The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is a wide-angle zoom lens built for the Micro Four Thirds format. With an impressive 16-50mm full-frame equivalent focal length, the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens covers most landscape photography needs. It even acts as a nifty fifty when zoomed in, giving it an unusually wide range for everyday photography. With a maximum aperture of just f/4, it’s not the fastest lens in my bag, though. Do the pros outweigh the cons? I’ll answer that question in today’s review of the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro.
Table of Contents
Picking a Lens for Micro Four Thirds
Whenever I consider a new lens for the Micro Four Thirds system, I always pay extra close attention to these three aspects of a lens:
- Is the focal length useful?
- Is it fast?
- Is it compact?
These considerations are linked to the 2x crop factor of the Micro Four Thirds Format, which effectively doubles the focal length and f/stop in full frame equivalence terms. The result of the smaller sensor size (in general) is that more reach is achievable with smaller lenses, at the cost of an increase in noise.
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens has an equivalent focal length of 16-50mm, which is very versatile with a long zoom range. At f/4, which behaves similarly to f/8 on a full frame, the lens is not particularly fast. (I’ll get more into the low light abilities limitations of the lens further down.) Lastly, the lens is not the most compact Micro Four Thirds lens I’ve shot with, but it’s still not massive, weighing 411 grams (0.91 pounds).
Handling and build
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is a sturdily built, weatherproof zoom lens that features smooth focus and zoom rings, plus a customizable function button. When not in use, the lens can be retracted to fit more conveniently in a camera bag. To put the lens in and out of the storing position, simply rotate the zoom ring past the 8mm mark. There is no locking mechanism – you just have to push past the resistance at the 8mm mark.
The focus ring is smooth and works as expected. Akin to other Olympus Pro lenses, the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro features a manual focus clutch which toggles the lens between manual and autofocus by pushing the ring forward. I’m not a fan of this design because it can be easy to accidentally slide it out of the autofocus position, which has been a hindrance. That said, as a (mostly) landscape-oriented lens, this wasn’t too glaring of an issue.
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is weather sealed, tolerant of splashing and dust. Although I haven’t put it through as many trials as some of my other lenses, it feels sturdy and inspires confidence while shooting. This is despite the fact that it’s an externally zooming lens.
When extended, the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens reaches 4.5 inches long (11.4 cm). Compared to other wide-angle lenses for this system, it’s certainly on the large side. Shooting with the larger lens felt clunky at times, especially when shooting one-handed or when stability is key in any other awkward position. But it’s still smaller than a majority of wide-angle zooms for larger sensor sizes.
Performance
So what if the lens is a bit large – does it make up for it in performance? In my opinion, overwhelmingly yes.
1. Sharpness
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is a very sharp lens. Pixel peepers like myself can rest assured that the lens is more than adequately sharp, even corner to corner at f/4. The only time sharpness takes a slight hit is when at f/4 and at close focus. Otherwise, the lens excelled in sharpness.
A few crops of the below image show how tack sharp the lens is:
Center crop:
Corner crop:
A mild sharpness improvement is noticeable stopping down from f/4 to f/5.6 in the corners. For close focus, I was shooting happily at f/7.1. Still, I always felt like I could take full advantage of the f/4 aperture if I needed it.
2. Bokeh
As an f/4 lens, it comes as no surprise that the bokeh performance is nothing to write home about. I wouldn’t plan on using this lens for any sort of photography that counts on creamy bokeh. Even when focusing close, background details are kept mostly in-focus.
3. Chromatic Aberration
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens minimizes chromatic aberration. Upon extremely close inspection, some is noticeable but it is negligible and easy to correct. Overall the lens does an incredible job maintaining true colors.
4. Color Fidelity
One of the aspects that stood out to me the most about the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is how well it retained the natural colors of a scene, even when shooting in unfavorable lighting conditions.
The lens has little to no flare when shooting against the light. This is perhaps attributed to the Zuiko Extra-low Reflective Optical coating applied. It does wonders because I could shoot scenes into the sun and they were captured just as they appear with the human eye. This is not something I can say about my other favorite wide angle lens I use for close focus and astrophotography, the Panasonic Leica 9mm f/1.7.
5. Distortion
I observed little to no distortion when shooting with the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens. At 8mm, some horizon lines became ever so slightly curved at 8mm, though nothing uncorrectable.
Field Use and Versatility
The strengths of this lens comes in its versatility. It excels as a 50mm equivalent lens for natural compositions, and also as an ultra wide-angle lens. Additionally, it focuses close, yielding a 0.21x magnification ratio. If you’ve been watching my photography, you know how important close focus is to me!
