Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by sani, Apr 18, 2012.
I have and like both lenses.
Use my 20 more often for the fov.
Dana Point Harbor Baby Beach by CapoDave, on Flickr
Mission San Luis Rey by CapoDave, on Flickr
This gives a lttle more wa.
While I had it I never had a complaint about the IQ of the 17. Yet, when I got the chance I bought the 20 and never looked back. I don't regret it a bit. I have always like that 40mm VOV so I suppose the 20 just felt right. The IQ on the 20 is OMHO a good deal better than the 17. That's not to say the 17 is bad, it isn't just the 20 is better (and given the price difference its no surprise).
I've already had the chance to rant at length on the 17 here : https://www.mu-43.com/f38/pancake-lenses-12754/index2.html#post113381
The 20 runs loops around the 17 in every respect.
Not to say the 17 is awfully bad, as I wrote, it's just deceiving. And overpriced.
I prefer the 17 focal length, but the 20 is the better lens in every regard. I hope Olympus reexamines this lens and releases a new version.
I have used both on PENs. They are both lovely, but the sharpness of the 20mm is kind of addictive. There is a certain OLY magic though when you mate the 17 to to a PEN....the slight softness combined with the OLY JPEG processing. I have very few shots with with the 17mm, but a higher percentage of ones I love for some reason.
Please consider disabling your ad blocker for our website.
We rely on ad revenue to pay for image hosting and to keep the site speedy.
Or subscribe for $5 per year to remove all ads and support our efforts.