Oly 17mm - Panny 20mm. A question for owners of both.

johnny9fingers · #1 May 20th, 2010, 04:23 PM

I have the 17mm on my E-P2. I am happy with the photos I get and the AF speed is fine. But there is so much buzz about the 20mm. Is the 20mm that much better in image quality and AF speed, even after the recent Oly firmware update? Also, is the operating noise similar? I want to hunker down with one lens for the next year and learn how best to use the E-P2 and I thought the 17mm would be that lens....
Please let me know your experience with both lenses..
Thanks,
John

BBW · #2 May 20th, 2010, 04:32 PM

johnny, while your awaiting responses, I've just bumped up two threads that may be of interest if you haven't read them yet: "Which pancake for my E=P1?" and "How do you like your Olympus M. Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 lens?"

I know Vidar loves his 17mm, but don't think he has the 20mm.

BBW · #3 May 20th, 2010, 04:37 PM

And you might find this to be an interesting thread, as well: Panny 1.7 love so far so good

squeegee · #4 May 20th, 2010, 04:39 PM

I have both.

Honestly, I think my 17mm focuses faster than my 20mm.

They both make a focusing noise, personally I like the motor noise of the 17mm better (if that's ever any reason to buy a lens

)

Other than that... I personally find I like the 17mm a lot better, just everything from the slightly wider angle, to the smaller size.

As for image quality, yes I do believe the 20mm is better than the 17mm, but personally I find that my shaky hands negate any difference I'd get from the 20mm.

I almost sold my 20mm after having it for 2 months and never actually using it. I just keep it around now just in case I want to do some lower light shooting (F1.7), and a few other nonsensical excuses.

Streetshooter · #5 May 20th, 2010, 04:43 PM

I'm with squeegee 100%. The 17 is such a natural FOV for me I don't have to adjust framing at all. The 20 is great but I just use it for low light stuff......

johnny9fingers · #6 May 20th, 2010, 04:48 PM

Hi BB, and thanks. I read through thoses threads and found them interesting, and informative. Thanks for you insight Squeegee. There would have to be quite a bit of difference in image quality for me to add the 20mm. I do feel kinda silly with this thread since I am happy with the 17mm, I should probably not worry about any other lens unless if filled a specific need. The combination of the nice quality I get at higher ISOs and utilization of IS, f2.8 has been fast enough for me so far.....

BBW · #7 May 20th, 2010, 04:50 PM

Good, I'm glad on all fronts.

Gear lust is such a wiley virus and so easy to catch that one can't be too careful. I have had a touch of it now and again.

My brief gear lust goes along with "hindsight is 20:20".

Streetshooter · #8 May 20th, 2010, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny9fingers

Hi BB, and thanks. I read through thoses threads and found them interesting, and informative. Thanks for you insight Squeegee. There would have to be quite a bit of difference in image quality for me to add the 20mm. I do feel kinda silly with this thread since I am happy with the 17mm, I should probably not worry about any other lens unless if filled a specific need. The combination of the nice quality I get at higher ISOs and utilization of IS, f2.8 has been fast enough for me so far.....

Your sig is great....... Boogie Woogie....

squeegee · #9 May 20th, 2010, 04:52 PM

It makes me feel better having 2 lenses though.

I feel guilty having gone through all the effort to buy an interchangeable lens camera just to find myself super-gluing a single lens to it - and a prime lens none the less.

Ray Sachs · #10 May 20th, 2010, 05:21 PM

Nothing quantitative - all impression. I've had the Oly 17 for a while. I really really like it - nothing bad to say about it at all. I like the wider field of view sometimes, but not all the time. When I was a kid, I did most of my shooting on a 35mm film camera with a 50mm prime, which is closer to the 20 than the 17, but sometimes I like a wider angle. So I love the 17.

Then I got the 20. And its rarely come off my camera since. I can't tell you what it is about that lens, but there's something about the visual quality of the shots I've been getting with it that I just frickin' love. And I've seen the same unquantifiable thing in photos from others using the same lens. Maybe its just clarity - I prefer to think of it as magic!

Bottom line. I'm really really happy to have both. I'm getting back to the point of spending a lot more time with primes on the camera than zooms. But having owned both, if I had to pick one and I could afford the higher price, I'd get the 20. If someone told me I had to give one up, I'd give up the 17 before the 20. Fortunately, nobody's telling me that.

-Ray