Good news folks! Leica 25mm lens will cost around 73.500 YEN (around 650 Euro)!


Image courtesy: Quesabesde.

There have been a lot of confusing info about the price of the lens. Some European websites initially did unveil a price tag of 899 Euro while some other websites (Dpreview, Focus Numerique) said that the final price will be announced before the market release. Things are much clearer in Japan where said the price will be 73.500 YEN which is 675 Euro or 950 Dollars (but you know that the price in dollars will be much cheaper). The japanese store Yodobashi sells the lens for a street price of 58.800 YEN which is 610 Euro!!! That has been confirmed by the swedish magazine Fotosidan (650 Euro). The older Four Thirds lens did cost 1099 Euro/Dollars (it costs less now on eBay).

That’s good news!

P.S.: Leica 25mm still not available for preorder on Amazon (Click here to see the search results).

  • Still very expensive imho compared to something like the canon 50mm f/1.4 — even if I guess that the build quality won’t be nearly the same (nor the hype-factor of the brand).

    • i think it doesn’t make much sense to compare the higher end mft or ft lenses to equiv ff lenses, regarding to price…its just the way it is for whatever the reason; small scale mass production, newer lens designs etc.
      In this case Leica’s signature did help too ofcourse, but to a subtle margin only i am surprised :-)

    • the pl25 would be tack-sharp&contrasy at f1.4 while the canon will be at f4,
      besides u cant compare, its different systems

      • Henrik

        Frosti, thanks for your test results. Now i accept the price which initially seemed steep to me too.

        • You are welcome,
          besides, this (800$) Summilux-DG is rather cheaper then Summilux-M (3,495$)

  • Yeah, it IS expensive. But i’d rather have the option of buying or not buying than no option at all. I believe this lens is more like a strategic move, showing that they have the muscle so to say. A fast normal prime is key in any lens line up, and we have a summilux, nothing less!

    Time to start saving…


    Still expensive but if the street price drops around 550€, it maybe a good deal if the IQ is here.

  • WT21

    It might not matter what the price in the states — it’s likely to be unavailable for 6-12 months anyway!

    If it’s around USD$600, then I may not be able to resist it. I already convinced myself (on the early 899 pricing) that it was out of reach.

    • Mr. Reeee

      Not available here in the US… unless you have friends in Japan!

      73,500¥ = $916 today
      58,800¥ = $734 today.

  • Bizzarrini

    I think 58.800 yen equals 510 euro, sounds like a nice price!

  • Well, the prize is less than expected.
    The street prize will be a bit lower and if they might bundle it with upcoming bodys the prize can get close to what you consider a good buy.

  • DonTom

    Cheapest Summilux ever! Gotta count for something…..Still, if I can find a Nokton for a similar price it is a better differentiated pair with the 20/1.7. Well done Admin, and well done Panny, for not being too greedy!

  • KL32

    We’ll see. I don’t think you can make a Yen to Euro comparison and expect that to be the price. But it is nice there is at least one source saying 650. I agree, while expensive, that is a far more attractive price.

  • 650 would be a great price…..

  • How can you make a headline-worthy announcement of EUR price based on yen pricing? Prices don’t convert directly to euro (or from any other currency) unless you import it yourself – and even then you are likely to have to pay duties and VAT. Besides, I trust DPR over some random Swedish website (Sweden isn’t even in EUR area).

    If yen price equals 510 or 650 EUR, the actual EUR price when the lens is bought from a European store is likely to be 20-50% higher due to taxes, duties, etc.

    At best the headline is misleading, and should say “…will cost around 650 EUR in Japan.”

    • Mr. Reeee

      Pay Duty and Tax?
      Stick it in your camera bag and no one will know but you!

  • Tom

    Still too expensive. I rather spend 600 Euro on a 50/1.8 Zuiko then on a 25/1.4 Leica, mainly because lots of people, like myself, already own the excellent 20/1.7…

    • so you are actually saying you wouldn’t buy it because you already have the 20 mm

      • Tom

        i say, that 600 Euro are too expensive if you already own the 20/1.7, yes :-D
        I would apreciate a 35/1.4 or something similar :-)

        12/2.0, 20/1.7, 35/1.4, 50/1.8 that would be pretty awesome.

