I've not seen anyone talking about this lens. Since it's been out for awhile I'm surprised. Love to hear about your experience with it.

In retrospect, I don't know why I didn't jump on this lens as soon as it was available. I'm so confident that it is a perfect general purpose lens that I put my 20mm up for sale after I ordered it today.

Lot's of reasons for this:

a. It's 25mm, standard portrait length.
b. It's F/1.4
c. It's larger, has an easy to access focus ring.
d. Comes with a lens hood that looks very nice and substantial
e. Autofocus has got to be more efficient and faster than the 20mm.
f. 20mm (40mm) is not a bad length, but it is a bit odd in many cases.
g. It's Micro Four Thirds

In short, it is the standard, fast portrait lens anyone who cannot afford the Nokton should probably have, especially anyone who does paid gigs. It is not cheap, but from all reports it is worth it's cost. I love shooting portraits, and this lens should be very nice for photos alone.

Here is a short GH2/25mm F1.4 demo:
Panasonic 25mm F1.4 Demo on GH2 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxMyIXI0zxA)

Bought this, sold my 20/1.7. Ideally, I would have kept them both, but ~$300 goes a long way towards paying off the new lens.

All your aforementioned assumptions are correct. It also has generally better contrast, is sharper wide-open, and nicer bokeh. It's also less prone to flares and ghosting.

For what it's worth, I think it's an even nicer lens than the oft-ballyhooed Voigtlander - and even has working AF.

I'll try to assemble some sample stuff from it for your perusal

Thanks guys. Thanks Joe for the link. I found another video or two while I was there. Looks like about what one would expect, pretty nice. It should work really well for video at receptions.

Jeff, I don't know where you got that 50mm is good for portraits. Most portrait photographers go no lower than an 85mm. The longer focal length is more flattering to the face because it doesn't exaggerate the size of the nose/ears/etc. the way shorter lengths do. It also drawn the background closer, giving a nice bed for the face. The other benefit of a longer lens is you don't have to invade the personal space of your subject to get the shot. This is an excellent tutorial: Focal Lengths in Portrait photography on Vimeo

50mm is a standard lens (also called a normal lens), not because I say it is, but because that is how it's classified. It is also considered a standard portrait length, again, not because I say it is. 85mm focal length is in the telephoto range, but those and much longer lenses are commonly used for portraits.

It is a common misconception to those new to photography that one focal length is considered "the" lens to use for certain situations, such as portraits. When learning our way in photography, is normal to develop black and white thinking about a number of things. The most common phenomenon is that newbies become "prime lens snobs". I suffered from that affliction when I bought my first still camera, the Canon 30D a few years ago. Eventually, we all learn that zooms were developed for good reason.

Many people say 105mm is the perfect portrait lens. A knowledgeable photographer understands that is rubbish. "Most" photographers use zoom lenses anyway, not primes, but what "most" photographers use is irrelevant, because what you use/need depends on your circumstances and desired effect.

I have owned and used two versions of the Canon 85mm, the EF F/1.4 and the FD F/1.2 and am familiar with that focal length and it's uses. Great lens, but the GH2 has no OIS and the closest equivalent is my 45mm (effective 90mm) and it is not practical for handheld photography (at least for me) much of the time, unless shooting from a tripod or in very well lit conditions.

Thanks for the video Patrick, that is a good tutorial.

Patrick, here's a link to Ken Rockwell's discussion on portrait lenses, he explains things much better than I can. I too, am new at this photography thing, and have a lot to learn. As he says, lens choice depends on what you're shooting and your distance, and how much you want to show of your subject. He also mentions the 105mm thing, which a lot of people favor for portraits. The main thing to take away is one size does not fit all.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/portrait-lenses.htm

I had originally taken pictures of people with my Voigtlander 25mm (effective 50mm). Once I started using my Canon 50mm f/1.4 (effective 100mm) I noticed a huge difference. Peoples' faces were just so much more pleasing. To me the 50mm looked too much like a fish eye lens when taking head shots up close. For the 50mm OIS isn't necessary. I keep my shutter no lower than 1/100 so I don't have to worry about blur from camera shake. Remember, unlike video, we can adjust the shutter as fast as needed to eliminate blur in photos.

If we're talking about the benefits of zoom lenses you may as well talk about the benefit of using a fixed rate servo zoom on a real video camera vs. hand cranking a photo camera's zoom ring. I shoot a lot of corporate stuff, and am in fact, in the middle of a multi-day shoot right now (and spending the rest of the night playing gigs with a band...working on almost no sleep...getting 2 hours tonight if I'm lucky). I'm using my Canon XHA1...contrary to what some on these forums think, tape is very much alive. They hand me tapes, I shoot, end of day hand them back. There are still a lot of jobs that operate like that. They're having me shoot in 60i, DV 4:3. Don't even have that option on the GH2, not to mention no XLR inputs for audio, servo zoom, long battery life, etc. So yes, everything is specific to the job, but if you want to nitpick, DSLR's are in no way efficient for shooting most things. I know when I filmed my last wedding with the GH2, having to change lenses, and then attach my variable ND filter (wedding was outside) every time was very time consuming.

