Favorite m-4/3 "Aftermarket" lens in the 35mm equivalent-ish range?

[Benjamin Marks]

Micro 4/3 has put an odd spin on the concept of "aftermarket" -- after all all lenses, even from front line makers can be used on any m-4/3 camera. But I am intrigued by the vast number of new-ish brands out there making lenses in a m-4/3 mount (Yongnuo, DJI, Laowa, 7 Artisans, TTArtisan, Sigma etc.). Do you have a favorite in the 17mm range? I am looking for a 35mm-40mm equivalent lens for a modest price. Bonus points for a picture demonstrating the visual qualities of the same. Fixed focal only. . . don't like the lens speed on the zooms.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Interesting. 60 views, but no responses. I take it from this that our most active members are not using much of the "new brand" glass. I guess it is kind of unfair to lump Sigma in with the newbies, as they have been around for decades and aren't really a bargain-basement brand in any sense these days. I guess I will proceed on a "you get what you pay for/caveat emptor" basis.

 

[aw614]

I bought the Laowa 17mm but I haven't used it much outside of indoor shots for stuff I was selling on fb marketplace and ebay. Not sure how it would compare to the olympus 17mm 1.8

I do believe most of the Laowa m43 lenses are optimized for the m43 image circle, unlike some of the 7artisans and ttarsian lenses that are just aps-c lenses on a m43 mount.

 

[Evergreen States]

Photographer and filmmaker Khalik Allah made a documentary called Field N****s shot at night on a single street corner in Manhattan with a GH4 and Voigtlander 17mm ƒ0.95, often wide open. I don't know where you can see the movie, but the trailer is here:


I strongly recommend his book Souls Against the Concrete, which was shot on the same corner, same subject matter, with a Nikon F2, Portra 160 and a 55mm ƒ1.2, often wide open.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Interesting. 60 views, but no responses. I take it from this that our most active members are not using much of the "new brand" glass. I guess it is kind of unfair to lump Sigma in with the newbies, as they have been around for decades and aren't really a bargain-basement brand in any sense these days. I guess I will proceed on a "you get what you pay for/caveat emptor" basis.

I've been using micro 4/3 for all of my color work for the last 5 or 6 years, though recently I have started shooting some color film, too. I didn't comment because I haven't tried any of those lenses. I have one Panasonic lens (45-150mm f4-5.6) and four Olympus lenses (7-14mm f2.8 Pro, 12-40mm f2.8 Pro, 45mm f1.8, and 60mm f2.8 Macro). I can say that the Olympus 17mm f1.8 is one of the worst lenses I have ever tried. I bought and returned four of them and all were the same. Razor sharp in the center, with rapidly decreasing resolution as soon as you moved away from dead center. Halfway between center and edge, there was no fine detail resolution at all. Stopping down did not help. Horrid. I've seen several reviews that tested resolution at different apertures and all agreed with my experience. This is an expensive lens, not a cheap one.

The 17mm f1.2 Olympus Pro is an excellent lens, but is HUGE and very expensive. I honestly don't know what 17mm to recommend. I used to have a 15mm f1.7 Panasonic-Leica that was wonderful. I foolishly sold it. That's probably the closest to 17 you'll get that gives great sharpness without being ultra-expensive.

 

[wlewisiii]

When I used m4/3 - Olympus E-PL1 & E-P3 - my favorite was the Olympus 17/2.8 which doesn't really fit what you were asking about. Wonderful little inexpensive lens. So I never felt any urge to buy anything from a third party or, for that matter, a faster lens. Later I'd trade it in when I fell down the Nikon rabbit hole but virtually all the good shots I took with m4/3 were in 1:1 aspect ratio using that lens.

 

[JeffS7444]

Having already purchased the Olympus 17/2.8 and 1.2 Pro, as well as the Panasonic 20/1.7, do I really need to keep exploring those focal lengths?

The 17/2.8 has some "character" which isn't displeasing, IMO. It's also tiny (quite a bit smaller than the Panasonic 20/1.7) and relatively inexpensive.

 

[Archiver]

Olympus 17mm f1.8 - a very acceptable lens, sharp in the middle, good colours. Light and small enough to go in a pocket as an afterthought/backup. There is some vignetting wide open, and the light transmission isn't that good, which is common to the Olympus f1.8 primes.

