Thanks again! The Lumix director stated that the S PRO lenses are designed and built with the same collaborative processes and people as the m4/3 Leica lenses. They use "Certified by LEICA" to distinguish them from the Leica directed products. So there are three Leica classes: German/Portuguese-built, Japanese-built fully-branded, Japanese/Chinese-built mixed branding.
I didn't thought it was the same collaborative processes. The S Pro lenses are great, very very sharp and great bokeh but I think the PanaLeica M43 lenses have more the Leica vibe.
This is such a great review. I feel like people are looking to buy not just a camera but a great lens WITH that camera, thanks for the work! More of these please!
Great comparison. Indeed, the MFD of the 24-70mm is really disappointing at the wide angle but it's still a great great lens ... Your 24-70mm look a bit soft at 70mm f2.8 (12:23), I think it is at 70mm but I have a doubt because it displays 24mm in your video. There is some serious copies variation with this lens. I tried two copies, only the last one was very sharp at 70mm, the first one was very soft. My 10-25mm is also very sharp but a bit less sharp at the long end. Colors and rendering are also a bit different between the two lenses, the Leica has a stereoscopic effect I really like.
It should say 70 that’s simply an error. I did notice that as well though but in other tests and real world use I found 70 to be mostly as good as the rest of the range, but I do think there is a slight drop off in quality.
@@RhettThompsonFilm The separation of subject and background is almost like 3D. It's some kind of secret Leica sauce. It is mainly because of the micro-contrast, the 10-25mm has high micro-contrast, giving very smooth tonal transitions.
Great vid Rhett. Moving from the gh5 to the s5iix and struggling to decide between the s primes and the 24-70 s pro for video. I do a lot of narrative filmmaking so the 24-70 focal range covers everything I could need. Have you been using the 1.8 primes?
Congrats on the change! That’s gonna he a huge upgrade! Very tough call however. The 24-70 is great but the close focusing is only OK. Perfectly fine for close ups on human subjects and stuff. The 35mm is the only one I’ve tried out and only on the S5 since I haven’t had the chance to use a mkii but it’s also very fun and surprisingly small! If I had to choose for weddings and films it would be the 24-70 for me but I have a preference for zooms already.
I'd heard in general something like a 25mm f1.4 on MFT would have an image nearly identical in quality (DOF, Noise, Exposure and equivalent focal lengths)to 50mm f2.8 on FF. I bet if there was such a thing as a Full Frame f3.4 lens to test, that'd you'd have seen similar quality at around ISO 25000. Of course there are other factors as well.
Great video - really appreciated the flare discussion. Indoors, do you ever find yourself needing even wider than 20mm (whether the 8-18 Leica or 16-35 full frame) or not really?
Parfocal and flare tests are so easy to do and so many people neglect it. Regarding 20 mm indoors, yes I find it sufficient for pretty much every single thing I would do other than real estate, which something closer to 14 mm or 15 mm would be a requirement or at least basically a requirement
Very very great video dude! I LOVE this video! I'm very impressed with the 10-25! Those little halation around the bulbs in 21:35 was that the 24-70? I'm a bit surprised by that, I'm not a fan of that actually. I LOVE the sunstars from the Leica 10-25! Man, that's beautiful! The 10-25 is quite a marvel! It's pretty compact for being a fast zoom! I LOVE the clicking quality of the clutch on the 10-25 a little better. I think the 10-25 has more "bass" because it has a higher level of sealing than the 24-70 PRO. Also, after owning many zooms with the rubber piece, I never want another one if I can help it. They've all come off eventually for me! Again, fantastic video! I agree with you regarding the Full Frame being better in low light. The disadvantage is the sensor's in even the newest MFT cameras are quite old at this point. But my E-m1 mark ii outperforms my Canon 5D Mark II in low light that's for dang sure!
Thanks Rhett. This is an awesome comparison. I would love your views on whether the GH6 + 10-25 f/1.7 + 25-50 f/1.7 would give better results than S5 + 24-105 f/4. My work is mostly with video, and low light capabilities are definitely important to me (my "low light" limits are still between 2000-4000 ISO at max. I would use a prime f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens and avoid pushing the ISO further than that), as well as decent bokeh capabilities.
You’re limits confuse me with the S5. Especially if you’re shooting VLOG. In fact 1600-3200 will be the same or worse than 4000-8000 in terms of noise. I might have to compare this though since you’d be going from say 6400 down to 1250 on the GH6. Or from 4000 to 800 which is a huge jump. That being said 4000 is a native ISO and 800 on the GH6 is 1 and 2/3 stops above base.
Thanks for another great video. When using the 10-25mm, I find that the manual clutch a little bit too loud when I am filming in a quiet room. If it can be further dampened, that will just be perfect.
@@AmazingKitchen this might be copy variance to be honest. I’ve heard other people say the same thing. I’d love to see a sample of how your lens functions
@@AmazingKitchen My sample is not parfocal at all either. My 24-70mm is a bit better but not parfocal. Only my 20-60mm is close to be parfocal. I guess it is again copies variation.