I don't know if this post had a point, time for bed =)

50mm can look outstanding, you just need to shoot from the right distance and shoot at the right angle and the light has to be right, just like with any lens. Just because it's not easy to work with at times doesn't mean it can't produce great images.

I thought I would revive and update Jeff's old post with some test footage I shot with the 25mm this past weekend. I know I just posted this link in my previous comment on the Varavon loupe - so pardon the redundancy. But I though people searching for feedback on the 25mm in the future might benefit from this video being linked in this thread.

Tribeca NYC - Panasonic GH2 & Lumix Leica DG Summilux 25mm f1.4 - Test Shots on Vimeo

I love this lens. Really sharp wide open. I use it a lot. Here is a review.

Panasonic Leica 25mm Summilux Review » FrugalFilmmakers.com (http://frugalfilmmakers.com/2012/03/05/panasonic-leica-25mm-summilux-review/)

Thanks for the link Alan. It was a decent review.

Slightly off topic, but I found the following statement from the author interesting: "The other lens that defines greatness in the micro four thirds system is the excellent Panasonic G 7-14mm f/4". I've often overlooked that lens since it is pretty slow. But I might have to look it to it. I do like the idea of a lens that wide that is not a fisheye. But my 12mm Olympus f2 and Panasonic 14mm F2.5 are covering my wide range for the moment.

Anyhow....back on topic. Yes! I also find it sharp wide open, which is a huge benefit. It's autofocus is also very fast and accurate - which helps considerably during run and gun scenarios.

Thanks,
Angelo

I've shot a few weddings with the 25mm F/1.4 now, and I am not thrilled with it. I think it is the 50mm that I don't like among other things.

I find the auto focus in low light to be somewhat slow and unpredictable, and I've missed shots because of this. I also do not care for the color rendition at times particularly in low light.

I strongly prefer my 45mm F/1.8 Panasonic when I can use it, and the 12mm F/2.0 is superior lens with superior optics, but obviously is too wide much of the time.

Mind you, everyone, I'm not knocking the lens, I'm just not excited about it and somewhat disappointed. There have been times I could not achieve auto focus at all in a fast paced situation and it really bummed me out.

Most of the time it works just fine, and it produces nice images under most circumstances. For bridal getting ready segments the 12mm is my favorite by far, and is easily my favorite lens.

I bought it a few months ago...my first lens besides the kit lens.

I love it...stays on my cam most of the time.
Most of the portraits Ive shot have been with it (see pics in signature)

Jeff

Yes, Jeff, in a controlled environment the lens is very nice. I guess I miss the 40mm of the 20mm lens, the extra width was nice. The 25mm is definitely a nice value at F/1.4 at around $500. The 12mm has me spoiled, it is just such a fine lens.

I also have the 12mm f/2.0. I agree, the 12mm is an amazing lens, definately a must in confined spaces, fast and wide.

I need to add the 25mm f/1.4 to my collection, it's looks great.
I'll probably still hold onto the 20mm f/1.7 which is also a nice lens.
I own a couple GH2 cameras which helps for event work.

As time has gone on I appreciate the 25mm F/1.4 more each time I use it.

As time has gone on I appreciate the 25mm F/1.4 more each time I use it.


Harper...
Which ND filter did you decide on for the 25mm 1.4? I need to get either a set or a variable ND filter for my outside clips.

Thanks in advance,
Jeff Hinson

Why did I not see this thread last December? Christmas video with the AG-AF100 and the 25mm F1.4:

Christmas Lights (Panasonic AG-AF100 + F1.4 Lumix 25mm H-X025) on Vimeo

Jeff, I do not use a ND filter. I shoot so little outdoors, and am always rushed, I work without a ND filter. I also switch between three lenses when I work and the hassle of a ND filter is not worth it to me.

Ideally, it is much better to use a ND filter, of course, but I get by fine without one. I did test shooting with ND filters last year and the differences were minimal enough that I feel comfortable without.

I need to add the 25mm f/1.4 to my collection, it's looks great.
I'll probably still hold onto the 20mm f/1.7 which is also a nice lens.
I own a couple GH2 cameras which helps for event work.

I must have put my name on B&H's "notify me" list because Fri I got an email from them that they had a few 25mm f1.4's in stock.

I didn't hesitate.

According to tracking it started moving in the system at 7:46 tonight and should be here Wed 18th. Like you I plan to hang onto my 20mm f1.7, it's too useful a lens to let go.


Harper...
Which ND filter did you decide on for the 25mm 1.4? I need to get either a set or a variable ND filter for my outside clips.

