The 10-25mm has better local contrast than most full frame lenses, it is also sharper than the 15mm f1.7 and 25mm 1.4. When you use this lens with the G9II, you have the best IBIS, excellent rolling, shutter, 4K 120fps with an equivalent 20-50mm FF but with excellent clarity and local contrast, even better than most M43 primes. Small FF zoom lenses like the 20-60mm S are sharp but the local contrast is pretty low. I also own the 24-70mm S Pro and indeed this one is sharper than the 10-25mm but local contrast is the same, I also prefer the colors of the 10-25mm. Maybe the right price for this 10-25mm should be more like 1400$ and not 1800 but this is really a great lens. However the 25-50mm is even better, I never seen a local contrast so high on a zoom lens, the colors with the GH6 are just so good, neither my 24-70mm S Pro on my S5II or my GM lenses with my A7IV are as good. I bought it for 1700$ and never looked back.
All fair points. At a cheaper price, this lens is hard to beat. Just so much, when for that amount of money, you could get a new system. But I also still have it, so I must like it haha. Thanks for checking this out.
Well obviously you are a videographer so it makes sense that you aren’t aware of all the lenses available for m43 cameras, but there are so many tele lenses that are way more expensive than the 10-25. You can almost buy 4 of them for the price of one Olympus 600mm.
@@backlinefilms I’m sorry my memory serves me wrong, it was the 150-400mm f4.5 that I was thinking of. I’m not a wildlife photographer so I only remembered that there were some ridiculously expensive telephoto lens from Olympus.
"Fast" tele lenses are always more expensive than fast standard zoom in the 20-50mm full frame equivalent range. So the 10-25mm being a 20-50mm f3.4 lenses is maybe a bit expensive, but you not only pay for the fast aperture but also the quality of the glass.
@@slows728 that is true. Although the lens is still a f1.7 aperture lens, it is only the depth of field that is wider because of the smaller sensor. The exposure doesn’t change because of the crop factor.
Regardless of pricing I have tested this lens and found it to be very good for both stills and video. The only caveat I have is to get the best from it you have to use Panasonic cameras and not Olympus cameras like I do. Oympus cameras have no lens mapping profile to correct artifacts produced by this lens like they do with their own native lenses and doing so in the case of video in post would be crazy time consuming or impossible. Also I found the AF response on Olympus's phase detection bodies I have, the EM1 Mk2 and EM1 Mk3 is inferior to most MSC designated Olympus lenses in both speed and focusing transition. Use it only on Panasonic bodies and you should be fine.
I really don’t believe any lens should be super expensive, no lens is worth more than $900 to me. For example the Cooke cinema lenses should not be $7000 plus because the difference is really small. I guarantee u if a Hollywood blockbuster was shot with a $500 cinema lense the audience would even notice. It’s all about skill.
The 10-25mm has better local contrast than most full frame lenses, it is also sharper than the 15mm f1.7 and 25mm 1.4.
When you use this lens with the G9II, you have the best IBIS, excellent rolling, shutter, 4K 120fps with an equivalent 20-50mm FF but with excellent clarity and local contrast, even better than most M43 primes.
Small FF zoom lenses like the 20-60mm S are sharp but the local contrast is pretty low.
I also own the 24-70mm S Pro and indeed this one is sharper than the 10-25mm but local contrast is the same, I also prefer the colors of the 10-25mm.
Maybe the right price for this 10-25mm should be more like 1400$ and not 1800 but this is really a great lens. However the 25-50mm is even better, I never seen a local contrast so high on a zoom lens, the colors with the GH6 are just so good, neither my 24-70mm S Pro on my S5II or my GM lenses with my A7IV are as good. I bought it for 1700$ and never looked back.
All fair points. At a cheaper price, this lens is hard to beat. Just so much, when for that amount of money, you could get a new system. But I also still have it, so I must like it haha. Thanks for checking this out.
Your video looks wildly overexposed on my ipad
It’s overexposed
Well obviously you are a videographer so it makes sense that you aren’t aware of all the lenses available for m43 cameras, but there are so many tele lenses that are way more expensive than the 10-25. You can almost buy 4 of them for the price of one Olympus 600mm.
Hmm, that's interesting. I have never seen that lens, nor can I find it through a search. IS it an older lens that is not sold anymore?
@@backlinefilms I’m sorry my memory serves me wrong, it was the 150-400mm f4.5 that I was thinking of. I’m not a wildlife photographer so I only remembered that there were some ridiculously expensive telephoto lens from Olympus.
"Fast" tele lenses are always more expensive than fast standard zoom in the 20-50mm full frame equivalent range. So the 10-25mm being a 20-50mm f3.4 lenses is maybe a bit expensive, but you not only pay for the fast aperture but also the quality of the glass.
@@slows728 that is true. Although the lens is still a f1.7 aperture lens, it is only the depth of field that is wider because of the smaller sensor. The exposure doesn’t change because of the crop factor.
Regardless of pricing I have tested this lens and found it to be very good for both stills and video. The only caveat I have is to get the best from it you have to use Panasonic cameras and not Olympus cameras like I do. Oympus cameras have no lens mapping profile to correct artifacts produced by this lens like they do with their own native lenses and doing so in the case of video in post would be crazy time consuming or impossible. Also I found the AF response on Olympus's phase detection bodies I have, the EM1 Mk2 and EM1 Mk3 is inferior to most MSC designated Olympus lenses in both speed and focusing transition. Use it only on Panasonic bodies and you should be fine.
😅 i want that lens. But you are rigth
I really don’t believe any lens should be super expensive, no lens is worth more than $900 to me. For example the Cooke cinema lenses should not be $7000 plus because the difference is really small. I guarantee u if a Hollywood blockbuster was shot with a $500 cinema lense the audience would even notice. It’s all about skill.
If you think a micro 4/3 lenses is overpriced 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