Sell my Pany 14mm and 20mm for the Oly 17mm/1.8?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by arier, Dec 7, 2015.

  1. arier

    arier Mu-43 Rookie

    Apr 19, 2012
    Just got an EM5. Getting the itch to switch the line up around. Does it makes sense to sell my 14mm and 20mm Panys and get the Oly 17mm/1.8? What do you guys think? I have the Oly 9-18mm so I have wide covered.
  2. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I've variously owned the 14 and 20 in my u43 career. Both are gone now, but I still have the 17/1.8 which was the first u43 lens I bought. As nice as the 14 and 20 are, they both have limitations - AF speed and banding in the case of the 20 and CA and fairly slow aperture in terms of the 14. The Oly isn't perfect, but it's a beautiful lens to hold and use and the focal length is perfect for me.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. arier

    arier Mu-43 Rookie

    Apr 19, 2012
    Thanks man. I think you've convinced me.
  4. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    If you don't mind the larger size of the 17mm. It's not a big lens, but it's longer-barreled than the ones you mentioned. I've owned both the Pannies but not the Olympus; the 20mm is quite sharp, but indeed slow to focus. The main advantage of the 14mm is its tiny size.
  5. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    I have to agree with this too. I bought the 17 and the 14 and 20 are not getting used sadly.
  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    If you're a 14 and 20 shooter, get the 17mm 1.8 and call it a day!
  7. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    I can see 17 replacing the 20, but 14 is significantly wider IMHO . But, only you know what you like :) 
  8. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 30, 2013
    I've owned all three, and I think the 17/1.8 can safely replace both of these lenses, and especially on an Oly body I would recommend the 17/1.8 over the 20/1.7.
  9. SojiOkita

    SojiOkita Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 23, 2014
    I had the 14 - 17 - 20.
    I kept the 14 and 20.
    I kept the 14 for its tiny size, always interesting to have on my GM1.
    I think prefer the 20 mm focal length to 17 mm, and I found the 20 mm to be sharper than the 17, with a nicer bokeh, and a slower but more precise AF.
    And it has a better resistance to flare and is a pancake lens.
    So there wasn't much in favor of the 17 mm.

    The 17 mm is a very nicely built lens, but when I made my comparison, I always picked the picture taken with the 20 mm.
    (the 17 mm has a sort of nice soft look but that wasn't what I was after).
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. MoonMind

    MoonMind Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 25, 2014
    I've never owned the 14mm, but was able to use it on a friend's camera - nice lens, but not quite up there with the 20mm in terms of IQ; considerably faster to focus, though. I wouldn't choose it over the 17mm - too little gained here.

    The 17mm is the much more convenient lens than the 20mm, but it's not as good optically - so it's kind of a draw between those two lenses for me. When I had to decide, I kept the 20mm around in the end for its size and IQ - but the 17mm is one of the two mFT primes I use the most (together with the 25mm f/1.8). The 20mm nowadays mostly lives on its old mate, the GF1, and makes a surprisingly enjoyable combo for casual documentary style stuff (events, family and other outings). If I want maximum IQ, I put the 20mm on the E-PL7 for a killer combo - though it's a bit slower to work with than I'd like. To be honest, I mostly leave the 17mm on the E-PL7 because it's such a great street lens and takes very nice environmental portraits, too. I feel that it's a much better one lens solution than the 20mm in spite of its slightly weaker optics.

  11. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    I've also had all three. AF and performance has been covered by others and I agree.

    On an E-M5 (mkI or mkII?) I'm not really sure size/weight make as much a difference as they would on a GM#/E-PL# body. I actually like the extra in the bigger body.

    But it really comes down the focal length and angle of view. You have the range mostly covered with the 9-18mm but selecting the right prime isn't always about coverage. For me the 14mm isn't wide enough for a wide prime, and the 12mm is still to much for me. Between the 17mm and 20mm the choice would be harder if the AF was faster on the 20mm. But for street or family around house the 17mm wins for me since I like both focal lengths.
  12. scott rawson

    scott rawson Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 17, 2015
    west yorks
    I prefer 20mm output...But coming from GX7 to E M5ii I realllllly notice the slower focus...never bothered me before as it,s output and size suited me better...But I now understand its Knockers over the slow auto focus!
  13. GFFPhoto

    GFFPhoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2013
    14mm is pretty different in field of view as well a character (the distortions of a wide) when compared to the 17. If you like shooting wide, I couldn't see a 35 equivalent replacing a 28. The best option from an optical perspective would be to replace the 14 with the PL15 and have a 15/20 combo. The best option from a budgetary perspective would be the 14/17 combo.
  14. Nathanael

    Nathanael Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 12, 2015
    The nice thing about having the 14mm around is it can be a ~10.5mm with a $10 Fuji wide converter. It's not a optically perfect but there's not a lot of options in m43 to go that wide for that cheap.
  15. jimr.pdx

    jimr.pdx Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    near Longview ~1hr from PDX
    Jim R
    I know the elder 17 (f/2.8) was a very fun lens and seemed to hit a sweet spot for me. I like 'em small though so the f/1.8 might not have received a shot to fit in my kit had it been around at the time.
  16. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    The 15mm/1.7 is another option worth considering. The leap from 14mm to 17mm might come as a bit of a shock. And while you have the 9-18mm, it's not really a suitable lens for indoor photos of people. You're giving up at least 3 stops compared to the 15mm/1.7.

    Depends on your most common kinds of photography, really.
  17. Johnny The Greek

    Johnny The Greek Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 19, 2015
    I owned the 14mm and liked it but wanted the wider 12mm f2. Never looked back.

    As for replacing the 20mm f1.7 with the 17mm f1.8, I think most will agree that the picture quality of the 20mm is significantly better across the lens, but the autofocus on the 17mm blows the 20mm away. I'm happy enough with the 17mm's quality.
  18. astrostl

    astrostl Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 4, 2014
    St. Louis, MO
    Justin Honold
    I currently own, among others, the P14/2.5, P15/1.7, O17/1.8, and P20/1.7.

    I'll be getting rid of the P14 and O17, and keeping the P15 and P20.
  19. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    I still have all three lenses. I agree that the 17mm fits as a replacement for the two pancakes, but it isn't as compact as either, and not quite as amazing as the 20mm when that lens is cooking, but still sharp in its own right. If you like keeping stuff to a minimum, do it.

    However, the OP might consider getting the O45mm and keeping the two pancakes. The longer focal length really fits as a portrait lens and fast mid-tele.
  20. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011
    I have owned all three. I like all three alot. You cannot go wrong.

    The 14 is just so small that is just typifies what is possible with m43.

    The 20 is the same thing. So small for what it does. Auto-focus is generally just fine and newer bodies have made this even better. Occasionally is hunts and pokes around but generally if focuses quickly and accurately. Something about this focal length just seems right to me also.

    The 17 is not as sharp when pixel peeping but for taking actual photos, it does a great job. Very nice feel to it and it focuses fast. Not as small as the Panny's mentioned but not larger either.

    I still prefer the 20mm. Maybe that is because it was my first "great" m43 lens and I have many photos with it. It does look very nice on the EM5-Mk2 and E-P5.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  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.