johnny9fingers
Well-known
I have the 17mm on my E-P2 and have been happy with it, but keep wondering about the 20/1.7. Is it that much better than the 17mm?? With the new firmware auto focus is pretty zippy now and am happy with the photos I get. You know how it is, you start reading about something in the forums and it peaks your interest. So please tell me if there is noticable differences in the images they produce, quicker or slower AF, noisier operation, ect...
Thanks,
John
Thanks,
John
Broke
Established
Hi John,
I own both and have shot both extensively. The 20mm really is much better lens overall. Besides the extra speed (which is extraordinarily useful), it is much better in the corners at f/2.8, and really isn't much larger size wise. It has a little bit of coma wide open in the corners, but much less than, say, the 35mm Nokton classic that I also own. Has a more useful 46mm filter ring. The 20 is perhaps a touch quieter, haven't noticed any speed difference between the two.
Hope that helps,
Cheers,
Jim
I own both and have shot both extensively. The 20mm really is much better lens overall. Besides the extra speed (which is extraordinarily useful), it is much better in the corners at f/2.8, and really isn't much larger size wise. It has a little bit of coma wide open in the corners, but much less than, say, the 35mm Nokton classic that I also own. Has a more useful 46mm filter ring. The 20 is perhaps a touch quieter, haven't noticed any speed difference between the two.
Hope that helps,
Cheers,
Jim
cysewski
Member
I have both, but use the 17mm more because I like the focal length better. The idea of the 20mm is great, but I find I miss the extra width. It guess it depends on the kind of photography that you take and what you use your images for. I sold the 17mm and then bought another one because of the focal length.
Steve
Steve
Vince Lupo
Whatever
The 20 is indeed a fantastic lens - actually seems to be the perfect match for the E-P2.
However - if you need extra width, that 7-14 Panasonic is awesome, and is undoubtedly the quietest AF lens I've ever used.
However - if you need extra width, that 7-14 Panasonic is awesome, and is undoubtedly the quietest AF lens I've ever used.
johnny9fingers
Well-known
Thanks for the replies. I guess what I'm looking for is if you were to look at two identical photos and the typical response would be:
hmmm shot with the 17mm, nice.
hmmm shot with the 20mm, WOW!!!!!
otherwise I will probably stick with the 17mm....
hmmm shot with the 17mm, nice.
hmmm shot with the 20mm, WOW!!!!!
otherwise I will probably stick with the 17mm....
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
John,
You won't want to hear this but truth is, ya need both.
FOV is the deciding factor. I have both and will keep using both....
If I ever tire of the 9-18.
You won't want to hear this but truth is, ya need both.
FOV is the deciding factor. I have both and will keep using both....
If I ever tire of the 9-18.
maxleung
Member
You will never look back with the panny 20mm f1.7
johnny9fingers
Well-known
Thanks again for the replies folks. The Panny has quite a following, but I think I'm going stick with and master Olys 17mm. Partly because money suddenly got a bit tight right now, but also because of whats out there on the horizon. According to the lens roadmap Olympus will be releasing a 45mm Macro next spring. I think I'll start saving for that right now. 45mm, (90mm) on the E-P2 would be almost perfect for portraits..... And I want a prime with a bit of reach. Just hope it's f2.0 or faster...
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
Of course, for a mere pittance and song you can right now get an adapter and any number of nice 50mm-f/1.4 legacy lenses for an equivalent 100mm-f/1.4 manually focused portrait lens (portait implying it doesn't necessarily need AF).
If there's any reason to use manual lenses on u-4/3, it's in this type of application; which in my thinking doesn't justify the cost of an AF, u-4/3 mount "new" lens. YMMV.
~Joe
If there's any reason to use manual lenses on u-4/3, it's in this type of application; which in my thinking doesn't justify the cost of an AF, u-4/3 mount "new" lens. YMMV.
~Joe
johnny9fingers
Well-known
I have adapters for M42 screw mount and OM to m4/3rds with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 150/4 Super Takumars, and 28/2.8, 50/1.8 mij OM lenses. So I'm good for manual focus legacy glass......
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
I haven't used panny but I like the 17mm oly very much. I prefer to use manual glass on my E-P2 most of the time, but since I lack in a wide end at the moment I use my oly 17mm as "street" lens and I like what I'm getting out of it. Only gripe is with manual focus with these lenses (or pretty much with any af lens for that matter) but I can live with that.
One picture from 17mm altho not from the street but from indoors. I like the close focusing of this lense and that "almost 35mm look".
One picture from 17mm altho not from the street but from indoors. I like the close focusing of this lense and that "almost 35mm look".