        At the moment im using a 35/1.7 CCTV ^^

        • Ben

          I would also buy a 35/1.4 :)

          • Mr. Reeee

            Voigtländer makes a very nice little Nokton 35mm f1.4 for $579.

            Even with the Leica M mount adaptor, it’s about the same size as the 20mm. 9mm smaller diameter, a few mms longer. Twice the weight 200g vs. 99g.

            7-14mm, 20mm, 25mm f.95, 35mm f1.4, Pentax 50mm f1.4 and 105mm f2.8 SMC Takumar.

            • John

              I have the 20/1.7 as well as the Nokton 35/1.4 you mention and I will probably sell the Nokton and get the PL 25/1.4. Using on GF1.

              The Nokton 35/1.4 bokeh is only ok, not great, Pana 20/1.7 is better. Also I would prefer to have the autofocus.

              • Mr. Reeee

                Okay. Have you tried the Nokton 40mm f1.4? Opinions seem to flip-flop between the 35 and 40 as to which is better. 35mm Fl is good for me.

        • i guess i can understand the -wish or dream about- thinking, as i do it too sometimes. but the rest of the time i concentrate on actual existing lenses. I don’t have the 20mm, i have a mf 50 mm, so i have the option between the lumix 20 or 25 in that focal range. Actually i like both, the 20 mm for allround shooting when i want to have the camera with me, during day off or at work. the 25 mm would complement the 50 for my model photography, partly because i like the size for such situation, not too small, not too big.
          but the suggested 35 would be interesting, if i hadn’t my 50 nokton already :-)

    • Henrik

      That’s what i thought too. No way of comparing prices 1:1. Only with some research maybe: See what the 20/1,7 costs in say Japan, US, Europe and draw speculations about what the price may be for the 25/1,4 in Europ and US based on one existing price in Japan.

    • Gabi

      You may translate the price US§ = €. Hence, it is very likely that the price in Europe (or at least in GErmany) will rather be aboutd 900 €, which would be by far too expensive for me (especially since the feature difference to the excellent Panasonic 20/1.7 is not that big).

  • Chez Wimpy

    “(but you know that the price in dollars will be much cheaper)”

    According to what precedent? The Panny m43 lenses (and certainly bodies) have always been cheaper in Japan at release. Considering the current exchange rate, and the price at Yodobashi, close to $800 sounds about right… that or the typical “supply issues” while the lens sits readily available at every major camera store in Japan.

  • Esa Tuunanen

    Actually best price for older Four Thirds lens was (/is) under 800 euros.

  • Ben

    Any idea on the IQ difference when compared to the 20mm f1.7?

  • Pixelbart

    Leica-wise, this is cheap. The Summilux M 50mm 1.4 lens goes for $2000+. Second hand. But they have to, because the market is just too small if it’s more than twice the price of the 20mm f1.7.

    I do wonder where (Germany? Canada? Japan?) and how (Leica standards? Panasonic standards?) it’s built, though…

    • Jason

      It is made in Japan, whereas the expensive Summilux lenses are made in Germany.

  • JeremyT

    Yeah, going to wait and see on street price. My guess? 900 USD at launch, drifting down to $800 over time.

    Regardless, it’s not cheap, so it better be good! :)

    I might consider trading my full Four Thirds 25mm f/1.4 for it. I’ll wait and see what reviews say and what the price on the Four Thirds version does; I think it’s at least possible that the Four Thirds version will retain its value for a good while, since there’s nothing like it new on the market any more and there are still a lot of Olympus DSLRs out there.

  • karst

    still way to much money for such a lens.

    you must be pretty retarded or a fanboy to be happy about it

    • Mr. Reeee

      Retarded? Nah, just a photographer. ;-)

  • kkkk

    so you get a f1.4 that gets not even near the DOF of a DSLR 50mm 1.4 lens and you pay twice as much for it. :)

    really what is so expensive to build on these lenses?

