Pany 14, f2.5 or Oly 17, f2.8 on new E-P5?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by ccplady, Jul 9, 2013.

  1. ccplady

    ccplady Mu-43 Regular

    May 15, 2012
    Orlando. FL
    I want a pancake lens for my new E-P5. I bought the kit, so it came with the Oly 17, f1.8. I want a slim lens for easy carry in certain situations. My questions are, 1) does the Oly focus any faster on the Oly body compared to the Pany on an Oly? 2) Are there any banding concerns with the cross brand combo? (I sold my Pany 20, f1.7 because of the banding, even at moderate ISOs, on my OM-D.)

    I'm hesitating on the 17 because I already have the bigger 17. I'm hesitating on the 14 because I'm afraid I might not want the wider angle and I don't want slower potential focussing.

    AARRRGGG!!! I'm so confused.
  2. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    I'm pretty happy with my 14(2.5) on the OM-D. I like the wider angle so this is not a problem for me.

    P7080093 by pelicaneng, on Flickr
  3. gochugogi

    gochugogi Mu-43 Veteran

    Although AF is virtually silent, the auto diaphragm of the 14 2.5 is noisy and makes a "sheeek" sound as it constantly adjusts to maintain correct exposure in live view on my E-P3 (the diaphragm on my Olympus 17 2.8 is silent). Strangely, the diaphragm is virtually silent on my GX1. Not sure if my E-P3 results translate to the E-P5.

    While not an ugly lens, the 14 2.5 cosmetics are not as attractive as the Olympus 17 2.8. Of course, Olympus has decades of camera and lens design experience over Panasonic and it shows in the details (e.g., smoother MF ring). Nevertheless, Panasonic nailed the important things and this optic is sharp, sports peppy AF and so small it's hard to tell if a lens is mounted on your camera. The 17 2.8 is somewhat larger, slower focusing but still in pancake territory. Basically I prefer the 14 2.5 on my GX1 and the 17 2.8 on the E-P3. Seems to work better that way...
  4. phigmov

    phigmov Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 4, 2010
    I'd go for the 14mm, particularly if you've already got the 17mm focal length covered with a faster lens (both in aperture and AF).

    For the money the 14 is terrific value.
  5. PaulGiz

    PaulGiz Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 3, 2013
    Rhode Island, USA
    I don't know the O17/2.8, but the P14/2.5 focusses quickly on my E-PL5, is quite sharp and the angle of view is quite natural. It is not a superwide by any means (think 28 on a 35mm).

    There is some purple fringing, but only in extreme contrast situations.

    I like the lens a lot, and it is quite compact. Its size and weight work quite nicely with the PEN format.

    So, another Recommend for the P14.

  6. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 25, 2012
    I currently have the 14 and 20 - when I do buy the 17/1.8 I'll still keep the 14mm - nothing touches it for size and price, image quality is good.

    I got some great shots out of it on a Thai speedboat trip with an e-pl1, put it on a backup body and it's a great combo for when you don't want to worry about expensive gear.
  7. Anthon

    Anthon Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 8, 2012
    Keep the 17 1.8 and buy a 14 2.5
  8. brianb032

    brianb032 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 10, 2011
    You already have a 17, so I would go with the 14/2.5. It takes a bit longer to get used to a 28mm field of view, but you'll enjoy it if you give it some dedication and an honest chance.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Mu-43 mobile app
  9. ccplady

    ccplady Mu-43 Regular

    May 15, 2012
    Orlando. FL
    It sounds like the 14 is the favorite thus far, and I certainly appreciate the input. Has anyone tried both lenses on an Olympus body to know if the focus speed is significantly different? Or if the focus speed of the 14 is faster than the Pany 20mm?
  10. brianb032

    brianb032 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 10, 2011
    From personal experience, I would say that the 14 is quite a bit faster when it comes to focusing speed. The 20 isn't too bad with focusing though, it's just that the 14 is so quick it's hard not to notice.
  11. arch stanton

    arch stanton Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 25, 2012
    The 14 is pretty damn fast, the 20 is fast enough *in good light*.

    But I'm repeatedly frustrated by the 20's focus speed in low light, it's not fast enough for moving people on my e-pl3. Had one whole set of shots where almost no-one came out just because they were walking (evening party inside).

    Having said that, give the 20 time and it's a lovely lens - I've used it a lot more than the 14mm...but I'm replacing it with the 17mm/1.8 for the focus speed issue when I can face selling on the 20.
  12. madmaxmedia

    madmaxmedia Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 20, 2010
    The 14mm focuses significantly faster than both the Oly 17 2.8 and the Panasonic 20mm, on any M43 body.

    The 14mm focuses very fast on recent Oly bodies. It's unbelievably small, makes the 20mm look like a big lens. ;)
  13. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US
    I've used the 14/2.5, 17/2.8, 17/1.8 and 20/1.7on my E-M5 and E-PM2. I used the 17/2.8 quite happily on both bodies and my E-PM1 before them. It's not quite as quick to focus as the 14/2.5, but I had no complaints with it. I tried both the 17/1.8 and the 20/1.7, and although the 20 was somewhat slower to AF than the 17/2.8, what completely turned me off the 20 was its banding at higher ISOs and sometimes not-so-high ISOs.

    I've since sold all but the 14/2.5 and the 17/1.8. The 17 is a bit faster to AF than the 14, but I have no issues with the 14 (and it AFs much faster than the 20). It's a nice, sharp, tiny lens that I love to use for shooting cars, fireworks, or just when I want a wider view (or a very small package). The 17/1.8 is great for low light and shallow DOF close up and is my main walk-around lens. If I ever miss a shot with either the 14/2.5 or the 17/1.8, it's my fault and not that of the lenses!

    If the 14/2.5 didn't exist, I'd have kept my 17/2.8 for my pancake. But I like the 14/2.5 more the more I use it, and now that I've got the 17/1.8, I'd rather not have two 17s just because one happens to be a pancake. I really like having the 14/2.5 & 17/1.8 combo. Also keep in mind that these two lenses are internal focus, whereas the 17/2.8 and 20/1.7 are not.

    Hope this helps! :biggrin:
  14. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    If the newer Olympus 17F1.8 was a pancake this whole discussion would be pointless ... in a good way. :smile:

    Oh come on Panasonic and Sigma : sort out yer 20mm & 19mm, I want a new lens!
  15. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011

    I have used the 14 on the E-PL2, E-PM1, and now on the E-PM2. In my experience it is very fast to focus. Definitely faster than the P20 and I would rate it effectively as fast as any of my other m4/3 lenses (P20 excluded). I have never seen banding and have been impressed by the image quality given the cost of the lens.

    I cannot speak for the 17s but I cannot see you being disappointed with the 14.
  16. mnhoj

    mnhoj There and back again

    Dec 3, 2011
    Los Angeles
    John M
  17. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US