Laowa Argus 25mm F0.95

Venus Optics have yet to disappoint me with their Laowa lenses, the Argus 33mm a few small flaws away form being one of the best lenses available on Fujifilm. The 25mm looks to fix those, but brings a few of its own. I don’t enjoy using “35mm equivalent” lenses on APS-C such as this 25mm, and with a lens as outright good as this, it becomes apparent why.

With lenses such as these I never know how to review them or use them, do I look at it as a 25mm? If I do all the benefits of a wider field of view are void on APS-C but all the optical characteristics remain. Do I look at it as a standard prime? Almost impossible when aside from field of view, the image does not render like a normal 35mm focal would. 33mm is not that different to 50mm in rendering, and the benefits of a 33mm design often complement the “50mm equivalent” field of view. This tends to carry on the longer the focal length gets, but becomes an issue at the wider end. That being said, all that alters again when we factor in the insane F0.95 aperture. To fill the frame how I would normally, I am much closer to my subject and this does two things. The first is it puts me in a position where fast focus pulls are no longer an option, below 2m the focus throw is extremely long, approximately 75% of the overall throw. It means that focusing will be precise but it also fundamentally changes how you use this lens. The plane of focus is not as linear as the 33mm Argus, often resulting in a less than smooth transition to out-of-focus. The bokeh is smooth and slightly swirly, very pleasing but there will be points of in-focus matter that break through. It is also worth noting that at close distances F0.95 leaves very little in focus, unlike the 33mm at working distances. This is tied to our APS-C sensor more than “fault” with the lens but it is of note. Many people still do not realise that the closer you get, the less depth of field you have (and most are fixated on the opposite effects in telephoto designs). It makes focusing demanding, and alters the subject choice. Secondly, with a quick throw lens (such as the ArtraLab Nonikkor 24mm F1.7 that can go from infinity to 0.23m in a quarter turn) I can easily recommend for moving subjects, or even the 33mm Argus that has a very lenient window between around 1m to 3m. The Argus 25mm is much harder to. For context I shot a Muay Thai match on the 33mm, that you can see on Laowa’s Instagram. I’m not shooting combat sports on the 25mm. I’d struggle to even use it in cultural festivals, another subject the 33mm had no issue with. luckily for me, much of my current workload is reconnaissance for Discover Temples of Thailand, and I have a plethora of interesting still life scenes at my disposal.

The addition of a click/de-click aperture switch is perfect on this lens, enabling me to confidently leave it at F0.95. Yes, very rarely did this lens come out of F0.95. Whilst I can see the minimal distortions and control that comes with its complex apochromatic design being favourable for some, it’s not indicative of how I would curatively choose to use this lens. F0.95 and subject separation, getting close and getting that unique look is where I believe a lens like this shines. I haven’t stopped comparing this to the 33mm but it’s hard not to. I think the 33mm is the superior lens regardless of what field of view you favour. The Argus lenses are heavy, expensive in relation to comparable lenses 9though affordable considering what they offer) and they are demanding to use, the 33mm offers enough to counterbalance that. The 28mm Simera from Thypoch suffers from a similar focal length to field of view dissonance, but overall usability and end result outweigh the disconnect. The Argus 25mm on the other hand, is cleaner and more controlled than either, has the clicked aperture but lacks that pinch of MSG that I have come to expect from Venus Optics. It’s head and shoulders above any other “35mm equivalent” I have tried for Fujifilm (which is most) and with the focal length gaining popularity recently, it’s an oddball. Far better light transmission (these Argus lenses in cine form are rated T1.0 I believe) but far slower in operation, it becomes a difficult low light pick, “everyday-everything” field of view but much too heavy to be an EDC. Not as spectacular as its 33mm sibling but a perfectly powerful tool in its own right. There are some images I made that could have come from no other lens, but those images came between bouts of “I wish I had a faster throw.”

I have an unreleased review of the 33mm Argus meant for Fuji X Passion that I may repuerpose, though ideally I’d like an excuse to shoot a new set of images with it. You can however, still find my review of that lens in FUJILOVE Magazine issue 109 where I take it to Ayutthaya and claim my own version of the iconic Buddha head in a tree image.