Thanks in advance,
Jeff Hinson

Jeff, I'll "chime in" with my answer. I'm having good luck with the Polaroid ND Fader from B&H. I've got it in 37mm, 46mm, and 52mm sizes. So far I see no color shift and fitted with a rubber lens hood it gets so convenient to "dial" in outdoor exposure by slight adjustments turning the hood. Set shutter to 1/60th, aperture for desired effect, and "tune exposure" by turning the filter dial (or hood) until the meter indicates you "have it".

The 46mm size threads into the 46mm thread on the Lumix 20mm f1.7 (and the Lumix 14mm f2.5) but the filter thread on the front is 49mm. So I had a 49-52mm stepup ring and used that to hold a wide angle rubber 52mm hood (so the 20mm won't vignette). I haven't figured out what the front thread size on the 37mm and 52mm ND faders are, but I'm guessing 40.5mm and 55mm respectively.

I'll have to hit up a real camera store somewhere to see what fits. But I do like the variable ND filters, very convenient and some kind of ND is a must outdoors.

I must have put my name on B&H's "notify me" list because Fri I got an email from them that they had a few 25mm f1.4's in stock.





Jeff, I'll "chime in" with my answer. I'm having good luck with the Polaroid ND Fader from B&H. I've got it in 37mm, 46mm, and 52mm sizes. So far I see no color shift and fitted with a rubber lens hood it gets so convenient to "dial" in outdoor exposure by slight adjustments turning the hood. Set shutter to 1/60th, aperture for desired effect, and "tune exposure" by turning the filter dial (or hood) until the meter indicates you "have it".

The 46mm size threads into the 46mm thread on the Lumix 20mm f1.7 (and the Lumix 14mm f2.5) but the filter thread on the front is 49mm. So I had a 49-52mm stepup ring and used that to hold a wide angle rubber 52mm hood (so the 20mm won't vignette). I haven't figured out what the front thread size on the 37mm and 52mm ND faders are, but I'm guessing 40.5mm and 55mm respectively.

I'll have to hit up a real camera store somewhere to see what fits. But I do like the variable ND filters, very convenient and some kind of ND is a must outdoors.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks Bruce...
A few days ago I ordered NDX8s/0.9 for both my 25mm and 14-140 kit lenses....hadnt read your post yet. Of course they are not variable...but should give me some experience using NDs. Should arrive today I will see how they work....not that much invested in them.
Do you take your protective UV filter OFF...when using the NDs?

Ideally you should not stack filters. In the end what does it matter? Not much either way.

I've taken the "protective" UV filters off. I ran into no problem with them on Canon lenses (in fact they are required to complete weather sealing on the L series lenses when mounted on weather sealed bodies) but on the Lumix and Olympus Zuiko lenses I did begin to see some extra "flares" due to reflections.

So for protection I insure a lens cap is handy and cap them when not in use.

I also got some vignetting by leaving the UV filter on the 14mm Lumix when using the ND fader.

My 25mm f1.4 is "out for delivery", I'm on the "tail end" of my UPS guy's daily run so I get deliveries anytime between 4:30 PM and 6:30 PM. Doesn't matter much what time now, in a "freak" accident Sunday morning I took an impact to the face that required emergency eye surgery.

I have stitches to repair a tear in the Conjunctiva (lining over the eyeball), and stitches to repair a torn eyelid. Vision appears OK but I have to keep my left eyeball and eyelid "well greased" with an antibiotic ointment and don't know if I want to risk getting a GH2 all greasy trying out the new lens. I suppose I could just use the LCD...

I'm having good luck with the Polaroid ND Fader from B&H.

I also use the Polarod ND filter on my 12mm and 25mm. (They have the same filter size!) I like it, but you have to be careful because as you close the filter - it creates an odd "Hourglass" shape if you close it too far. So keep a close eye on your viewfinders, especially in bright sunlight.

Angelo

@ BRUCE....
Seems like you had a real bad day....take care of that eye.
Hopefully getting the new lens will cheer you up a bit.

Hinson

Thanks Jeff, for the considerate comments.

Yes, getting the new lens did cheer me up a bit. What little I can tell playing with video in the living room with only one eye working, I think I am really going to enjoy using it. The "continuous autofocus" seems promising but I'll know more when I can get out and do some real testing.

It's like coming full circle. I remember getting my first real SLR, a Nikkormat that came with a 50mm f1.4 "normal" lens that most of us had to "make do" with until we could afford that 135mm f3.5 (actually I saved up a bit and got a Nikkor 105mm f2.5 instead then followed that (when I could afford it) with a Nikkor 28mm f3.5.

But I worked a lot with that 50mm f1.4 (did a lot of low light work on Tri X and Kodachrome 64) and that is what this lens feels like although it's sharper, crisper, and contrastier.

Zooms must have made a lot of us lazy and I'm looking forward to working with this lens, the 14mm f2.5 when I need wide angle, and the 45mm f1.8.