    • probably the nano crystal coating is still a rather expensive technology, and if you would put “summilux” on a nikkor lens, it would be more expensive too :-)

  • kkkk

    henrik, good one… :)

  • fta

    Guys, your missing the big picture. By the end of 2011, m43 will actually be a complete system. Compared to NEX and NX, m43 will be a very real alternative to people wanting better than P&S and smaller than DSLR.

    I’m happy where this is going and glad I chose m43 instead of NX back in the beginning..

    • I don’t see a fast portrait prime which is a glaring omission. UWA prime would be welcome, also.

      • fta

        That’s why I said “By the end of 2011”, as there are at least 3 more m43 lenses to be released by the end of summer.

  • Niva_explorer

    I will be waiting for the Oly 50mm to see if it is good

  • Considering I got the f1.7 20mm for 33,000 yen, 58,000 yen seems a fair price. I may snatch one of these up after all…

  • HMR

    If it is more than $700 US, it will sell in very small quantities due to current economy, I would guess. I suspect that the price will be too high initially and will drop if they want to move inventory. But it’s a supply and demand issue mostly. I would rather spend my allowance on a bright zoom at this point. I’m fairly content with my MF primes and my 20.

  • Justin

    The mtf charts look pretty solid. Better in the corners than the 20 1.7. Wide open a little softer in the center. The key will be contrasty punchy pics. If it provides then this lens will be a game changer on the m43 systems. AF, shallow dof, fast contrasty lens. I’m pretty excited. Wish it was shipping earlier than august. I’d like it in time for my vacation mid month.

    • WT21

      I agree — contrast and color will be the key on this lens.

    • cL

      Where did you see the MTF chart? Soft in the center is just annoying. Soft in the corners means it’s used for portrait and will make your photos a little more “focused.” Any link?

  • bookervrk

    I just found another site for preorder this lovely lens in Japan.
    It costs only 52900 Yen(include the tax).
    Maybe I should worry that I can’t get it in time.

  • Ivan Lee

    I just want to know something… is this lens digitally corrected as most (or all) m4/3 lenses?

    • che

      What? there is no such thing what you are reffering to is processor corection of the CA, fringing and distortion and that is done by sensor/processor and if you like Lightroom. So the answer is no.

  • bookervrk

    The panasonic jp site announce the
    G3 and GF3 at the same time.
    In July both of them will be available in Japan.
    And the suggest price of Leica DG 25mm f1.4
    is 73500 yen(included taxes).
    In the real market it will be cheaper, though.

    • Yeah, actually DejiKame/DigiCam Watch (“”) states the announcement on the Japanese Panasonic website as its source.

  • Andy

    I compared a few prices in the amazon japanese website(7-14mm, 20mm f1.7, 14mm f2.5, etc) notice that all the lenses are more expensive there than in the US. so if the 25mm f1.4 cost over there ¥ 58,800 (732 USD) looks like will cost less here in the US say around $650-$699

  • Per

    It will be interesting to see teast of this lens. I already have the 20 mm, but if this has the real quality I will switch. Som comments above about being retarded to by a 650 Euro lens – that shows a combination of ignorance and arrogance that fall back on those who made the comment. The difference between current decent m43 lenses and the really good ones is very significant.

  • bilgy_no1

    How’s this for a kit: G3 + 25mm for €999? That could win over some enthousiasts I guess

    • fringe

      Camera world UK put the price at £499 lens only while Mathers of Lancashire is taking preorder lens body combo (GF3+lens) at£495!

    • Kralin

      I would definitely buy such kit :)

  • Arguros

    A leica summilux for 600 euros. With af and f1.4 is a bargain.

    • simon

      A Panasonic lens with a Leica badge, you mean :)

    • steve

      just because it has a “leica” name on it does not mean it will be anything like the Summilux-M lenses on the Leica-M system.

      yes, it is up to leica’s standards, but “how high” IS that standard compared to their 5K lenses is another question.

      since they are not building in germany, that’s also another thing.

      • MikeMill

        The point is the Panasonic lens that have Leica badge historically proved to be a very good lens. Leica approves to use Leica name for only great products.

