I sold my 20mm in anticipation of the 17mm since the autofocus speed is so slow on the E-M5. Though now I am now also tempted by the PL25.

Currently have the O9-18, O12, O12-50 and O45.

Advice from those that own the 25 and are also tempted by the new 17?

Thanks!

For me, it would be a case of PL25 only, or best case PL25 + O17. Definitely not O17 instead of PL25. That comes from preferring the 25mm focal length and knowing just how good a lens the PL25 is to use.

__________________
Nic
E-M5, GH1
Flickr Photostream
>> Insert quote here <<

This is the age old 50mm versus 35mm question, really. For me no question the 25mm f/1.4 if I could only have one. I'm a 50mm fan though (so far at least), and it's one of the very last lenses I would ever sell. If I have to take just one lens with me somehere, it's usually a 25mm because I frame naturally with that focal length. I'm not sure that I'll get the 17mm eventually or not, but I would most assuredly not trade in my 25mm for it personally.

If you don't know if you have a preference for 35mm or 50mm equivalent framing, 2 suggestions to help you decide:

1) when you used the 20mm, did you consistently wish it was a little wider, or maybe a little tighter? Did you frequently find yourself cropping in tighter in post-processing?

2) If you have lightroom or any other software that lets you review your existing photos, what focal length do you find yourself using more often/gravitating towards, if any?

Another thing I notice is you have the 9-18mm, 12mm, and 12-50mm so I'm guessing you may be a wide angle fan. With that being the case, maybe a 35mm equivalent is going to be more natural for you?

Lastly, from a purely functional standpoint: the 17mm will have the snap focus ring; if you like to zone focus or manual focus a lot that's a big plus.

__________________
500px | flickr

“The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.” -- Dorothea Lange

The 25mm is, of course, faster which is a real consideration indoors. That also affects depth of field - making it a more effective portrait lens. The 12-50 is slower at the 50mm end making it a bit less useful for portraits. From early reports it sounds like overall sharpness is the same.

__________________
Love mercy, do justice, walk humbly - Micah 6:8
"A true photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words." Ansel Adams

Why don't you shoot for a few weeks with the 9-18 @ 17 or 18 and see how you like the perspective?

In day light it would be the same as a 17/1.8.

Grab that o12-50 and shoot with it at both 17 and 25mm see which one suits you better.

__________________
www.chrisleskovsek.com
@chris_leskovsek

I will echo these two things.

Different focal lengths and I suspect you will have a preference for one over the other but it will be a personal preference. My preference is more towards the 25mm these days but years ago I leaned more towards the shorter focal lengths when I was shooting 35mm film. I would have opted for a 24 or 28 in those days rather than a 35.

On other factors I think it's too early to say. There have been a couple of user reviews of the 17mm but no general comments because it hasn't been released yet. My view is that it's basically a wait and view on that, at least apart from one comment I can make.

I have the 25 and love it. It's been the lens I've been using most over the last few months except when I've been using either the 75 or the 40-150 because I needed something much longer. The only problem I have with the 25 is it's bulk, it's a physically large lens though not especially heavy. I prefer the smaller size of Olympus' primes, apart from the 75 which is larger than the 25 but not as much larger as you may think. The 17 looks like it's going to be around the size of the 12 and 45 and I find that a nice physical size for a lens on my E-P3 and E-M5. If the 17 were an Olympus 25 of roughly the same size, I could find myself really wanting to get it for the size factor, provided image quality was close to that of the PL25.

I think Olympus seem to get the physical size of their lenses pretty much perfect for my tastes. In this case I'm waiting to see what people produce with the 17 but I think it's probably not going to replace the 25 for me, and it may well not replace the 17 F/2.8 for me because I really appreciate that lens for its size.

Two different but "standard" focal length people. But I would personally pick the 17/1.8 instead since I use my Em5 for a more wider angel and use my Fuji on 50mm FL.. But thats just me..

__________________
www.photopurple.blogspot.com

Thanks for all the great advice everyone.

I have spent some time seeing what FOV suits me better and I do gravitate towards 25, especially when shooting portraits where my 45 is too long. It is good to hear how much everyone loves the lens, and I just purchased one from the forum tonight, can't wait to start shooting with it! Maybe I will consider the 17 in a few months, I do love the super fast AF and all metal construction of my 12.

I bought the 9-18 for a trip to Europe in anticipation of wide landscapes though found the 12 on my camera more often due to shooting indoors and at night. I might sell it given it's hard to justify the price for such limited use.

For the 12-50, it came with my EM-5 and seemed like a good idea due to the weather sealing, though the only time I used it during a 2 week trip was when it rained in London and I was on an open bus tour!