How much of a difference these two lenses will make in photo quality and what will be the difference? I am a newbie in photo and I am looking to invest in a nice lens for 4/3 that has max features in it - bokeh, zoom, night/evening pics etc.

Could someone explain to me the difference between the two? they cons and pros?

Context: I travel and hike a lot, I like to take portraits, landscapes, pictures of flowers and nature.

I own Olympus OMD10 mark ii (btw would Panasonic lens work on Olympus camera?)

enter image description here

  • \$\begingroup\$ Comparing features only makes sense in context. What are you looking for a new lens for? What led you to these in particular? \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    Commented Apr 12, 2019 at 1:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If you’re looking for zoom, I think you’ve chosen the wrong lens...these don’t zoom. \$\endgroup\$
    – OnBreak.
    Commented Apr 12, 2019 at 14:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ @mattdm updated context :) \$\endgroup\$
    – YohanRoth
    Commented Apr 12, 2019 at 22:57

1 Answer 1


I have no idea which is "better", but I'd guess the Leica Nocticron 42.5/1.2 because it has "Leica" in the name. Also the list price is 3.4x the other.

They will both give a field of view equivalent to an 85mm on full frame. F1.2 will look like F2.4 on full frame. F1.7 will look like F3.5 on full frame. As far as light-gathering ability, they are a fraction of a stop away from each other.

Sample images on Flickr for both lenses look nice. If this is the focal length you want/need, either lens would likely work. Go to a store that will let you try them out.

As far as zoom is concerned, as Hueco points out, both lenses receive a failing grade.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.