        • napalm

          yes they had a good reputation in 4/3:

          – 25mm F1.4 (considered as the best low light lens in 4/3)
          – 14-50mm F2.8-3.5 (considered as the best standard zoom lens in 4/3)
          – 14-150mm F3.5-5.6 (considered as the best ultrazoom lens in 4/3)

      • cL

        You get what you paid for, especially when the lenses are under the same brand name. Leica is not stupid enough to price a higher standard lens with lower price tag, even if you consider the origin of manufacturing plant.

        That said, it still means it still guarantees a higher standard than a lens without the Leica badge.

        Japanese products are known for high level of quality control, so you shouldn’t worry too much. The lens is still made by Leica specification, so I wonder what you’re worrying about.

        The multi-thousand Leica M-mount lenses have several built-in factors into it. 1) It is made in Germany (higher labor cost), 2) they’re not mass produced, and are individually inspected by master lens makers (higher production cost), 3) Leica warranty, which means you enjoy life time warranty on the lens you bought. They don’t charge you for repair, 4) and they’re optically correct (just like the “cheaper” lenses made for m4/3). I believe they’re all metal barrel construction as well (just like Olympus 4/3 lenses, except for the two kits lenses). Output from Leica’s lenses are also neutral in color, and I like it a lot better than color shift toward cool spectrum (Canon and especially Panasonic), or to a less degree, warmer spectrum (Olympus). You can always shift the color temperature with software, so neutral is better.

  • Stopkidding

    Very few people know and own the regular 4/3 Summilux. Hence all the skepticism about the “Leica” name. If it’s priced around $750-800 USD and has similar IQ to the bigger cousin, it would be a must buy for the MFT system.

    • MikeMill

      4/3 Summilux is a super lens. I missed it alot when I sold FT system.

  • Narretz

    I think nobody actually thinks the price in € will be equivalent to the price in yen, or Dollar that is. It’ll be more like 800 €, I betcha.

  • Nelson

    @ 52900 yen it is quite a bargain! Consider Leica lens usually cost more than normal lens

  • che

    BTW give us some OLY rumors even if its fake :)

  • simon

    Funny how the label ‘Leica summilux’ gets people to think this is a bargain. It’s designed and built by Panasonic, people. Leica’s involvement is described on the product page as “The LEICA DG lens is manufactured using measurement instruments and quality assurance systems that have been certified by Leica Camera AG based on the company’s quality standards.”

    All that means is the lens isn’t terrible, and Leica says so. Beyond that, Panasonic and Leica are laughing all the way to the bank. They get to charge an additional $100-$200 for the same lens, because people will flock to the bargain.

    Time will tell if it’s worth the inflated price, but for now my hopes are on Olympus.

    • stopkidding

      @by extension the same argument can be made about people who buy lexus over toyota, infiniti over nissan, or VW over Skoda.

      According to Panasonic, for a lens to get the Leica brand name, it has to pass certain criteria and I quote..

      “A superb image quality with minimum distortion, chromatic aberrations that pass a stringent Leica standard”

      In the past Minolta used to manufacture Leica lenses, Sony not manufactures Zeiss lenses. So its not just a branding exercise…

      • simon

        The car examples do not apply, because Panasonic and Leica are independent companies. [A correct car analogy would be Toyota producing Mercedes vehicles] It’s not like Panasonic bought the Leica lens design team. It’s their premium line, nothing wrong with that.

        Did Minolta design the Leica lenses they produced? Does Sony design the Zeiss lenses? Not sure about this.

        It seems that the Panasonic Leica lenses are a Panasonic effort with Leica quality control (I’m assuming for design and manufacturing). I’m not saying the lens won’t be excellent, just that it’s not comparable to the other ‘Leica summilux’ lenses.

        • The Other Chris

          Yes, Minolta designed some of those lenses. Some of the Leica R lenses were direct copies of Minolta designs, as well.

          • cL

            And some of the best Leica lenses are made by Minolta. The best Leica M mount camera before the launch M7 was Minolta CLE. Minolta was Leica’s partner before Panasonic.

