Author Topic: comparison between the panny 20 1.7 and panny dg summilux 25 1.4 samples (Read 3946 times)

cosinaphile · « **on:** June 23, 2011, 04:55:40 PM »

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1106/11062008panaleicasamplesgallery.asp#specs

both lenses are excellent , bottom line

voyager · « **Reply #1 on:** June 24, 2011, 12:05:54 PM »

Indeed.

WheeE-P1 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 24, 2011, 02:29:00 PM »

The portrait from the 20mm looks surprisingly terrible though (with the distortion), almost a hall of mirrors effect. I understand that a wide angle lens is not likely to be good for portraits and this seems to be excellent evidence.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #3 on:** June 25, 2011, 06:41:33 AM »

Quote from: WheeE-P1 on June 24, 2011, 02:29:00 PM

The portrait from the 20mm looks surprisingly terrible though (with the distortion), almost a hall of mirrors effect. I understand that a wide angle lens is not likely to be good for portraits and this seems to be excellent evidence.

i noticed that too. thats a very telling illustration of why wides dont make the best portrait lenses
but different wides distort different ways , when i get my x 100 i will shoot a comparision with a 50 on m43 with the heads the same size in the frame to see if it is indeed as dramatic as the 20 vs the 25 in that test suggests

if the x 100 does that to heads it will be a bad thing

cosinaphile · « **Reply #4 on:** June 25, 2011, 06:42:33 AM »

the 45 1.8 is looking better and better for 300 usd

asterinex · « **Reply #5 on:** June 25, 2011, 08:16:11 AM »

Both equally good, but I have the feeling that the pana is a tiny bit sharper.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #6 on:** June 25, 2011, 10:10:05 AM »

maybe , but it could be curved focus fields differences too

Panther · « **Reply #7 on:** June 25, 2011, 02:40:58 PM »

That comparison is an EXCELLENT way to pit µ4/3 owner against µ4/3 owner....

Glad I don't own either of them at the moment...

cosinaphile · « **Reply #8 on:** June 25, 2011, 03:29:07 PM »

i dont see that happening , though there is a human tendancy to "love the one you`re with"lol

it will be facinating to compare them and see what 5 little mm and what/2\3 stop of speed mean in terms of image quality ....portraits for instance ,,,bokeh... distortion

from what i see both are already exc3llent , the rest will be diversionary splitting of hairs

lisandra · « **Reply #9 on:** June 25, 2011, 04:01:55 PM »

An argument over which of the 2 is more fantastic? This is good! It means you can't go wrong no matter what you do!

WheeE-P1 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 25, 2011, 05:32:04 PM »

Quote from: lisandra on June 25, 2011, 04:01:55 PM

An argument over which of the 2 is more fantastic?

If it is, I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be - the portrait looks terrible. Not "OK" or "passable" but just plain distorted. If I want my people to look like Coco the Clown then I'll choose the 20, if I want them to look human I'll choose the 25. Of course neither is great for this application but one at least does a decent job.

adash · « **Reply #11 on:** June 25, 2011, 10:50:05 PM »

Quote from: WheeE-P1 on June 25, 2011, 05:32:04 PM

Quote from: lisandra on June 25, 2011, 04:01:55 PM
An argument over which of the 2 is more fantastic?

If it is, I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be - the portrait looks terrible. Not "OK" or "passable" but just plain distorted. If I want my people to look like Coco the Clown then I'll choose the 20, if I want them to look human I'll choose the 25. Of course neither is great for this application but one at least does a decent job.

That's more likely to be the moral of the story - don't stick a wide angle lens too close to one's face

jap · « **Reply #12 on:** June 26, 2011, 03:38:58 AM »

Quote from: adash on June 25, 2011, 10:50:05 PM

Quote from: WheeE-P1 on June 25, 2011, 05:32:04 PM
Quote from: lisandra on June 25, 2011, 04:01:55 PM
An argument over which of the 2 is more fantastic?

If it is, I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be - the portrait looks terrible. Not "OK" or "passable" but just plain distorted. If I want my people to look like Coco the Clown then I'll choose the 20, if I want them to look human I'll choose the 25. Of course neither is great for this application but one at least does a decent job.
That's more likely to be the moral of the story - don't stick a wide angle lens too close to one's face

A normal or standard lens, held too close to a face, will distort it also. They are best used for head to mid-torso|waist shots. The closest approach one can probably make with a normal lens is the three quarter back view, which can be shot from the shoulders up. Try to shoot from the same distance from in front and the nose (and maybe the forehead or chin, depending on how prominent they are) will distort. To the uninitiated observer, the distortion may be so subtle that the portrait will simply look wrong, although the observer may be hard pressed to say just why.

popo · « **Reply #13 on:** June 27, 2011, 02:23:32 PM »

Cameralabs have updated their review to do the same comparison also.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #14 on:** June 27, 2011, 07:30:48 PM »

Quote from: popo on June 27, 2011, 02:23:32 PM

Cameralabs have updated their review to do the same comparison also.

yes .... some real differences there...... thanks

asterinex · « **Reply #15 on:** June 28, 2011, 03:23:13 AM »

Quote from: cosinaphile on June 27, 2011, 07:30:48 PM

Quote from: popo on June 27, 2011, 02:23:32 PM
Cameralabs have updated their review to do the same comparison also.

yes .... some real differences there...... thanks

Panther · « **Reply #16 on:** June 28, 2011, 11:41:02 AM »

Panasonic 20mm ƒ1.7 is definitely the better of the 2....

cosinaphile · « **Reply #17 on:** June 28, 2011, 07:14:17 PM »

could be... could be

im doin my own damn test!!!

cosinaphile · « **Reply #18 on:** July 18, 2011, 04:57:35 AM »

Quote from: Panther on June 28, 2011, 11:41:02 AM

Panasonic 20mm ƒ1.7 is definitely the better of the 2....

panther , pm me please , i cant seem to pm you
thanks paul

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #19 on:** July 18, 2011, 05:48:40 AM »

It would have better to do a 3/4 shot for the test IMO. A 20/25 is too short for a head shot, unless the distortion is a part of the image idea, or what your want to portray A funny type of shot.

I find it great that a lens at 1/2 the price of the 25mmm and just as sharp, for all practical purposes, though the contrast looks low in the test head shot.

Author Topic: comparison between the panny 20 1.7 and panny dg summilux 25 1.4 samples (Read 3946 times)

Panther

Panther

Related Topics

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery