
Great comparison video, I think you nailed it. Also, the visual tricks on the lenses (focus clutch movement, zooming to the aperture marking, etc.) were nice video touches. I also liked your background colors.
Thanks!
Thank you Peter for a great review of this lens. Does it work with the High Resolution setting ?
Yes it works also with high res.
I own the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8, along with a number of other M.Zuiko Pro lenses. The focal range of 7-14mm is very handy when you need wide angle, but I must say, for me personally, the 7-14 is my least used, and least favourite Olympus pro lens. There is noticeable distortion as you move out from the centre, and it is not up to the superb quality of other Olympus Pro series lenses when you are looking at sharpness near the edges. It's not bad by any measure, and these issues are almost certainly related to its ultra wide field of view. Nonetheless, in my opinion, it doesn't quite match lenses like the 12-40 f/2.8, or the 40-150 f/2.8, both of which are simply excellent all round. Finally, the 7-14mm is relatively heavy, expensive, and unable to accommodate standard filters, or threaded filter holders. With OM Solutions bringing out mark II glass for the 12-40 f/2.8, I hope they also decide to rework the 7-14mm with some of these drawbacks addressed in future variants.
12-100 is a larger lenses great for em1x
maybe a small rig could be 8-25mm
45mm f1.8 75-300mm em10 mark iv
Dear Peter, as first thanks.
I have a question regarding to lenses. When talking about specs from a lens Olympus say (7-14 f2.8 and 8-25 f4) Why? Because for the 7-14 it is in fact f2.8 and for the 8-25 it is f1.4 and very far away from 4. It does not describe the real values for the diaphragm, those are not real values.
What do you think about it?
8:54 Is the 7-14 less sharp in the corners or does it have more field curvature? You may find that the corners are quite good at 7mm but they won't be in the same focal plane as the centre.
If I hadn't already got the 7-14 the 8-25 would certainly be on my shopping list. But I'm not about to buy the 8-25, because I'm quite happy with it and, in truth, it is only used occasionally.
No need to get a new lens if you are satisfied with the 7-14mm f2.8.
The 8-25 is on top of my wishlist
I wish that someone would make a comparison with the 8-25 with the leica 8-18
I might but it is hard to get hold of Pana lenses for testing here.
@@ForsgardPeter Thanks, helps explain why your fellow Finnish photographer--M. Sulanto--left Panasonic
I wish the price difference would be similar on the used market. But there it seems to be the opposite. I use 72mm filters on my 12-40 and 40-150. Seems like a plus for the 8-25. The filtering I use is mainly ND for filming in order to use lower F-Stop for some background separation ... which is harder to get if not almost useless with wideangle F4. Given the used price and that I went the 2.8 route so far probably makes me purchase a 7-14. Although I will for sure miss the 25mm.😆
I've got a love hate relationship with the 7-14mm. It has a propensity to produce lens flair when shooting widest, if the sun is anywhere near the frame, even when stopped down. So I always have to be very careful when composing a shot to know where the sun is. Did you notice any similar tendency with the 8-25mm?
No, it is much better with that. The flares are no problem with the 8-25mm f4
8-25mm + 12-100mm as travel duo. Which fast prime would you add to the travel trio?
It is a good combo for travel. I would most likely add a 25mm f1.2 or f1.8. But if you are more towards wide-angels then 1 17mm might be a better choice.
@@ForsgardPeter When I travel light, I just carried 12-100 F4.0 and 45mm F1.2 with E-M1.3.
When I travel light I bring my 12-100mm f/4 Pro and pair it with either my 25mm 1.2 pro or the Panasonic Leica 12mm 1.4.
Thanks Olympus now you make the perfect lens
Thanks Peter for the comparison. Is the 8-25mm a rectilinear lens?
Yes it is.
Thanks for your video. A very good lens. I am a bit disappointed because of the size. I've expected a bit smaller lens because I own the Pen-F.
I like 8-25mm F4, however, I am not going to get one soon, as I already have 7-14 F2.8 for years. The only filter I would use for digital cameras is the ND filter. With E-M1.3's built-in ND filter, I am not going to have a problem with 7-14 for filters.
8-25 F4.0 is a great design indeed. I might get one later for when I don't want to bring both 7-14 and 12-100 for hiking.