            That said, the reason Leica name commands a higher price tag is because the design of the lens must follow Leica standard or Leica won’t approve it. That means it’ll be optically correct and requires no software correction. A software corrected lens (i.e., cheaply made lenses with very low R&D cost) will have no collectible value. That’s why Olympus lenses are good value, because they’re optically correct, but not at Leica price.

            If you go on eBay and bid for a film lens for your m4/3 camera, you’ll know lousy second rated lens will not get sold, even if it’s listed for $5. A high quality lens will still get sold for several hundreds, if not thousands of dollars.

            And like sacundim mentioned, Zeiss digital lenses are made by Cosina.

        • sacundim

          “In the past Minolta used to manufacture Leica lenses, Sony not manufactures Zeiss lenses.”

          Are you sure Sony’s not invovled with the manufacture of the Sony/Zeiss lenses? I don’t get the impression that Zeiss have a lot of AF technology.

          Anyway, I can add one to the list: Cosina, who make a bunch of Zeiss lenses. Nearly all of the Zeiss ZM rangefinder lenses are made by Cosina, and I believe also all of the Zeiss SLR lenses for Nikon, Canon and Pentax.

  • OlyDude

    Sigh, I just can’t get excited over yet another 50mm (full-frame equivalent) lens no matter what brand is on the front of the lens.

    35mm would be much better.

    • babbit

      This is the first AF 50mm (FF equivalent) lens for M43. How can you not be excited?

    • sacundim

      Well, I’m not excited over this lens either, but let’s recognize that it’s at least more ambitious than other lenses in its class. This lens has 9 elements in 7 groups with two aspherical elements, one “UHR” (Ultra High Refractive Index) element, and some fancy kind of nano-crystal coating.

      The 50mm f/1.4 lenses from other manufacturers don’t have this much tech:

      Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4: 8 elements/7 groups. No mention of any aspherical elements, fancy glass or coatings.

      Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM: 7 elements/6 groups. Two “high refraction” elements.

      Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM: 8 elements/6 groups. No mention of any fancy stuff.

      Pentax SMC FA 50mm f/1.4: 7 elements/6 groups, no mention of any fancy stuff.

      Sony 50F14: Same.

      Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4: 8 elements/5 groups. Aspherical lenses, “glass with anomalous partial dispersion” (whatever that is), glass with a high refraction index and a floating element. If you pay $3,700 for a 50mm lens you’re going to get very few expenses spared (in addition to the huge markup!).

      Zeiss Planar T* 1,4/50: 7/6, no fancy anything mentioned.

      Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 Leica D for Four Thirds System: 10/9, one aspherical element.

      Panasonic 20mm f/1.7: 7/5, two aspherical elements

      This should all be taken with a grain of salt, because in some cases we may just be seeing the marketing departments’ eagerness to embellish. But at least the element counts should tell you that the m4/3 25mm f/1.4 is shooting for a higher standard that most lenses in the pack. Will it hit it? Only testing it will tell…

      • cL

        Good post and comparison. Fancy glass element doesn’t guarantee final optical quality because everything must work together as a whole (e.g., if you bought a Nikon D700 but use it with a kit lens, I wish you good luck…). However, fancy glass does guarantee higher production cost.

        A few points I would like to add. I’ve seen result from Canon 50mm f/1.2L, the bokeh is horrific and the result is not usable unless you stop it down to f/2.8.

        Nikon 50mm f/1.4…. Not sure about this one, but most modern higher-end Nikon lenses have nano coating. Coating doesn’t add sharpness. In fact, multi-coating could reduce sharpness. What it really does is reduce glare and ghosting. Something extremely important under certain lighting condition, but rarely used as a headliner, because it’s not a consumer friendly marketing. Most consumers are not aware of the ghosting/flare problem unless you point it out to them, therefore, they wouldn’t pay extra $100-200 for the lens that has it.

