1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Oly 17 f/1.8 vs Oly 14-42EZ sharpness

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by tuxxdk, Jun 10, 2014.

  1. tuxxdk

    tuxxdk Mu-43 Regular

    74
    May 29, 2014
    Denmark
    Martin
    Hello

    The 17mm gets some bad rep around the interweb so I was wondering if it's sharper than my kit, the 14-42EZ?

    I'd love the extra speed but I also lack the final sharpness in my kit so I was looking at the 17 due to the FL that I love.
     
  2. phl0wtography

    phl0wtography Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Apr 15, 2011
    The 17/1.8 has a hard time shaking off its stigma. A few (un)educated opinions from reviewers, and forum-ites alike have managed to earn it a somewhat bad reputation. However, the 17/1.8 is a fine lens. Its IQ is significantly better than your zoom. While it may lack the stellar lp/mm values from other m4/3 primes, perceived sharpness is more than sheer resolution. Tonal rendering, overall contrast, microcontrast wide open, sharpness, and light fall-off, transition, and rendering of oof areas all add to perceived sharpness. And the 17/1.8 delivers in those areas, especially in microcontrast. Whether it's worth its premium over say the P20 is your call.
    Ming Thein has a great comparative review of the O17.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  3. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    + 1. We have both the 17 and EZ and we like them for different reasons. The 17 lives on my camera and I/we think that the EZ is a wonderful travel/have with you everywhere zoom. I think that they are a wonderful 2 kit solution.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. tuxxdk

    tuxxdk Mu-43 Regular

    74
    May 29, 2014
    Denmark
    Martin
    Thanks for your posts. That's exactly what I'll be doing also - Oly 17 on a daily basis and then the EZ-kit on vacations.

    I must say that's some amazing looking images, not only sharpness (looks good!), but I mean the overall look and feel of the image.

    I'll be taking a trip to the store tomorrow and try it on my E-M10 and most likely take it with me.

    I've also concidered the Pany, but I need lightening fast AF (no slower than the EZ) and also the MSC engine for video.
     
  5. tuxxdk

    tuxxdk Mu-43 Regular

    74
    May 29, 2014
    Denmark
    Martin
    Having read the review posted above front to back and not just looked at images, I'm now more hooked than ever. I know he's a skilled photog (I'm not...) but who's not to say that with practise, I'll learn to compose and yield similar results?

    The EZ-kit is okay, but often it lacks. With DSLR (and my previously Fuji X100s) I'm used to primes, so why not continue that? I'm a bit hesitant with the Pro 12-40 zoom as size and weight eliminates some of the advantages I got from dumping DSLR.

    This is going to be good....
     
  6. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    918
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    I was coveting the 14-42EZ because of its small travel size, but when I read some tests that rated the bigger (and cheaper) Oly 14-42's as good, or better, I was surprised that Olympus compromised on the optics.

    I bought a refurbished 17mm for $300. Someone may have returned it because it wasn't sharp, but I like it and think it's quite a nice lens. I can see why people complain if they paid $499 for it. It won't test to the sharpness of the less expensive Oly 45mm. When it comes down to the 45mm pricing, maybe it will shed its initial weak reviews, as good pix need more than just sharpness.
     
  7. tuxxdk

    tuxxdk Mu-43 Regular

    74
    May 29, 2014
    Denmark
    Martin
    Yeah, if only I could get it as cheap as 499. Here it's 599, give or take. I dunno if it's expensive, maybe more than I expected when entering mFT, but definetely not off-putting. However I am the type that, when buying such merchandise, expect top optics, so that's why I've been hovering for some time.

    I won't call the EZ bad, actually I'm pretty impressed by it. Maybe because everyone is saying it's so bad. Definitely not something I'd get the, here, almost similar priced II-version for instead giving the increased size.

    I'll be happy to pay the 600 price tag of the Oly 17 if it delivers - the more I read, the more it seems it'll deliver. If not, I'll just return it within my 14 days initial period.
     
  8. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    All things being equal (sensor size, design abilities, etc.), a smaller lens will always have more compromises.

    Barry
     
  9. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    830
    Sep 30, 2013
    Its funny how much people harp on the 17mm for sharpness. In my experience the 17mm has almost identical rendering and sharpness to the 12mm, the biggest difference being the FOV. Yet nobody every complains about how "soft" the 12 is, despite being significantly more expensive. Weird.
     
  10. tuxxdk

    tuxxdk Mu-43 Regular

    74
    May 29, 2014
    Denmark
    Martin
    I've read a lot of comments on the 17 and I remember one, where the poster harped about how bad it was. Then he wrote again to withdrae his statement - he had a bad copy and after being replaced there were no longer sharpness issues.

    Which brings me to conclude that perhaps there has been a few bad samples in the beginning?