GX85 - Door 13 by Archiver, on Flickr

Olympus 17mm f1.2 Pro - a stellar lens with high light transmision, beautiful sharpness, solid build quality and smooth manual focus. Cons: relatively large and expensive.

GX85 - Flowers in the Sun by Archiver, on Flickr

Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95 - heavier than the Olympus 17mm Pro lens, and strangely has more shallow depth of field at f1.2 than the Olympus at f1.2. It is glowy wide open, so I usually use it at f1.2 anyway. Like all the Voigtlander m43 primes, it creates distinctive and attractive sunstars, even at f5.6. The bokeh highlights are angular as opposed to round when stopped down. The focus ring is super smooth.

I have not used any of the more recent 17mm lenses like TTArtisan, Pergear, Mitakon et al as I am happy with what I have. The only one which might tempt me is the SLR Magic 17mm T1.5 Microprime cine lens, although it would have to beat the Voigtlander to join the kit.

 

[JoeV]

This is from the TT Artisans 17mm F/1.4, shot on the old Lumix G5, wide open at F/1.4.

Here's the same lens mounted to the Lumix G7:




I find this lens is great for video, the front aperture ring is click less and well-dampened, while the rear focus ring is very smooth.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I find this lens is great for video, the front aperture ring is click less and well-dampened, while the rear focus ring is very smooth.

Joe: Do you accidentally change the aperture when manually focusing? Or does the damping you mentioned keep that from happening? Nice performance from a $75 lens!

 

[SimonPi]

This is a Voigtlander 15mm from 1999 used on an Olympus EM5.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

^^^love the quality of the light you captured, Simon. You can "feel" the quiet.

 

[JoeV]

Joe: Do you accidentally change the aperture when manually focusing? Or does the damping you mentioned keep that from happening? Nice performance from a $75 lens!

I don’t see this problem when using it, the aperture and focus rings being well separated on the front and back of the lens barrel, respectively.

 

[Bingley]

It’s not really aftermarket and it’s a little wider than you’re looking for, but I cannot say enough good things about the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm f1.7 ASPH. I picked up a lightly used sample from KEH and took it on a three week trip through Slovenia and Croatia; I dusted off my Olympus Pen F for the trip. The resolving power of this lens is very impressive; the files I got from the m43 sensor on the Oly Pen w/ this lens blew me away. Here are a few sample images:

A house in Goce by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

Istrian countryside by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

Pula doorway by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr

 

[Bingley]

I also have the Olympus M-Zuiko 17mm f1.8 that Chris Crawford mentions. My sample is OK, but doesn’t hold a candle to the DG Summilux, even though it has some nice handling features. The Summilux is sharp enough that you can crop images down to 17mm w/out much loss in sharpness.

 

[Bingley]

Suffice it to say, the DG Summilux has altered my view of what I can get from a m43 sensor. Paired w/ the Oly Pen F, I think the files compare favorably to the APS-C sensor in my Leica CL digital. Anyway, this is getting far afield from the OP’s question.

 

[Bingley]

Having already purchased the Olympus 17/2.8 and 1.2 Pro, as well as the Panasonic 20/1.7, do I really need to keep exploring those focal lengths?

The 17/2.8 has some "character" which isn't displeasing, IMO. It's also tiny (quite a bit smaller than the Panasonic 20/1.7) and relatively inexpensive.

I had that lens and sold it to buy the 17mm f1.8. Not sure in retrospect that was a good move. The little f2.8 lens was nice.

 

[Bingley]

I just picked up the second version of the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f1.7, I had the first version but gave it away. The second version has an annoying thing: the autofocus continues to hunt even after you’ve taken a picture. I’ve set my camera to manual focus and will see if that’s more satisfactory. Optically, the Lumix 20mm is a superb optic.

 

[JeffS7444]

I just picked up the second version of the Panasonic Lumix 20mm f1.7, I had the first version but gave it away. The second version has an annoying thing: the autofocus continues to hunt even after you’ve taken a picture. I’ve set my camera to manual focus and will see if that’s more satisfactory. Optically, the Lumix 20mm is a superb optic.

That doesn't sound like a lens thing, it sounds as if your camera body has some sort of prefocus feature activated.

 

[Bingley]

That doesn't sound like a lens thing, it sounds as if your camera body has some sort of prefocus feature activated.

Thanks! I’ll look into that.