        Aspherical lens is used to reduce CA. CA is a problem with wide angle. For a normal lens, it’s not a problem. FF lens doesn’t need it unless the design is too complicated and therefore needs an extra correction element. To produced 50mm with m4/3, the lens design is 25mm, which is almost an ultra wide angle, so it does need an aspherical lens…. m4/3 and 4/3 lenses, because of their 2x crop, are potentially more expensive to design their lenses, not to mention Olympus usually designs a lens with twice the resolution to compensate the smaller sensor (which I am guessing it’s why people find Olympus’s m4/3 lenses are not as good as their 4/3 lenses…, maybe they stopped making lenses with twice the resolution for m4/3).

        To compare this PL lens with Sony’s equivalent, you need to compare it with Sony G or Zeiss branded lens. And this is essentially Canon L lens equivalent and higher end Nikon or Olympus HG and above (there is no Olympus HG lens for m4/3 yet). Pentax is a poor choice. FA lens is low end. You need to compare it with DA* (DA star, not regular DA…, which is also low end), and I seriously doubt DA* is even equivalent to an Olympus HG, therefore not even sure if it can be compared with a Leica….

  • David Bateman

    Dpreview says its 549.99 Pounds which is 899 USD. Sounds right to me. I see no confusion.

  • Bob B.

    I won’t buy this lens, only because I have the 20mm f/1.7. …but it is great to see a quality lens coming down the line for MFT. Hopefully there will be much more in the same vane!!!!!!!

  • joezz

    It´s not the logo or the production place, it is the mathematical calculation of the lenses-that´s the secret. And this is made by Leica. See the document “” for details of the aim of the Leica engineers.

  • D

    Needs to be much cheaper for me to consider it. I can’t see the value in it (for me) since I’m very happy with my 20mm pancake and I got a Computar 25mm f/1.3 for roughly $10 for those times when I want something a little faster than the f/1.7 of the 20mm pancake.

    • Mojojones

      I have to agree with D. I’m always looking for quality glass (and was sorely disappointed with the 14mm) but, I’m not sure if the slight increase in IQ and half a stop is enough to justify nearly twice the price.

      • cL

        Not sure where your argument stemmed from. I need to see the result before I decide it’s “slight increase” in IQ. Any increase in aperture is going to increase the side of the lens elements so it’s going to be expensive to make (if they didn’t cheat on the design).

        BTW, IQ is very subjective. “Slight increase” in IQ to some may be significant to others. IQ is also a very loose term. Do you mean by sharpness or resolution (how fine the lines are, not megapixels type of resolution), or do you mean by color reproduction accuracy or light fall-off characteristics? All of those are also affected by your lens. So how much people are willing to shell out for that extra difference is subjective.

        Generally rule of thumb though is don’t pay for something if you can’t see the difference. You could be right, but I need to see the result before I judge anything. If 20mm is good enough for you, then there is no point getting another lens that’s slightly narrower (actually this is just a personal preference. I prefer the slightly wider normal lens also, and I usually don’t shoot at f/1.4 either…, but it’s nice to see choice).

  • Nelson

    43 25mm vs M43 25mm

    The ghosting is much reduced in the M43 version, you hardly see the blue/green that is present on the 43 version of 25mm

    • cL

      I clicked on the link you posted, I am not sure where you got the ghosting comparison. If you mean the side by side comparison of the two lenses, then that’s not result of the photo coming out of the lens. It only shows the good coating of the lens.

      The new PL 25mm for m4/3 has nano coating. Besides, if you paid attention to it, the 4/3 PL 25mm is placed more away from the center, so it’s just the angle (plus the lens is dirty). A lot of photo ghosting is caused by dirty lens not properly cleaned (use a lens pen, or proper cleaning solution specifically approved by your brand of lens…, since every brand has their own coating. Some don’t like alcohol, some don’t like ammonia based cleaner…, sunglasses cleaner will ruin your camera lens’s special coating for sure). Modern coating also solves that problem significantly. Always use a high-end filter in front of your high quality lens, so you don’t scratch your front element (low-end $20 filter will only give you lots of visual artifacts). Besides, if you ruined your filter’s coating by using the wrong cleaner, it’s only a filter.

    • Agent00soul

      The bokeh looks better than most other comparable lenses, at least in these samples.

