1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Buy olympus 12-40mm f2.8 , sell oly 17mm 1.8 ??

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by PantelisMor, Sep 25, 2014.

  1. PantelisMor

    PantelisMor Mu-43 Veteran

    282
    Jan 14, 2013
    Hello.

    I am thinking to buy oly 12-40 2.8 as an all around lens. I am thinking if there is any reason to keep my oly 17 1.8 ??

    Thx a lot..
     
  2. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Do you ever do any low light/available light shooting where you need a faster aperture than F/2.8? That's one obvious reason. The 12-40 seems to have become my "standard" all around lens at present but I won't be getting rid of any of my faster primes simply because they do offer an advantage in some light conditions.

    In addition the 17mm F/1.8 is a smaller and lighter lens and that can be an advantage at times. I kept my old 17mm F/2.8 pancake when I bought the 1.8 simply so I could use it on my second body, an E-P3, just as a physically smaller camera/lens combination I could carry around in my general bag.

    Your signature indicates that you have the 17mm and the Panasonic 14-45. On the face of it I'd say there is more reason to dispose of the 14-45 than to dispose of the 17mm.
     
  3. Ramsey

    Ramsey Mu-43 Top Veteran

    718
    Jan 9, 2013
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Disregard everything David said.

    You don't need the 17mm f1.8. You might as well sell it to me, for a ridonculously low price. :drinks:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. verbatimium

    verbatimium Mu-43 Veteran

    204
    Jul 17, 2013
    Toronto, Ontario
    Martin
    I have both and decided to keep both. The 12-40mm is an amazing all around lens that I take with me when I am feeling lazy or when I have family around. However, I still use the 17mm on more artistic shots because the background blur that it produces is a lot more pleasing. Also as already mentioned, the 17mm prime is great for low light, and it is easy to carry around.
     
  5. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    As an owner of the fantastic 12-40 I am saving my money to acquire the 17 f1.8. There are times I'm not sure what I will encounter on a photo shoot and the 12-40 is ideal but there are just as many other times I know the 17 f1.8 would be the perfect lens. Can't wait to add it to my prime lens group! I sold my old 17 f2.8 and wish I'd hung on to it but as they say "hind site is 20-20".
     
  6. Roast

    Roast Mu-43 Rookie

    20
    May 21, 2014
    Calgary
    I agree, just picked up the 12-40, and in low light you really need a prime.
     
  7. PantelisMor

    PantelisMor Mu-43 Veteran

    282
    Jan 14, 2013
    Thx a lot for your advice, i think i will keep 17 1,8,.. The panasonic 14-45 i have already dispose of..
     
  8. Vivalo

    Vivalo Olympus Loser

    931
    Nov 16, 2010
    Finland
    I have them both and use them both. My go-to-kit is 12-40, 17 and 40-150. The 17mm 1.8 is very nice in low light situations and when you want to keep your camera unobtrusive.
     
  9. SkiHound

    SkiHound Mu-43 Veteran

    328
    Jan 28, 2012
    I have both. IMO, it might depend on what body or bodies you're using. The 12-40 is a terrific general purpose zoom. Except for the extra 1.3 stops there really is no optical advantage to the 17. And the close focus capabilities really add to the versatility. I have an E-M5 and when I use the 12-40 I use the horizontal grip. That said, I also really enjoy taking the grip off and using just the 17. It's just a smaller, lighter, and less intrusive package. I thought it made no sense for me to keep both, but find I use them in rather different ways and really enjoy both. If I had only an E-M1, I'm not sure I'd find the size of the 17 so appealing and advantageous.
     
  10. esnift

    esnift Mu-43 Veteran

    247
    Mar 17, 2013
    Boston, MA
    Dan
    I was recently faced with a similar dilemma. I came across an opportunity to pick up the 12-40 at a great deal, but due to the financial limitations, HAD to sell my 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 to fund the purchase. I knew that I would miss the primes for many of the previously mentioned reasons, but wasn't sure just how much. Now that it's gone, the small form factor of the 17 paired with the E-M5 sans grip is what I miss the most; to the point that I will almost definitely be reacquiring the 17/1.8 as soon as I'm able. I, however, would not give up the 12-40 to go back to my previous setup. So if you have enjoyed shooting with the 17 and can afford to keep both, might as well.
     
  11. silver92b

    silver92b Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 7, 2013
    Atlanta, GA
    IMHO, sell the 17f1.8. It's redundant. I speak from experience as I have both. The only reason I have not tried selling my 17f1.8 is because I dropped once and bent the front ring. No damage other than that, but you can't screw in any filters :tongue:... I probably could not get much out of it, so I use it as a body cap on my E-P5... The only reason to keep it would be if the body you have is not at par with the E-M1 :wink:......
     
  12. nardoleo

    nardoleo Mu-43 Veteran

    332
    Apr 2, 2013
    Singapore
    Leo
    I think you should keep the 17mm for that compact design and extra speed.

    I dont have the 17mm f1.8 but have the pana 25mm f1.4 and it really helps to have it with the zoom for time f2.8 is just not bright enough.
     
  13. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    For myself, there are many times when the 12-40 is too big, too heavy, too cumbersome, too "obvious"... just not so much "fun" for those reasons. And much of m4/3 shooting is about having fun and not being burdened with larger, heavier gear.

    Not to mention times when you really need the extra speed of the 1.7 lens and want to avoid the look of having a large, very obvious lens.

    Thus, I have used the 17/1.8 on occasions (12/2, 20/1.7, and even the 25/1.4 also come to mind for similar reasons). In fact, I just bought the 15/1.7 Summilux, as a possible replacement for my 17. I have no intention of letting my Pany 12-35 go, but there is a place for smaller, faster primes available as well.

    It's nice to have a small, fast, high quality wide/normal lens on all kinds of occasions. I think you will appreciate keeping the 17 around.
     
  14. PantelisMor

    PantelisMor Mu-43 Veteran

    282
    Jan 14, 2013
    Its true that a lot of times i am very happy i use the small size of this lens with my Em5 without grip. In fact i am thinking to sell em5 with grip and buy em1 with 12-40. This is the reason its came to my mind this choice..
     
  15. edmsnap

    edmsnap Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Dec 20, 2011
    Edmonton, Alberta
    The 17/1.8 is the one native lens that I have some lust for acquiring as a speedy-autofocus street shooter. But I have the Oly 12/2 which is stunning and a Canon FD 24/2 which is my favourite prime so I already have great glass close to that focal length. In addition, my 4/3's 14-54/2.8-3.5 is brilliant at 17-18mm; therefore, common sense has kept me from purchasing the 17. The key thing to remember is that common sense is rarely connected to camera gear purchasing. So we're in the same contemplation phase, we've just bought and wished for opposite things. I guess what I'm saying is: buy it all, but it all, but it all!! :biggrin:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    I can't speak of how the E-M1 handles as I've never had one but as a former owner of the E-M5 and current owner of the E-P5 I can say that both of these cameras have the ability the become large enough to balance well with the 12-40 with add on grips (third party grips on the E-P5) and without grips small enough to mate with the 17 for a perfect semi-compact camera. The best of both worlds!
     
  17. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    2.8 minus 1.8 = 1.0

    Therefore...

    1. Do you need the benefits that the extra 1.3 stops gives you?
    2. How important is the 35mm focal length?