The lowly Oly 17 2.8 - showing some love

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by keko, May 25, 2013.

  1. keko

    keko Mu-43 Rookie

    May 19, 2013
    I've read endless threads about the shortcomings of the Oly 17 2.8.

    However, in my modest collection of lenses it seems to have found its place for its consistent delivery of "punchy" out of camera images.

    Here are a few recent shots, all straight out of camera only applying autocontrast.

    Attached Files:

  2. LDraper

    LDraper Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 4, 2011
    Albuquerque, NM
    I have an affection for that lens too. At the moment I head out with it on my EP3 with the Oly 45 in a pocket or a small pouch. It's a very relaxed FOV that I especially like for family groupings. But as you show, it's good for landscapes as well.

    Where are these taken by the way? They have a nice feel.
  3. keko

    keko Mu-43 Rookie

    May 19, 2013

    All shot were taken in or near Barcelona, Spain, where I live.

    I just bought the Pana 14 2.5 yesterday with a DMW-GWC1 adapter (11mm eq) and after testing it today, got the initial impression that the Oly 17 2.8 is more contrasty and saturated. On the other hand the Pana seems sharper and quicker to focus.

    I'm just starting out on m43, and planning to get the Oly 45 as well, heared only good things about it, and it doesn't break the bank.
  4. SkiHound

    SkiHound Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 28, 2012
    keko, I've given some thought to the 17 and will probably pick one up at some point. The 45 would make a very nice companion to the 17. It's remarkably small and light and would easily slip into a pocket for a nice two lens kit. It also produces really nice output.
  5. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Oct 9, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    It is a neat little lens, but I sold mine because I wan't using it so much and I had thoughts of getting the 17/1.8. However, it occurred to me that the reason I wasn't using the 17/2.8 so much wasn't because I didn't think it was a decent lens, but because it wasn't quite my focal length.