    • Mojojones

      My opinion of slight increase in IQ came from looking at the samples posted and comparing them to the well known qualities of the 20mm 1.7. There were already plenty full-res pics posted that gave a reasonable representation of how the lens performed in different situations. I was seeing nothing that was particularly stellar about the 25mm’s performance. My argument came from the fact that since there are two lenses so close in range that there needed to be some compelling quality to justify one being valued at twice the other (besides having the Leica name on it). Now that the difference is only about 50% more, it makes it a better value comparison and perhaps a more attractive purchase within the scope of the range.

  • Steve

    what does DG mean in terms of “DG-Summilux”?

    • MikeS

      The “D” stands for “digital”, as the lens was designed exclusively for use with digital cameras (as opposed to Leica M and R lenses; S lenses are another story). Leica lenses that appear in compact cameras are hence designated “DC”.

      The “G” refers to the Lumix G system (i.e. G1 et al). Panasonic lenses for 4/3 were all Leica-branded. After switching to m4/3, Panasonic started branding their lenses with the “G” moniker. Additionally, Nikon lenses that lack aperture control rings are designated “G” lenses; similarly, Lumix G lenses have no aperture control, in contrast to the previous Leica 4/3 lenses.

      In any case, “D(igital)” + “G” = “DG”

  • Jan Francois

    Thats a good price. No body to go with such a len though….oly, pana, where are the #*%$+=@
    expert bodies?!

  • jrk

    I think $800 for a 25mm f1.4 is alright. How much would a Canon or Nikon 24mm f1.4 lens cost? Panasonic didn’t make a 50mm lens so stop bringing up the damn 50 f1.4.

    • y3k

      Jrk, Pana 24 1,4 and Nikon/Canon 24 1.4 are apples and oranges.
      Pana 25 1.4 50 2,8 ekv. on FX senzor. 800 dollar for a 50/2,8?

      • Yeah but the lenses true FL is 25mm. Anyway it seems it will be priced at a more reasonable $600. if you really want a cheap 50mm f1.4, go to the traditional players. I am sure that when Panasonic decide to release a 40/50mm portrait lens with large aperture, it won’t exceed the price of this lens.

        Also perhaps the 24mm lenses aren’t viable for comparison. In that case compare to a 35mm f1.4 on APS-C I suppose. But in the end, for light gathering, f1.4 will be f1.4

  • mtn-jack

    wow this lens is exciting, finally a decently fast and sharp lens, with good bokeh for the system.

    already love the summilux for the 4/3 mount, and this new one is so small and light, with more or less the same performance as the big brother, panasonic keep em coming, can’t wait to couple such a lens on a e-p3 or pro-panasonic body

    well worth the pricetag imo.

    i only miss the aperture ring which worked perfectly on the 4/3 system

  • Just stumbled upon this gallery on flickr, the guy claims using the lens…

    Nice results, but not as nice as I was expecting…

  • Olaf

    I can imagine this lens on a Olympus body with IS as a perfect low light tool!

  • tmrgrs

    Just saw on DPR that Adorama is taking pre-orders for the 25/1.4 at $599 USD.

    This is a lot less money than expected! At first, I thought that maybe I’d stay with the 20/1.7 because the new 25/1.4 would be almost $1000 or maybe a street price of $800. Now, I’m starting to think that maybe this is going to be my next lens purchase.

  • Now we need a:

    24mm (FF equivalent) f/2
    35mm (FF equivalent) f/2
    90mm (FF equivalent) f/1.8

    Note i didn’t go to ultra large apertures, mainly because they would demand bigger lenses, and it doesn’t seem like the system is going that way (and i must say i like that).

    • Agent00soul

      A 100 mm f/2.0 would be nice. Just think about how handy that would be, compared to a typical 200/2.8 for full frame.

      • y3k

        200/4 on FX

  • radbag

    announced 4 months ago, where is it already?

    not interested in slooooo-pancake zooms,

    get some good glass out there panny or you’re going to be left in the dust.

    I’m really interested in the Nikon mirrorless, and I’m not a nikon person.

    you snooze you lose panasonic, how about putting up or shutting up?

  • peevee

    bug in the forum

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website,, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.