Yes, I do wish it was at least F1.4 but then it would probably be bigger than a PL25...
Been really thinking about picking this one up since I don't have a good 35mm lens anymore and it's my favorite FL. If only Sigma made a DP in exactly 35mm equiv with an F2. I just can't bring myself to drop $1300 on a X100s right now when Lightroom can't process the files well and it still has issues with landscapes. I really want to resist buying a D600 + Sigma 35mm F1.4.
Feel free to post samples of the Olympus 17mm F1.8 to sway me.
I think the reason was lenstip was comparing Oly 17mm to Panasonic 20mm lens. 20mm is a very good lens, but the af is slower compared to the later primes esp in low light I missed a couple photos. That is the reason I bought 17mm. Also I like the manual focus option. m43 has plenty of samples: http://www.mu-43.com/f80/olympus-17mm-f-1-8-image-thread-38371/index31.html
I'm in the same position as FlyPenFly. I really want a great 17mm equivalent for m43. What I'd really like is a PanaLeica 17mm f1.4 at the price they'd charge (say $700), but that doesn't seem like it's coming in the near future.
httivals wrote:
I'm in the same position as FlyPenFly. I really want a great 17mm equivalent for m43. What I'd really like is a PanaLeica 17mm f1.4 at the price they'd charge (say $700), but that doesn't seem like it's coming in the near future.
Yeah exactly how I feel. I think the next PL style lens coming from Panasonic is a 43mm portrait lens. Strangely my least favorite focal length.
httivals wrote:
I'm in the same position as FlyPenFly. I really want a great 17mm equivalent for m43. What I'd really like is a PanaLeica 17mm f1.4 at the price they'd charge (say $700), but that doesn't seem like it's coming in the near future.
+1. The next prime I'd like from Panasonic is a Summilux-DG 17/1.4, from Oly I'd like to see either a 10mm f2 or a 25/1.8 with sealing.
I'm also looking at this lens.
I now shoot with the PL25 and 45/1.8 on my OM-D. For the 35mm focal length I have the Sony RX1, but I must say that I often prefer the OM-D for street shooting. That's because of the tiltable LCD screen and superfast accurate AF. The results from the RX1 look much nicer than those from the OM-D + 17/1.8, but for some subjects it's more important to get the shot.
Edit: I'm surprised by the reviews this lens is getting. I was expecting it to be better.
The 17mm f/1.8 is sharper than any of the kit zoom lenses, and even sharp at f/1.8, at least what it's focused on.
If the lens has a problem, it's field curvature, which causes the edges to be out of focus (front-focused) unless you stop down quite a bit. It's not a lens to focus and recompose, for this reason.
Some people may think it's overpriced given that it's only f/1.8, and it has that field curvature issue.
A small update: I got this lens yesterday and my first impressions are very positive. It's already supersharp at f1.8 and stopped down it's nice from corner to corner. The AF is silent and blazing fast.
Probably the the most interesting thing (from the review) is that the corners appear to not change much as you stop down which seems a bit different from lenstip but maybe i'm misreading the graph.
Tested on different cameras. Lenstip uses 12MP e-pl1 vs photozone 16MP gx1. I checked also ephotozine which used 16MP G3 and resolution improves on the corners when stopping down:
Probably the the most interesting thing (from the review) is that the corners appear to not change much as you stop down which seems a bit different from lenstip but maybe i'm misreading the graph.
Always scratch my head when people dump on the Pany 20mm f/1.7. Maybe mine is a displaced alien artifact but I really have no complaints about it at any aperture. Sure it isn't as sharp in the corners wide open, but then no lens is. On my OM-D it makes a very tidy, go everywhere package really good for crowd shooting and focusing on a small piece of the world. I suspect the Oly 17mm is plenty fine, but one is certainly paying a premium for those 3mm.
Summary: a good, but not spectacular lens. Much better used for environmental portraiture or the like, where it does quite well. It's competent, but uninspiring for landscape use.
OntheRez wrote:
Always scratch my head when people dump on the Pany 20mm f/1.7. Maybe mine is a displaced alien artifact but I really have no complaints about it at any aperture. Sure it isn't as sharp in the corners wide open, but then no lens is. On my OM-D it makes a very tidy, go everywhere package really good for crowd shooting and focusing on a small piece of the world. I suspect the Oly 17mm is plenty fine, but one is certainly paying a premium for those 3mm.
Robert
I had it for a while. It's a good lens but the images I got out of it were just flat and it had uninspiring rendering.
It's a fantastic lens. I much prefer it to the 20mm, partly because of the fov, and largely because the AF is way faster, smoother, and locks in lower light.
Summary: a good, but not spectacular lens. Much better used for environmental portraiture or the like, where it does quite well. It's competent, but uninspiring for landscape use.
My feelings as well. Definitely the best lens for M43 in that focal range, though. :/
FlyPenFly wrote:
I had it for a while. It's a good lens but the images I got out of it were just flat and it had uninspiring rendering.
I now use NEX more than M43 and i still have a 20 1.7 and still like it a lot. Small, light , fast ,sharp and relatively very cheap. I got the 35 1.8 OSS just in a hope to bring the 20 1.7 experience to NEX but i really prefer the 40mm ish FOV than 52mm)
Its render is not an issue to me, it isn't bad...and I am not in the camp that ”interesting” (or odd) render makes a photo. (maybe that's the same reason why some really like ZF 50 1.4 plannar and some really hate it's ”ugly” bokeh)
but I really have no complaints about it at any aperture. Sure it isn't as sharp in the corners wide open, but then no lens is. On my OM-D it makes a very tidy, go everywhere package really good for crowd shooting and focusing on a small piece of the world. I suspect the Oly 17mm is plenty fine, but one is certainly paying a premium for those 3mm.