Some sample images taken on Monday with a production version of the 17mm f/1.8 (serial # below 100!). (I originally and mistakenly posted this as a reply to the review on the 75mm f/1.8; my apologies.)

I only had it in my hands for about 15 minutes on a gloomy NYC day, but am really happy with the results, it's pretty much the perfect street shooter, especially mounted on the OM-D. While many prefer the Nifty 50 perspective (see earlier post on Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 v. Oly 17mm f/1.8), my first lens was a 35mm, so I suppose that plays a role in my really enjoying this one. I also LOVE the build quality of the Olympus 17 compared to the Panasonic 25mm.

A couple things to note with the sample images: I only had a few minutes with the lens, and therefore rushed through many of these shots. It was a dark afternoon, so I shot many wide open at f/1.8, and moved too quickly in some cases, forgetting to lower the ISO. Grain at 800 ISO (and 2000! doh!) is therefore user error, my apologies. I'm still really impressed with the results, and will likely be getting one for myself.

Our Olympus rep said we'd be getting them on December 15th (Saturday?), but given that they are often overly optimistic, please don't hold us to that!

Cheers,
Dan at H and B Digital

PS: Should I post full-size versions here?

Your 'blog' thing is inside a frame on the webpage : hugely irritating to have to grab the sidebar to scroll.

Welcome to the forum.
Are you a shop?

This part is debateable even if you corrected the mistake (34 should be 17) ;
"Despite the 34mm focal distance (35mm equivalent), great for street portraits in my opinion, particularly with the shallow depth of field and great bokeh."
It really doesn't have a shallow depth of field, it is a 17mm lens ... unless you're in the nostrils of your big-nosed portrait victims. Oh don't get me wrong : I LOVE my own 17mmF2.8 but the focal length when used for portraits is best for children, puppies and craggy old sea dogs due to the slightly bulbous perspective effect.
"Great bokeh" is completely subjective, let's analyse this later when you've got more time and at least two similar lenses to compare.

Thanks for posting by the way.

__________________
Oly e-P1&17mmF2.8 e-600, e-410&40-150MkI, E-1&14-54MkI, Tokyo-Koki 300mm
Lumix G1&Yashinon45F1.7, e-pL1&CZJ135F3.5, e-P2&45mm. e-pL2&30mmF2.8

Yes, please post links to full resolution versions of the samples. Can't tell much from the small web-sized samples in your blog post, although the post itself is greatly appreciated.

Ulfric,
Thanks a ton for the reply and for the welcome. We are indeed a shop--or, rather, I work at a shop--and we're just trying to share the (information) wealth. We have a good relationship with Olympus and often get products earlier than bigger stores. So, yes, I guess we're trying to softly promote the store (not gonna lie), but I also want to check things out in the Mu-43 arena as a user. If I've overstepped the bounds, please let me know.

I could not agree more. We're working on it. Should I just post samples here? Links to full size images uploaded to DPReview? Thoughts welcome... (other than "your blog stinks" )

On a Micro 4/3 body, doesn't the 17mm become a 34mm (35mm equivalent) lens? I thought the form factor was 2x. The 12-50 on my OMD therefore acts like a 24-100mm (35mm equivalent). If I'm wrong, please don't hesitate to explain, I'd love to know more! If it does become a 34mm (35mm equivalent) lens, it won't have quite the same bulbous effect and will work for street portraits (read: not young women/models).

As for "bokeh," again, completely agree, it is very, very subjective--"great bokeh" on my Helios 40-2 85mm f/1.5 (M42 mount) is exhibit #1 ("trippy bokeh" is more accurate). When I've got some more time and several more lenses (and good shooting conditions, etc.), we'll talk. In the meantime, any lenses you suggest I compare it to?

Thanks again for the reply and thank you in advance for future ones.

Cheers,
Dan.

It would be better to say...

"...the 17mm (equivalent to 34mm in 35mm format)... "

That is less confusing because it is not a 34mm lens, it is a 17mm, and so it is clearest and most accurate to say the actual focal length and then any equivalencies you feel your readership needs to be told. Even more accurate would be to call it 135 format, but sadly a lot of people don't know what that means.

And you are correct, it is great for portraits, specifically for environmental portraiture, which is basically stuff like your second sample image. People in the environment, rather than just a random closeup of their face or something.

You were a little close in that one so there is some distortion, but if you had backed up a step then you would have a perfect example of a 17mm non-distorted environmental shot. And as we can see from that shot, the lens being at f/2.0 allowed the background to blur out a little so we can focus on the subject rather than on distracting background elements (of course a f/0.95 lens would do this far better, but still this lens did an adequate job).

I'd love to see some nighttime low light video of a cityscape to compare some of the videos taken with the Voigtlander 17.5. It's one of the other for my next lens and at less then half the price i'd love to see how the 17mm does with nighttime video.

I would appreciate it if you can host the RAW files on your website. Or full size JPEGs. That way you can post the link anywhere and people will get to your post and full size files.

Yes, links to RAW would be even better!

Arentol has a much better wording ;

I'd like to see a same scene (like for like) shootout between these four lenses ;
New mZuiko 17mmF1.8
Old mZuiko 17mmF2.8
Sigma 18mmF2.8
Lumix 20mmF1.7
The scenes should include head&shoulders portrait, moving street scene, trees & leaves against the sky, and low-light barrrooms.
Something to be getting on with there ...

Thanks for responding.

Actually, I can do something with two of those so ...

__________________
Oly e-P1&17mmF2.8 e-600, e-410&40-150MkI, E-1&14-54MkI, Tokyo-Koki 300mm
Lumix G1&Yashinon45F1.7, e-pL1&CZJ135F3.5, e-P2&45mm. e-pL2&30mmF2.8

Thanks all for the comments and suggestions. Working on getting the RAW images hosted on our site, but for now please see the following links to original files hosted on DPReview (original posting: Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.ZUIKO Sample Images: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review).

http://forums.dpreview.com/files/t/b...bddff601a3292a

http://forums.dpreview.com/files/t/6...e15efb5855125d

http://forums.dpreview.com/files/t/1...f1175f160df5dd

http://forums.dpreview.com/files/t/c...8105f4faa93d71

Once again, my bad for shooting so quickly at such high ISO's, you can really notice the noise in these larger images. Still, I really like the color representation and detail even wide open, particularly in the bike photo and the portrait shot.

I'll look through other ones I took to see if I have any at lower ISO's.

Thanks again for all of your suggestions and comments.
Cheers,
Dan.