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

M.Zuiko 17mm f1.8

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by sebs_color, Feb 12, 2014.

  1. sebs_color

    sebs_color Mu-43 Regular

    191
    Jan 5, 2014
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Sebastian
    anyone have any preferences on the M.Zuiko 17mm f1.8? i was looking at the pana 20mm but im kinda leaning this way now.
     
  2. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I have owned multiple copies of the 20/1.7 and the 25/1.4. All were very good to great. But my 17/1.8 is my favorite. It's about the focal length for me, but I find that the 17 also is very competitive in terms of image quality. Better than the 20 to me; not quite as good as the 25, but close.

    The one thing I will point out is that I see a real difference in AF speed with the 17. Doesn't matter in most situations, but if you are shooting people in interior settings with low light you will appreciate the difference. Beyond that you really can't go wrong. Two excellent lenses.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Do you mean the 17 is better in those situations? Or is it lacking?
     
  4. mrjr

    mrjr Mu-43 Top Veteran

    518
    Sep 25, 2012
    The 17 is vastly better.
     
  5. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    The 17 was my first u43 lens. I bought it at launch and then read all the negative reviews of it. This didn't entirely chime with my own experience, but I bought a 20/1.7 to decide for myself if it was indeed sharper as many were saying.

    The 20/1.7 is indeed sharper wide open than the 17/1.8 - but not by much; and stopped down to f4 the difference disappears. However, the 17/1.8 looks and feels much better and the AF speed is significantly better. So, I sold the 20 and kept the 17.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Having not used the 20 or 25, I'd be surprised if the AF was significantly better than the 17. Right now, I'm really enjoying the 17.
     
  7. broody

    broody Mu-43 Veteran

    388
    Sep 8, 2013
    It's one of my favorite lenses. In spite of what some reviewers have claimed, I've found resolution to be excellent and the rendering is quite appealing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    17 is noticeably better than the 20/1.7; a little better than the 25/1.4.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    413
    Feb 25, 2012
    London
    Malc
    My 20mm drove me nuts - I wanted it for low-light evening shots of friends - for which it's mostly useless.
    The 17mm is muuuuch faster to focus - and when it's too dark to AF you flip the ring and manual focus. Not sharp unless you're a focus-ninja but you can get useable shots.
    If you're only shooting static things the 20mm is great, but I never really clicked with it's images. For some reason I really prefer the 17mm FOV.
     
  10. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    The 17 is my favorite lens.
     
  11. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    I don't think there's a difference between 17/1.8 and 25/1.4. Though the 20/1.7 has trouble locking focus in low light conditions.
     
  12. Swandy

    Swandy Mu-43 Veteran

    362
    Dec 15, 2009
    Had the 20mm and really liked the resulting photos but as others have said, it's AF was decent in good light. In low light it was really slow (up to and including the EP5/EM5).
    Had the 17mm (got it as part of the EP5 kit) and sold it because I had the 14mm/2.5 and wanted a smaller lens to go with the EP5 body. Oh well - getting it again because I really miss it and prefer that focal length as a walk around/nighttime low light lens.
     
  13. Vivalo

    Vivalo Olympus Loser

    931
    Nov 16, 2010
    Finland
    I finally gave up and went to the local camera store to buy a black 17mm 1.8. 14mm 2.5 is too slow in low light and too wide usually. 25mm 1.4 is too large and sometimes (but rarely) too narrow. I had the 20mm 1.7 and loooooved the size but the AF is just too slow for my preference. This is when the 17mm 1.8 enters: And it seems to be just perfect!....except for one thing, the build quality. When I got home I noticed the face plate was poorly glued. I will go and change it to another copy next week. I am really impressed by the IQ though, especially by the flare and CA resistance and it is plenty sharp for me.

    20140214-20140214_171117-Small.
     
  14. DigitalD

    DigitalD Mu-43 Top Veteran

    505
    Jan 10, 2014
    Miami
    David
    I think the 17mm renders a little 'colder' than the PL 25 1.4 and the Oly 45 1.8 in my opinion but I don't think I would ever get rid of it because of its performance and size! Love the size and the clutch. I wish all Oly lenses had the MF clutch.
     
  15. gswpete

    gswpete Mu-43 Regular

    107
    Nov 18, 2011
    The 17mm 1.8 is so versatile. From portraits to landscapes to group people shots, to food shots to selfies (yes, even selfies) to semi close ups to indoor low light shots. Yes, it can do it all, along with beautiful rendering (the transition from subject to OOF background is beautiful IMO) and blazing fast AF. Also, the 35mm equiv. focal length is perfect for across the dinner table portraits.

    Did I mention I really like this lens? I also have the 20mm 1.7 and 25mm 1.4.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  16. sebs_color

    sebs_color Mu-43 Regular

    191
    Jan 5, 2014
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Sebastian
    Thank you for all the feedback guys. It looks like my mind is made! I will start the hunt for this lens! (Living in Italy usually means Amazon.com)
     
    • Like Like x 1