1. Landscape Photography
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is an excellent choice for landscape photography, it is impeccably sharp, minimizes any distortion, maintains natural colors even with tough lighting conditions, and covers very useful focal lengths.
The only thing it lacks for landscapes is a fast aperture for astrophotography.
2. Close Focus Photography
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens has a minimum focusing distance of 9.1 inches (23 centimeters), yielding a maximum magnification of 0.21x. Whether at 8mm, 25mm, or something in between, the lens does a good job at enlarging small subjects.
I personally enjoy wider-than-usual focal lengths for close-ups of small animals because the perspective is more intimate than you would get with a more typical macro lens.
I recommend stopping down a bit at close focus to avoid some softness in the corners. I had the best luck with f/7.1. Even so, close-up photos are on par with my sharpness standards.
3. Low Light Photography
The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens isn’t meant to be hand-held in low light. I wouldn’t choose the lens for moving subjects or in my case, photographing a sea cave from a moving boat. I definitely wish I had my Panasonic 9mm f/1.7 with me this occasion! That being said, the in-body image stabilization of modern Olympus cameras lets you get away with a lot! I’ll note that the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens does not have its own image stabilization.
Similar Lenses
When it comes to a long zoom range for a wide-angle lens, the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is one of a kind. No other zoom by Panasonic or Olympus covers that range completely.
Closest is perhaps the Panasonic Leica 8-18mm f/2.8. This lens does have a considerable advantage with the much faster aperture. However, it doesn’t reach that 25mm focal length for the nifty-fifty look (it’s equivalent to a 16-36mm full-frame lens rather than a 16-50mm). The Panasonic lens also has a much worse maximum magnification of 0.12x compared to 0.21x. So, it’s faster if you want to work in low light, but it’s less versatile in other ways.
Olympus also offers some zooms that are not as ultra-wide, but extend further in the upper focal length range. The Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO, Olympus 12-45mm f/4 PRO, and Olympus 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO lenses all extend past the 8-25mm on the telephoto end, and they’re all of commendable optical quality.
A final contender is the ever-intriguing Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f/1.7. Compared to the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens, the Panasonic offers a huge gain in light, while giving up a little bit of focal length on the wide end. This lens is also heavier and more expensive.
Of course, there are many faster primes out there, too. But what is so attractive about the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is that very versatile zoom range! Going from ultra-wide to nifty fifty is really useful. No other lens matches it for an interchangeable lens system, not even APS-C or full-frame lenses.
Weaknesses
It’s hard to come up with many weaknesses of the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens because the optics are top tier. It is a virtually perfect 8-25mm f/4 lens. I certainly wish it were faster so that I could utilize it for astrophotography and other low-light situations, but that was always going to be the case for an f/4 Micro Four Thirds lens.
I should mention that it’s a clunkier lens than what I’m used to with Micro Four Thirds. At 411 grams (0.91 pounds), the lens weighs almost as much as my camera body. It’s also on the large side, even when retracted, taking up considerable space in my camera bag.
Finally, the price is on the higher side at $1100 (though sometimes on sale for as little as $800, making it a more attractive option). Considering the wide range of lens choices for Micro Four Thirds, there may be better options if you’re on a budget.
Buying Considerations
Reasons to buy
- Excellent image clarity, sharpness and color renditioning
- Zoom range covers most landscape photography needs
- Focus close for maximum magnification of 0.21X
Reasons not to buy
- Maximum aperture of f/4 not suitable for low light or astrophotography
- Not the most compact lens
- On the expensive side when not on sale
Verdict
Yes the lens could be faster, and I wish it were a little smaller, but the glass is extremely high quality and delivers well. The versatility of the 8-25mm focal length and close-focusing 0.21x magnification abilities are not to be underestimated. In short, this is one of the most versatile lenses available, yet you don’t pay too much of a penalty for it in other ways.
I enjoyed using the lens for both landscape and wide-angle wildlife photography. The Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro lens is an excellent walk-around lens that can be used for the right composition in almost any setting.
If you’re planning to purchase this lens, you can support our lens testing efforts by buying it through our affiliate links below. The lens costs $1100, but it sometimes goes on sale for $800.
- Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro at B&H
- Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro at Adorama
- Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro at Amazon
- Used/international on eBay
Photography Life gets a small percentage of each purchase made through the links above, even if you buy something other than the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro, without costing you anything extra. Thank you for supporting our work!
Let me know in the comments section below if you have any questions or comments about this lens.
Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro
- Size and Weight
- Build Quality and Handling
- Sharpness Performance
- Other Image Quality
- Value
Photography Life Overall Rating
“Olympus 8-25mm f/4 Pro features a manual focus clutch which toggles the lens between manual and autofocus by pushing the ring forward. Iโm not a fan of this design because it can be easy to accidentally slide it out of the autofocus position, which has been a hindrance.”
This may not be possible on your Lumix, but one of the first things I do after buying a new Olympus/OM body is to go into the menu settings and deactivating the focus clutch. Depending on the situation, it’s handy to be able to turn this function on.
I agree with the rest of your review of this remarkably unique lens, and appreciate the love extended to M43 gear. It pairs up very nicely with the compact 40-150 f/4 tele-zoom. Perfect kit for travel.
In 2024, I am always stunned when I see this very common FLAWED & ERRONEOUS statements like this one:
โโฆ At f/4, which behaves similarly to f/8 on a full frame, the lens is not particularly fast.โ
Lens SPEED will always be f/4.
However, what the writer should be referring to is DEPTH OF FIELD which is equivalent to FF= f/8.
Additionally, reviewers talk as if the CROP limitation issue is somehow isolated to Micro 4/3 and has nothing to do with every other cropped sensor out there from every system manufacturer with 70% of the market having APS-C sensors of varying sizes and smaller.
“However, what the writer should be referring to is DEPTH OF FIELD which is equivalent to FF= f/8.”
So, when each lens is focussed at or beyond its hyperfocal distance, each has the same depth of field, which is infinite.
It’s not surprising that novices make such fundamental errors. What always delights me is the impudence with which they flaunt their errorsย ๐คฃ
See my technical replies to Rage1968 below:
photographylife.com/revie…ent-318913
I picked up this lens 2 weeks ago for about $850 USD and so far Iโm very happy with it. Photo quality excellent, plus I really like the soft retract and lock feature. Also, the manual focus clutch is an absolute must for me, though I acknowledge the authorโs minor annoyance with the ease by which it can be inadvertently bumped into manual mode. I have a 12-40mm f/2.8 and 25mm f/1.2 for low light situations, and the 7-14mm for reeeeally wide shots (heavy, but LOVE that lens!!), but the new 8-25mm may become my everyday walkabout lensโฆt.b.d.
Thanks for the thorough and interesting review!
I have this lens and I like to combine it with my 40-150/2.8. You lack 25-40mm, but that is something I can live with. But it gives you with two lenses a full frame reach from 16-300mm (plus extender if you have one) with just two lenses with great quality. For less weight, the 40-150/4 is also a nice option.
One point in your good article is partially wrong: the Panasonic Leica 8-18 is no pure 2.8. It’s a 2.8-4. So, you only have some benefit in wide angle area but loose the focal length from 18-50mm.
Thank you for this this review even I still don’t understand why investing in a system where the weight and price savings are marginal compared to full frame system with a far better I.Q.
Size and weight savings can be significant actually.
If you use ai noise reduction the difference in iq with 24 mp fx is marginal. Using the computational functions of mft in a proper way gives most of the times better results than fx.
I hope it’s a joke. I have tried both system with a z7 and the 14-30 f/4 in comparison and the I.Q of the Fx format is far better than 4/3 ;-)
It’s simply not. You may gain 1-1.5 stops of DR. That’s it. So unless you need shallow DoF, most of the time you want the opposite which m4/3 provides easier and in a smaller package. And noise is irrelevant when shooting landscapes from a tripod.
Smaller package, hum : try the comparison on camera size site between a OM-1 + 8-25 & a Z6/7 + 14-30 ;-)
DR, Dof, noise, hum hum : if you take a picture with the same speed with the OM-1 at iso 1000 f/8 you will have the same picture with the z5/6/7 at iso 250 f/4 ;-)
OMโ1 Micro Four Thirds system (MFT):
crop factor ๐ถ๐น = 2
๐แด๊ฐแด = 8โ25ย mm
๐ตแด๊ฐแด = 4 (f/4)
๐๐๐แด๊ฐแด = 250
Full-frame equivalent:
๐๊ฐ๊ฐ = ๐แด๊ฐแดโรโ๐ถ๐น = 16โ50ย mm
๐ต๊ฐ๊ฐ = ๐ตแด๊ฐแดโรโ๐ถ๐น = 8 (f/8)
๐๐๐๊ฐ๊ฐ = ๐๐๐แด๊ฐแดโรโ(๐ถ๐น)^2 = 1000
shutter speed is same as MFT
See Equivalence Also Includes Aperture and ISO by Spencerย Cox
photographylife.com/equiv…re-and-iso
I would say om-1 at iso 250 + f/4 = z7 iso 1000 +f/8 ;-)
Yes. Therefore MFT can, in many situations, deliver performance that’s hot on the heels of fullโframe, as Cees implied above:
“If you use ai noise reduction the difference in iq with 24 mp fx is marginal. Using the computational functions of mft in a proper way gives most of the times better results than fx.”