24:30 the MFT had a 3-stop advantage (1.5 in aperture and 1.5 in ISO) but still didn't look as clean as the s5. this means the S5 had a more than 3-stop better performance than the GH5 ? thats interesting because i always thought FF had max a 2 stop advantage over MFT as a rule of thumb (dxo mark puts the a7iii at 14.7 stops dr and the gh5 at 13 stops DR).
@@RhettThompsonFilm An MFT lens with 1.7 aperture does gather less light (number of photons) compared to a 2.8 FF lens with the same field of view due to the difference in the front lens diameter. So in this setup the S5 low light performance is definitively superior both due to more light from the lens and better sensor technology (newer sensor + dual gain).
@@RhettThompsonFilm Okay, I will try again with an analogy. You basically claim that if you put two buckets, one with a small and one with a big diameter out into the rain they will gather the same amount of water. Just think about it for a minute.
Honestly they both get used SO MUCH they are sticking around. Current lens setup is Leica 10-25, 25-50 and Lumix 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 f4 and that’s 98% of what I need
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (1/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m05kZ2GDKXg/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks again!
The Lumix director stated that the S PRO lenses are designed and built with the same collaborative processes and people as the m4/3 Leica lenses. They use "Certified by LEICA" to distinguish them from the Leica directed products. So there are three Leica classes: German/Portuguese-built, Japanese-built fully-branded, Japanese/Chinese-built mixed branding.
Very interesting! Thanks for clarifying!
I didn't thought it was the same collaborative processes. The S Pro lenses are great, very very sharp and great bokeh but I think the PanaLeica M43 lenses have more the Leica vibe.
thanks for this test Rhett! exactly what ive been looking for
Glad it was helpful! I know this is such a specific comparison but I thought it could help someone!
Love this kind of inter-system comparison, especially when you with really unique lenses like the 10-25 1.7.
I personally liked the overall look of pictures taken with Leica 10-25 lens
I’ve got some really striking images with that lens, and it’s big brother the 25-50…review on that coming soon.
Great comparison, especially for those of us who mix the two systems.
Thanks for this comparison! Ive been looking for something like this
This is such a great review. I feel like people are looking to buy not just a camera but a great lens WITH that camera, thanks for the work! More of these please!
Can’t buy a system without comparing the lenses AND the cameras together!
Gonna have to watch the rest after work but LOVE what I've seen so far!
This is definitely a sit down after work and get a snack kinda video haha
@@RhettThompsonFilm these are the videos I live for!
I don't understand why I can't just have a 10-600mm f/1.2 pancake lens that's compatible with all systems and under $200, smh my head.
Seems realistic to me. Panasonic should get off their ass and make one! 🤭
Great comparison. Indeed, the MFD of the 24-70mm is really disappointing at the wide angle but it's still a great great lens ...
Your 24-70mm look a bit soft at 70mm f2.8 (12:23), I think it is at 70mm but I have a doubt because it displays 24mm in your video. There is some serious copies variation with this lens. I tried two copies, only the last one was very sharp at 70mm, the first one was very soft. My 10-25mm is also very sharp but a bit less sharp at the long end.
Colors and rendering are also a bit different between the two lenses, the Leica has a stereoscopic effect I really like.
It should say 70 that’s simply an error. I did notice that as well though but in other tests and real world use I found 70 to be mostly as good as the rest of the range, but I do think there is a slight drop off in quality.
Could you explain the stereoscopic effect?
@@RhettThompsonFilm The separation of subject and background is almost like 3D. It's some kind of secret Leica sauce. It is mainly because of the micro-contrast, the 10-25mm has high micro-contrast, giving very smooth tonal transitions.
This is awesome man! Thanks for doing this!
Great vid Rhett. Moving from the gh5 to the s5iix and struggling to decide between the s primes and the 24-70 s pro for video. I do a lot of narrative filmmaking so the 24-70 focal range covers everything I could need. Have you been using the 1.8 primes?
Congrats on the change! That’s gonna he a huge upgrade! Very tough call however.
The 24-70 is great but the close focusing is only OK. Perfectly fine for close ups on human subjects and stuff.
The 35mm is the only one I’ve tried out and only on the S5 since I haven’t had the chance to use a mkii but it’s also very fun and surprisingly small!
If I had to choose for weddings and films it would be the 24-70 for me but I have a preference for zooms already.
I'd heard in general something like a 25mm f1.4 on MFT would have an image nearly identical in quality (DOF, Noise, Exposure and equivalent focal lengths)to 50mm f2.8 on FF. I bet if there was such a thing as a Full Frame f3.4 lens to test, that'd you'd have seen similar quality at around ISO 25000. Of course there are other factors as well.
Great video - really appreciated the flare discussion.
