When the Lumix 8-18mm first came out I had been using a Olympus m.Zuiko 9-18mm lens which left me wanting for a wider field of view as well as better image quality. I bought the lens and immediately sold the 9-18, the Leica 8-18mm was in a whole other league. I also at one point owned the Lumix 7-14mm and while I appreicated 7mm it did not perform as well as the Panasonic-Leica 8-18mm. I’ve mentioned in other posts how I have been getting back into the micro four thirds system and along the way i’ve picked up some new lenses like the 8-25mm f/4 which I previously comapred and am quite fond of. But I started thinking recently, how would the 8-18 stack up. I’d seen some online comparisons which shows they were close, but the 8-25 was slightly better and of course has a far more useful zoom range. For that zoom range you pay in weight and heft as it is not a tiny lens my micro four thirds standards, even if it’s not large for what it is.

Wondering how the 8-18 would compare in my own testing I ordered a copy from MPB for what I considered peanuts which was graded “well worn”. What I received was honestly a like new lens beyond some dirt in the grip on the barrel. No scuff marks anywhere and glass appeared flawless.

I broke out the Dollar Store IQ Board (TM) and also went out back for some fence photos to give these two a comaparison!

Build and Features Comparison

Weather Sealing

8-18mm: Yes 8-25mm: Yes

While both are weather sealed I would say I have more confidence in the 8-18 due to it’s internal zoom design. In rain, snow or dense fog a tromboning zoom always causes me concern that I’ll suck water in. The Olympus trombones, the Leica does not.

Zoom and Focus Rings

PL 8-18mm: Both zoom and focus rings are well dampened and have a pleasing action.

Olympus 8-25mm: The zoom ring is not as well dampened as the Leica, and the lens collapses requiring you to ‘zoom’ to extend the lens before it is ready for use. Not a huge factor, but something i regularly finding myself fighting against (turn on camera, put to eye…oh yah i need to zoom). Given I use these lenses near their widest focal length the most the PL8-18 is ready to go when i flip the camera on but the Olympus is not.

Size and Weight

The PL8-18 is about 100 grams lighter, has a smaller diameter, and while they are the same length collapsed the PL is far shorter in use since the 8-25mm is collapsable. The 8-25mm absolutely has more heft and it’s noticable. On a small body it’s somewhat unbalanced. The size certainly makes the 8-25 feel more than 100 grams heavier on my OM-5.

Filters

Both take standard cirular filters with the PL8-18 having a 67mm (wonderful as all my Tamron full frame lenses are also 67mm) and the Olympus is 72mm (A common size amongst Olympus lenses like the 100-400, 40-150 f/2.8, 12-100, 12-200).

Consturction and Extra FEatures

Both are all metal constructio and feel incredibly solid. The zoom rings are both all metal knurling while I would prefer a rubberized grip (although I realize the metal will out last rubber). I would honestly love a plastic lightweight lens with excellent optical quality as I feel in very cold conditions the plastic is much nicer to handle and expands/contracts less while warming/cooling slower (inhibiting fogging). But metal is ‘pro grade’.

The olympus has a L-Fn as most their pro lenses do. It also has a manual focus clutch which I really appreciate when doing macro style work or shooting at night and trying to nail my focus.

The PL8-18 has an AF/MF switch only, and nother additional buttons or focus clutch.

Image Quality

Summary / TLDR

The PL8-18 (at least my copy)is sharper at 8mm in center and edges (most notably in the corners/edges with only a modest lead in the center). At 12mm and beyond they compare favorably to each other.

Which lens you pick would, in my mind, come down to things like size/weight, focal length preference, preference for a manual focus clutch and trombining/collapsing design versys a fixed internal zoom.

Testing Notes / Conditions

The PL 8-18mm test images are all shot on a Lumix G9. The Olympus 8-25mm are all shot on an OM-5. Indoor test scene shots were on a tripod, not hand held. Outdoor shots are handheld (at shutter speeds around 1/100)

All images are shot at f/5.6 as this is where I have found most M43 lenses to be sharpest and where I shoot the most to maximize the combination of image quality and depth of field. I only go to f/6.3-f/8 or f/2.8-f/4 when i either need to prioritize DoF or prioritize shutter speed for hand held shooting.

All raw images were processed with the same preset in DXo Photolab 7 (applying lens profile, contrast and match color since I was using 2 separate bodies with auto white balance).

