17/2.8 in low light

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by dixeyk, Feb 12, 2011.

  1. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I read quite a few comments about the Panasonic 20/1.7 being superior in low light (and that makes sense as it is quite fast and the IBIS on the Olympus Pen bodies probably makes that even more useful. I have a 17/2.8 and while I like it quite a lot I realize I don't do a lot of low light with it. Does anyone out there have any great low light shots done with the Olympus 17? I'm going to try a few and I'm curious what anyone else has been able to do with it.
  2. jimr.pdx

    jimr.pdx Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    near Longview ~1hr from PDX
    Real Name:
    Jim R
    It would be interesting to know how focus speeds are affected in low light, as I've heard the 17 focuses faster than the 20 in normal use.
    I have neither, and hope something in the 10-12mm range arrives soon, but I can't guarantee I'll wait that long before I crack :smile:.
  3. pdh

    pdh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 6, 2010
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Not saying this is necessarily a great shot - but it is low light and the 17mm lens on an E-P1

    used aperture priority, probably centre weighted exposure. I also tend to have my camera set up so that the focus is done using the AEL/AFL button, not on the half press of the shutter - reason being that I dont want the AF to retry focusing every time i press the shutter, as in low light situations it can get confused.


    Jazz....Nice.... by kevinparis, on Flickr
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Vidar

    Vidar Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 31, 2009
    Bergen, Norway
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vidargrov/4621624840/" title="Rain in Barcelona by VidarFoto, on Flickr"> 4621624840_7aca24c07d. "500" height="391" alt="Rain in Barcelona" /></a>
    • Like Like x 4
  6. Iconindustries

    Iconindustries Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Now that's a good one Vidar. Brightened my day and Illuminated my face with a smile as the light came on and I realised the rather monotone pun I just wrote.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I'd say that qualifies as pretty great looking.
  8. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Lovely...I was just in Barcelona...love that city.
  9. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    The 20 is a bit better in low light, but the 17 isn't bad at all. Its probably better than the LX5, for example, and the LX5 is pretty damn good in low light. Here's are two of mine - not great photos (although I've come to like the first) but certainly technically competent in low light...


    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/4961273491/" title="Philly Street 1 by ramboorider1, on Flickr"> 4961273491_1b280aab4e_o. "822" height="1050" alt="Philly Street 1" /></a>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/4961273593/" title="Philly Street 2 by ramboorider1, on Flickr"> 4961273593_0d40b934c2_b. "1024" height="794" alt="Philly Street 2" /></a>
  10. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    You guys are talking me into a 17 for my second body.

    I'm in love with the 20mm, but the 17mm is such a deal, the posts here are starting to reach me...
  11. sblehm

    sblehm Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 28, 2010
    I generally don't care much for B&W shots, but this one made me pause and take a second look.
    Great shot!!

    • Like Like x 1