Indoors, do you ever find yourself needing even wider than 20mm (whether the 8-18 Leica or 16-35 full frame) or not really?
Parfocal and flare tests are so easy to do and so many people neglect it. Regarding 20 mm indoors, yes I find it sufficient for pretty much every single thing I would do other than real estate, which something closer to 14 mm or 15 mm would be a requirement or at least basically a requirement
Very very great video dude! I LOVE this video! I'm very impressed with the 10-25! Those little halation around the bulbs in 21:35 was that the 24-70? I'm a bit surprised by that, I'm not a fan of that actually. I LOVE the sunstars from the Leica 10-25! Man, that's beautiful! The 10-25 is quite a marvel! It's pretty compact for being a fast zoom! I LOVE the clicking quality of the clutch on the 10-25 a little better. I think the 10-25 has more "bass" because it has a higher level of sealing than the 24-70 PRO. Also, after owning many zooms with the rubber piece, I never want another one if I can help it. They've all come off eventually for me! Again, fantastic video! I agree with you regarding the Full Frame being better in low light. The disadvantage is the sensor's in even the newest MFT cameras are quite old at this point. But my E-m1 mark ii outperforms my Canon 5D Mark II in low light that's for dang sure!
The halos are the Leica 10-25 actually!
The 10-25 truly is special. Let’s hope the GH6 can truly take advantage of it
@@RhettThompsonFilm oh man! I am NOT a fan of that! Very surprised! But as long as it’s very rare I can mind it I think.
@@RhettThompsonFilm right! I know it’ll be a monster!
Thanks Rhett. This is an awesome comparison. I would love your views on whether the GH6 + 10-25 f/1.7 + 25-50 f/1.7 would give better results than S5 + 24-105 f/4. My work is mostly with video, and low light capabilities are definitely important to me (my "low light" limits are still between 2000-4000 ISO at max. I would use a prime f/1.4 or f/1.8 lens and avoid pushing the ISO further than that), as well as decent bokeh capabilities.
You’re limits confuse me with the S5. Especially if you’re shooting VLOG. In fact 1600-3200 will be the same or worse than 4000-8000 in terms of noise. I might have to compare this though since you’d be going from say 6400 down to 1250 on the GH6. Or from 4000 to 800 which is a huge jump. That being said 4000 is a native ISO and 800 on the GH6 is 1 and 2/3 stops above base.
Thanks for another great video. When using the 10-25mm, I find that the manual clutch a little bit too loud when I am filming in a quiet room. If it can be further dampened, that will just be perfect.
I cannot seem to get mine to be effectively parfocal. Maybe my settings are wrong. If you can share what are you settings then most appreciated.🙂
@@AmazingKitchen this might be copy variance to be honest. I’ve heard other people say the same thing. I’d love to see a sample of how your lens functions
@@RhettThompsonFilm sure, let know where I can send you the video
@@AmazingKitchen check my page description for an email
@@AmazingKitchen My sample is not parfocal at all either. My 24-70mm is a bit better but not parfocal. Only my 20-60mm is close to be parfocal. I guess it is again copies variation.
24:30 the MFT had a 3-stop advantage (1.5 in aperture and 1.5 in ISO) but still didn't look as clean as the s5. this means the S5 had a more than 3-stop better performance than the GH5 ? thats interesting because i always thought FF had max a 2 stop advantage over MFT as a rule of thumb (dxo mark puts the a7iii at 14.7 stops dr and the gh5 at 13 stops DR).
It’s not that easy considering the S5 also has dual native iso so it’s hard to do the math. Also isn’t 1.7 like 1 and 1/3 stops faster than 2.8?
@@RhettThompsonFilm An MFT lens with 1.7 aperture does gather less light (number of photons) compared to a 2.8 FF lens with the same field of view due to the difference in the front lens diameter. So in this setup the S5 low light performance is definitively superior both due to more light from the lens and better sensor technology (newer sensor + dual gain).
@@hustensaftsch0rle997 nope
@@RhettThompsonFilm Okay, I will try again with an analogy. You basically claim that if you put two buckets, one with a small and one with a big diameter out into the rain they will gather the same amount of water. Just think about it for a minute.
@@hustensaftsch0rle997 total light is irrelevant, as each pixel gathers a set amount of light individual. Sensors aren’t globally illuminated.
Are you plan to keep both ? I wonder if I should sell one of the two.
Honestly they both get used SO MUCH they are sticking around. Current lens setup is Leica 10-25, 25-50 and Lumix 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 f4 and that’s 98% of what I need
Very interesting 🤔
This is a fun video to do! Wish you had more views but I had fun making it
@@RhettThompsonFilm ya its a dope video man, I want me a 24-70 lol
@@A1Bokeh dude this Lumix is a beast
Compare with 20-60mm
Which one?
@@RhettThompsonFilm Panasonic 20-60mm vs 10-25mm because they have the similar focal length and apeature, F1.7 x 2 = F3.4 in Full Freame