Explanation
When two cameras with different formats are set to be equivalent then each sensor would receive exactly the same individual photons, and total number of photons, from the scene being imaged. Therefore the photon shot noise signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the photons, arriving at the different sensors, would be identical. The main difference in digital image SNR between the two cameras will be the result of a difference in sensor quantum efficiencies.
It’s always a compromise. As a second body Z7 + 14-30mm f4 is still a bit big and heavy compared to a E-M5/OM-5 + 8-25mm. But knowing you can switch to DX mode with a button, that 14-30mm becomes a 14-45mm. Great value, but I wouldn’t want to bring a second body with a telephoto lens on it.
I own both.
Because the IQ is easily in the “good enough” category and you get so much bang for your buck. I’d be hard pressed to find another system which provides all these (and I’m listing only these because they’re things I actually regularly want/use)
– 2 lens combination that gives me 24-300mm coverage and these plus camera weight ~1.5kg
– both lenses have around 0.33x magnification which means for most small subjects I don’t need a separate macro lens
– lenses are sharp pretty much edge to edge
– in-camera focus stacking
– all weather sealed
– pro-capture which lets me capture the exact moment I want (because the camera also shoots 60 fps)
– live composite and live bulb
Yeah, if I for some reason need the ultimate IQ and *don’t* need any of the above I’ll grab my medium format camera but my m43 system covers like 95% of the use cases and no client has ever complained about the IQ
Another alternative is the Olympus 7-14mm f2.8 PRO. Another great lens. Faster, but heavier and with a bulbus front end (i.e. you can’t use screw in filters).
I have both the 8-25 and 7-14 from Olympus. Both are excellent lenses that are well engineered and built.
Have both 7-14 and 16-25. Using filters with 7-14 is a challenge and have to use Lee’s with all the contraptions. Also, the focal range in limiting. 16-25 is an amazing lens. Image quality is superb, focal range is very flexible, and when combined with 12-100 (24-200), it covers everything I need for landscapes and travel.
I don’t miss moving from Fx to m4/3 at all, the latter of which I find superior in many ways.
HI !
For MFT the lens is still large and dark …
Particularly noticeable against the background of competitors.
For example, a lens Sigma 10-18/2.8 (APS-C)
Twice as bright !
Twice as light
Twice as cheap :)
I hope you will have a review of it.
The Sigma equivalent on MFT would be:
โ7.7โ13.8ย mm,
which is a far cry from the
โ8โ25ย mm Olympus.
Thanks for the review, this is a very interesting lens indeed. Funny to read here on PL that the new 35mm 1.4 lens is called lightweight while this lens with about the same weight is called heavy and clunky. This illustrates clearly the advantage of the MFT system. Please more articles about MFT:)
Olympus Pro lenses just deliver. When you buy an Olympus Pro lens, you can be sure that it will serve you well from the widest aperture.
This and 40-150mm F4 Pro would be a compact and light kit with high quality optics, weather sealing, fast AF.
I agree. They make amazing lenses. And if you ever miss shallow DoF, try the Voigtlander Noktons at f0.95 for m4/3.
That is my travel kit when not using just the 12-100 f/4. Everyone speaks to the optical quality, but I’ve used Olympus Pro lenses in heavy downpours without skipping a beat. They are very underrated, particularly by those who obsess with gear over the more important focus on craft.
Hi Nicholas,
Nice review, and it corresponds well to my limited experience so far. The 8-25 is an extremely versatile and high quality lens.
I’ve been shooting with the 8-25 for a few weeks now, selling an Oly 12-40 to defray some of the cost. Both lenses focus close and have a handy zoom range, but when I had the 12-40 in hand I kept wishing it could go wider. All the reviews of the 8-25 were pretty positive. I find I don’t miss f/2.8 much, since I have a couple of wide primes that can gather a lot more light than that when I really need it.
Lately my grab-and-go-into-the-woods kit has collapsed down to the PanaLeica 50-200 on the camera (wildlife, insects, botanical closeups…), and the 8-25 for when I want a bigger gulp of the scene in front of me (or a botanical closeup…). Neither lens is light (but collectively they are a lot lighter than a full-frame kit with the same capabilities), but between them they cover >90% of anything I’m trying to shoot these days.
While I’m here, just wanted to thank you for your writings about MFT as a nature photography system – they were a good part of the reason I went that way last year, and I haven’t regretted it a bit.
MF