Hello! I have been trying to decide between these two lenses and I came across your video! I am interested in a lens that is good for landscape photography as well as just a good ol' walk-around lens. I would, however, like to try my hand at astrophotography at some point. I know the 7-14mm would probably be the best for astro, but how well do you think the 8-25mm would perform for astro stuff?
8-25mm is a f4 and that might be a bit too dark. The 7-14mm is a bit better, but then 8-25 is a lot better for all around photography. I have them both and after I got the 8-25mm f4 I have not used the 7-14mm f2.8 at all.
Thank you for good information
I wanna jump and experiment with m43 as an amateur photographer. I am more into wide angle photography and I do care for low light photography. Would you still suggest the 8-25mm to someone that's not planning to have a faster aperture lens below the 25mm ? Cause to me 8-25mm seems a nice choice for someone if they wanna cover everything below 25mm with it and then another zoom lens for higher focal lengths. Or let me put it that way. I am planning to build a setup of 3 lenses:
an ultrawide zoom lens,
a prime ( the 17mm olympus or the 15mm panasonic ) or the 12-40mm which is still not as bright as the primes,
and a tele zoom lens which doesn't need to have constant aperture ( 40-150 or even the 12-200 ).
which ultrawide do i pick ? or do i get the 8-25mm for a 2 lens setup !
That is a hard one. I have used the 8-25mm F4 and for me it is the best choice. A fast prime is also an option, the 12mm F2.0 is a good choice.
I didn't buy the olympus 7-14, because of the filters. I bought the Panasonic 8-18 f 2.8-4, which can use circular filters. In my opinion the new Olympus 8-25 is a bit expensive, compared to the 7-14 and the Panasonic 8-18, only 250 € less, I think if I hadn't already bought the Panasonic, this would be my choice.
Whoever can pay 1000 euros will also have 1250. So the difference of 250 euros is insignificant. 8-25 would have to be significantly cheaper to even consider buying it . Wider angle and one f-stop faster means a lot, especially in architecture photographing .
I do not see one stop like that. In architecture I usually want to stop down to get more DOF. So f2.8 is not important.
@@ForsgardPeter You are right as usual :-)
I thought a wider angle for architecture and 1 f-stop faster for photography indoor when you don’t have ( or you must not use ) a tripod or a flash ( in a a museum for example ). Thanx for your reply !
Outstanding video.
Thank you very much!
When it comes to video I would rather the 12mm 2.0 as it's nice and wide and the length of the barrel is short so it really compares to a 10mm in the zoom lenses but photography I was blown away with the sharpness of the pictures in daylight with the 8-25. Great travel lens 👌 25mm 1.2 and the 12mm 2.0 and that's the trifecta for me. I love Olympus just need 4k 60p to complete the micro 4/3 world.
I got hiking with the 100-400 lens
You helped me make my decision, I'll go with the 8:25 over the 7:14. I'll just have to wait for the port for the underwater housing to come out.
Thank you from hot and exciting Libya.
Muchas gracias
Neither for me. Unfortunately. I would love to use the 7-14mm f2.8, but not having a filter thread on the front lens element is a no-go. And I would want that lens for its f2.8 aperture at the wide end.
The Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 8-18mm f/2.8-4 is probably going make the cut, as it has the f2.8 aperture at 8mm while also having a filter thread. Also, it's cheaper and lighter than the Olympus at f2.8. A shame really.
? would 12-40 F2.8 a better choice for these two ...
Hard to say. 7-14mm and 8-25mm are much wider. I do not think the 12-40mm f2.8 is the same thing.
Not at all the same thing. 7mm or 8mm is a LOT wider than 12mm in practice. I use the 12-40 lens as an all-purpose walkabout lens, but when it it time for wide angle 12mm is not enough.
Will you keep both?
I still have them both.
@@ForsgardPeter Me too! I need to keep both! The 7-14mm for real estate, I use it every single day! The 8-25mm for outdoor and landscape.
O me the difference from 7 to 8 mm is quite big. The lack of a docus clutch and the poor f4 are dealbreakers for me. The 7-14 2.8 is a much better choice for me.
Thanks for the review.
I do like the range of this new lens. With it i would be able to carry one lens instead of two 95% of the time. That would be nice, but i don't want to sell those 2 f2.8 lenses to pay for it.
