Who's getting the Oly 17/1.8?

It is funny, but I'm not very tempted by the 35mm focal length for the very reason many like it. For years the fixed lens film cameras were offered with focals ranging between 32-38mm. That was considered to be the most versatile focal for allround use.

IMO it made sure that all your family folks were appearing too small in the frame, but that you were never able to encompass a whole monument in the frame.

As soon as I was able to get my first interchangeable lens camera, I stayed away from the standard focal range. My Contax G1 came with a 45mm Zeiss lens which was extremely sharp. But I didn't shoot much with it and immediately got a 28mm and a 90mm which got the most use. I also got the 21mm but ignored the 35mm F2 when it came out. Retrospectively I think that I could have made more use of the 45mm since it is a wonderfully sharp lens (happily it has become a 90mm on the mft cameras ).

Indeed I seem to have kept the same dislike for the 35mm focal range on mft cameras, since I'm using the 25mm F1.4 more than the 20mm although I'm always keeping it in my bag because it is sharp, light and small.

But I have to admit that the new Olympus 17mm F1.8 is a very cute lens and its clever MF mecanism allowing zone focusing should be more useful than that of the 12mm. However, the first lukewarm reviews concerning sharpness and the fact that it isn't one of my favorite focal range will refrain any possible further envies. That plus the fact that I do already have the 20 and 25mm.

--
rrr_hhh