8mm

First note here is the color rendition from the two cameras/lenses is different. Partially it’s the lens, partially the sensor processing pipeline as I tried taking some shots on the G9 with the 8-25mm and the resutls are different when processed in either ACDSee 2024 or Photolab with the same preset.

At 8mm there is definietly more fine detail in the wood grain from the 8-18mm. And while the 8-18mm is only marginally better in the center (they are pretty close) it’s easy to call a winner on the edges. The 8-25mm isn’t bad, it’s just not quite as good. That said, doing ultrawide landscapes rarely is my entire scene in focus. Ususally my foreground elements, even if i go down to f/8 are not entirely in the focal plane. So some corner/edge softness can be forgiven in real world use (I don’t generally photography brick walls or fences).

Moving to the interior scene at 8mm, I took some shots with high resolution mode on the tripod to understand what each lens is capable of. One more note on color: The Olympus tends to render blacks a little lighter (part of this is the image being slightly more exposed), while the Lumix tends to be more magenta/red overall in it’s rendering.

Sharpness wise, this test repeats the outdoor fence test showing better center performance from the PL8-18 (ever so slightly) and noticably better corner performance from the PL8-18. If you wanted to create a hug print and watned as much detail as possible, using the PL8-18mm in high res mode is the way to go. I regularly used this lens in high res mode when I owned it with a G9 in 2018-2020 and got some wonderful results

The 8-25mm is perfectly usable still and if I didn’t have the 8-18 image sitting right beside it I would probably consider the corner performance to be just fine.

12mm

At 12mm these lenses are close performers. Even in the corners it’s very close. I’d still give the 8-18mm here a very minor edge in the corners, but I don’t feel you’re missing anything in terms of IQ going from one olens to the other.

Similar results going to the IQ board indoors. I’d like to point out color rednition again on the color wheel - note how the Lumix lens+body produces a more Magenta red. This is something I have sturggled to correct/adjust for in the past using this lens+body combo, and becomes more obvious as you raise shadows. Looking at the fine details of the sock, I would give the corner performance here an edge to the Olympus lens, but not by much.

18mm

The 8-18mm surprised me here, as I expected it to fall apart versus the 8-25mm which is now only about 2/3rds through it’s zoom range. I recall my previous 8-18mm being not nearly as sharp at 12mm, so maybe my previous copy just wasn’t as good (and remember I was initially comparing it to the Olympus 9-18 which is notoriously not a great lens). Not only does the 8-18mm seem every bit as sharp, I would argue the wood grain detail from the PL8-18 is marginally better.

Back to the IQ board I skipped straight to the corners as the center performnace was again so close. In the corners it’s similar, the lenses are very close and it’s difficult to call one a winner here.

Summary (Long version)

If you’re getting your first ultrawide lens for M43 the PL8-18 is possibly my favorite and the one I’d more than likely recommend if youre use case is primarily shooting at the wide end. The benefit of the Olympus is that extra 7mm (14mm in full frame equivalency) of range which does make a vast difference if you want one lens to walk around with.

In terms of aperture, I odn’t think f/2.8 presents a strong value proposition and byt 12mm you are at f/3.4 on the 8-18mm which is not meaningfull better in the real world than f/4. Ultrawides (at least for stills photography) are primarily used for landscapes where more things in focus are better and as a result shooting at f/2.8 is not a value add. For video I can see where the extra bit of light could be useful.

In the Fall-Spring time I do lots of outdoor shooting under dense fog, rain and snow. I’m often near waterfalls and other vista where I want a wide angle of view. In these conditions I think the PL8-18 wins. However, needing to crop considerablty or swap lenses to get to 25mm is a drawback and something I don’t want to do in inclement weather. So I would not bring the 8-18 as my only lens+Body, and likely travel with a second lens and body. On the other hand with the 8-25mm I feel I could probably shoot everything I wanted on most of those adventures minus wildlife.

Which lens makes the most sense is a matter of use cases ultimately. As someone who primarily shoots outdoors while hiking and camping here’s my sales pitch for each and you decide:

8-18mm: If you hike to lots of waterfalls and plan to bring extra lenses with you and don’t mind lens swapping, the PL8-18 offers the most weather protection while also offering slightly better image quality. If you know you’ll only need 8-18mm (e.g. you’re doing architecture for the day) then the PL8-18 is the winner here IMO. 8-25mm: If you want to spend most of your day hiking with a single lens and be ready for virtually anything that doesn’t involved wildlife the 8-25mm will have you covered throughout your day.