Still needs a filter holder for graduated nd filters. I got a 3d printed slip on ring for the 7-14mm through shapeways for maybe $30 U.S. It accepts the lee 100mm filter holder. To avoid vignetting at 7mm requires being careful but it does work well, hasn't slipped off while hiking and is relatively compact.
Hi Peter, thanks for this one. I'd like your advise. I have a Laowa 7.5mm, a Olympus 12-40mm Pro. I am considering another lens to cover between 7.5 and 12. Would you suggest a Panasonic 7-14 f4, Olympus 7-14 f2.8 pro or the one you are reviewing here the Olympus 8-25mm? Thank you.
When I got the 8-25mm F4 my 7-14 F2.8 started to collect dust. I liked the 8-25mm more thna the 7-14mm lens. Have not tested the Pana version.
F4 V2.8 a big differnce in lower light especially Astro photography
Yes it is. You are right.
The comparison that interests me is the 8-25 v 12-45. I like the 12-45, but the lack of fn button and manual clutch are annoyances for me (I use both frequently on my other lenses). That is almost enough to get me to switch in itself, but the extra 20mm of focal length ability is very convenient in some situations.
I wonder if the difference between the 12mm and 8mm focal lengths is big/noticeable?
Yes, you will find the difference in angle of view for each mm of focal length is not a linear gain. 8 mm is way wider than 12 (in film terms, they are 16 and 24, basically two increments of typical primes - 50, 35, 28, 24, 20, 16 - difference). Lots more delta at the short end than at the telephoto end when evaluating focal length.
@@mikejankowski6321 Thanks, that does add something that counter-balances the loss of focal length on the other end of the zoom range. Something to think about.
i have 7-14，one more reason I think to change 8-25 is the micro funtion.
And I got 7-14 2nd hand in 4200rmb, the new 8-14 is about 7000rmb,
As you say, 2.8 4 not a big problem, I have 17.2 45.2 for night shoting.
But all my lens 7-14 40-150 17 45 are inside zone, not like 8-25 outside zone
I am from Shanghai China, not easy to follow you chanel (I really love it, and very useful) because the GFW for internet
I wish to buy you a coffee soon, when I learn to pay by Visa card.
And sorry for my poor English, I wish you can understand me.
At last I keep the 7-14pro for my trip last week, EM12 and EM13 7-14/40-150 2body2lens(17pro and X2adaptor in bag), so I feel 2.8 is useful in the night market than the more 14-25mm longer. I buy you coffee today as I promised, and thanks again.
If only I could speak and write your language as well as you do English!
Panasonic 8-18/2.8-4.0
Questing is:
Invest 1000 bugs on 1 lens into a dead system?
Olympus gone, Panasonic already on a bigger sensor, to exit smoothly...
I changed from Sony apsc to Pen F, regarding the worse sensor. And I notice a big loss in dynamic range, which is the biggest /only bummer for me.
BUT I knew that the lenses that I wanted are just too expensive for me (as I have some more and even wayyy more other hobbies as well)!
So I own a 8mm manual (CN lens, very good), 12-32, 25 f1. 8, 32mm f1. 2 CN manual, 45 of course, 7-300mm. You see: all cheap but good enough lenses
These in a different system would cost more than double or triple. + plus Pen F is a beautiful cam!
But I would not invest 1k in 1 lens, if there is no future. otherwise... maybe. You see a product is: 4 P > price, proposition, promotion and place
As an argument of that I am thinking of a em1mii as a secondary video device...
What dead system are you talking about?
@@ForsgardPeter From all I said you picked up "dead system"?
m4/3, what else I was talking about.
Yes, because I m4/3 is not dead and was wondering what system you meant.
@@ForsgardPeter AFAIK is Panasonic the only company who´s building bodies, as Olympus is no more.
If Pana stops, no new bodies will come to market. Pana will make more renenue with the bigger sensor series in the near future, as Sony does as well.
The Question is not IF but WHEN this will happen.
@@derJackistweg you are very badly informed. Olympus is called om systems now. The company is alive and well. Mft cameras still sell very well. Mft is NOT dead.
is that nimmy’s wall ? Lol.
Jimmy’s.
@@1957PLATO You beat me to it.
It is not. It is a different wall!