O17 1.8 vs. O25 1.8

Get the PL25 1.4 and call it a day. :smile:

Seriously different FOV questions are hard to answer and there are so many good lenses for m43 around these FLs.

 

I've got both. I really like both. The reviews talk about differences in image quality but I get images I'm very happy with from both and whatever differences there are in image quality don't matter to me. The 1.8/17 spent a lot of time on my camera as my "standard" lens until I got the 1.8/25. I've had the PL 1.4/25 for a couple of years and liked it but never quite come to grips with its colour rendition which I find a little cold compared to what my Oly lenses deliver and the 1.8/17 gives me the same kind of colour that my other Oly lenses do. I got the Oly 1.8/25 to see if it would give me a similar result and it does, and it's pretty much lived on the camera in the few months I've had it.

So my take on choosing between these 2 Olympus lenses is simple: forget about test reports and what people say about sharpness. Both are more than good enough. Pick on field of view and how that suits what you're shooting and how you want to shoot it.

 

Im not sure if u got any longer fast lens but if this is your main lens to go with then I would choose the 25. It's nice to have the opportunity to create thinner dof... And I don't know about you but I used to end up cropping a lot of my photos anyway so the tighter fov from 25 could be ideal for some...

 

If you are a self described "pixel peeper from hell" you might be disappointed in the 17. Although it renders nicely, DxO shows it as one of the softest primes.

 

Are you talking about the original 17mm F/2.8 pancake or the much newer 17mm F/1.8? The pancake is considerably softer but does render nicely. The newer F/1.8 is a very different lens and I don't think most people would call it "soft".

 

Get them both on the used market; run them back-to-back for a few months and then sell the one you don't want. You'll lose almost nothing in the deal.

 

As fransglas mentioned in his reply, if this is going to be your primary lens, then I'd go with the 25 for its ability to give you thin DOF.

I have both the 17 and 25, but I'm in the process of selling the 25 because I prefer the 17/45 combo more than the 14/25/45 combo I was running. I love the 17's FOV, but I don't think I'd be happy with it by itself if I didn't also have the 45 for when I want subject isolation.

The 25 is versatile enough to handle a lot of different situations with its FOV, speed, and DOF.

 

For bokeh and sharpness is almost similar with 45mm f1.8. But 17mm is also sharp but not as sharp as 45mm.

 

I'm talking about the 17 1.8. DxO shows the 17 1.8 as being soft for a prime. Many people feels its sharpness is sufficient, and it renders great, but I wouldn't recommend it to a self described "pixel peeper from hell".

 

I can be a bit of a pixel peeper as well. they're both fantastic, get the focal length you prefer.

[buy from a retailer with easy returns/exchanges, I hear of softer 17s, but mine was very sharp]

 

If you're looking at one fast prime to complement the kit zoom, I think it has to come down to deciding which focal length you prefer since they're both excellent lenses. I imagine you'd be quite happy with the zoom and 25, although the 17/45 two prime setup seems popular as well.

I can't speak to the O25, but I've been pleasantly surprised by how the O17/1.8 renders and it seems plenty sharp. If you do go with the O17, this metal hood [ebay link] is the same diameter as the lens body - I've used it on the P14, P20, and now O17...

 

Buy the focal length that you prefer shooting with. In the end, you'll probably end up with both of them anyways.