[HI-RES] Olympus 17mm f/1.8 Samples (Bandwidth Warning - Large Files)

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Amin Sabet, Jun 2, 2013.

  1. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    There's been a lot of talk about the Oly 17/1.8 recently - is it sharp enough, etc.

    Is this a world class sharpness lens edge-to-edge for landscapes? No it isn't. I have used several lenses which have better edge sharpness, some which are MFT lenses and others which aren't.

    Still, this is absolutely one of my favorite lenses because it ticks so many boxes which matter to me. Great close up performance (unlike X100S lens, for example). Great autofocus speed (unlike most non-MFT options). Great build. Compact size. Pleasing character. Relatively low color fringing. And plenty of sharpness for my usual purposes, which mainly involve taking photos of people.

    Here are several large samples from a family outing to an elementary school event. Please add your own high-res (minimum 2000px) samples from this lens to this thread so we can get a sense of what it can do.





  2. brutto

    brutto Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    Feb 17, 2011
    Poop! I though I could live without one until now.
  3. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US
    Amin, I could have sworn you returned your 17/1.8. Did you buy it again? That's exactly what I did. Returned it, then missed it and re-purchased. :eek:
  4. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    Lovely stuff! I am also a big fan of this lens for the very reasons you cited.

    Now I have to go recharge my bandwidth capacitor... it's nearly used up... :wink:
  5. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Yep, returned, and repurchased. Mostly because I was enjoying 14mm more than 17mm before, while the reverse is now true.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Mu-43 mobile app
  6. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US
    Yes, I'm finding the same thing. That's why I plan on keeping both lenses. They each have their purposes. :biggrin:
  7. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    That sums up my feelings about it perfectly too. I couldn't have said it better.
  8. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    OK - a couple from me... Both with E-PL5 at ISO 200.


  9. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    I returned mine because I thought there was something a little "off" so I did some testing. It was pretty badly de-centered. So, I returned it, and haven't bought back, but I was just thinking about it today. This is an untimely post (untimely, if I want to avoid GAS!)
  10. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    I tried 3 copies yesterday in the store, and they behaved exactly the same way - blurrier on the right side. For me it was time to just accept it an move on. For my intended, usual use, it doesn't matter. Interestingly I noticed that if I focus on the right edge of a landscape using the right-most focus point, I seem to get symmetric performance. I'm beginning to think it's a consistent issue with asymmetric focal plane curvature as opposed to one edge really being "soft".
  11. Johnny_Alucard

    Johnny_Alucard Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2013
    I totally love this lens - sold both the Pany 14 and 20 since buying it as I've stopped using them...

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnny_alucard/8928833865/" title="P5280150 by Johnny_Alucard, on Flickr"> 8928833865_29f9f02cf7_o.jpg "2000" height="1500" alt="P5280150"></a>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnny_alucard/8928834295/" title="P4270806 by Johnny_Alucard, on Flickr"> 8928834295_46b94722be_o.jpg "2000" height="1500" alt="P4270806"></a>
  12. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US
    I never had occasion to test lenses for decentering till recently. I figure if I don't notice something "not quite right" during general shooting, the lens is fine. But ... before I bought my first copy of this lens, I'd read several posts (with samples) of decentering in the 17/1.8, so I tested mine by shooting the bookcase in my computer room. Thankfully it was fine. I was a little nervous when I bought my second copy, as I'd got what I consider a very good copy the first time around, so I tested my second copy in the same manner. It's just as good in my opinion. :biggrin:

    I recently bought a 12-50 and thought something was "off" about it but all that registered was that it was soft, and I didn't like it. When I finally got around to testing it, I found it was badly decentered. The left side of images were much softer than the right (which were quite sharp), and the top left corner was particularly bad. I then did the upside down test, and obvious decentering was confirmed. To make sure I wasn't imagining things, I then tested all my lenses, and every one is just fine. :biggrin:
  13. monk3y

    monk3y Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 14, 2013
    in The Cloud...
    I've been pretty impressed with this lens...I mainly use it for food shots, landscape and main walk around lens.

    taken at f/3.2

    This one was taken in JPEG at 1/15 f/2 Handheld then cropped a lot
  14. Livnius

    Livnius Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Jul 7, 2011
    Melbourne. Australia
    I think the biggest issue with this lens was that after the stellar 12, 45 and in particular 75 mm primes, expectation was super high, so when this really fine lens was released at around $500 it got perhaps a little unfairly hammered for falling just a tiny bit short of those lofty expectations.

    It may not be the absolute best in any one regard, it's value however is in it being so uniformly good across the board.
  15. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Great thread for those "in waiting" for this lens. Excellent examples and great to see them at slightly higher res, than usual, on the forum. When I finally receive mine it will be black, as part of an E-P5 & VF-4 bundle. Eagerly awaiting that camera AND this lens!
  16. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 10, 2013
    I like my copy as well, even with a faint de-centering in the upper right. But I have to say that most any lens'll look good if we're posting 2000 x 1500 pixel images at 260 ppi.
  17. odradek

    odradek New to Mu-43

    Feb 1, 2011
    But which lens is for you optically better, 14mm or 17mm?
    Thank you very much.
  18. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 6, 2012
    I've had the 14 for a while. They're both optically good enough. You can't beat 14mm's size though. 14mm has higher chromatic abberation but it is corrected in Panasonic bodies.

    If you like charts:


  19. Julia

    Julia Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 9, 2013
    Dresden, Germany
    Just got my copy of the 17mm lens. Bought it used through a German forum.

    First impression after two hours of testing it outside: if stepped down to f3.5 or more it's pretty sharp. Wide open and up to and including f2.8 it's pretty soft, at f1.8 even blurry. Will test it more tomorrow, but right now, I'm a little confused since I assumed I could use the lens wide open, but looking at the images up close is not pretty.

    Maybe I just need to figure out how to use it properly, but 20mm Pancake made better pictures wide open.
  20. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2012
    David Dornblaser
    I love this lens.

    P.S. - Amin, thank you for releasing us from the picture size requirements on your site! :eek:
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.