Heated debate about 17mm/1.8

Started Sep 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
tt321 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,450
Re: Where is the heat.?

gotompoes wrote:

tt321 wrote:

Let me make a hitherto unmade or under-made point: Have you noticed that the 35mm FoV is usually covered with competent but non-stellar primes if you look at almost any system? Even expensive items such as the 24/1.8 E-mount fail to really impress. Before the appearance of the recent Sigma 35mm/1.4 for FF, almost no truly 1st class testers have emerged at this FoV. The 17/1.8 is just very normal, competent but no MTF king.

That is an interesting point of view but then it remains remarkable that a zoom on the compact Sony RX100II performed substantial better. I conclude that the Fuji X100S and the Sony RX1 have both stellar lenses. The 35 mm focal length is very popular and therefore assume that it is important for camera manufacturers to produce the best lens they can to support their camera sales.
Why did i enter the m4/3 arena: because of the Panasonic Leica 25mm, the 12mm and the 45mm lenses. I am committed to the m4/3 system and do not wish to offend the owners of the 17mm 1.8
The recommendations for the 25,12,45 and 75mm lenses are unqualified positive.

I am sure you will be able to find quite a few 35mm FoV primes in a number of different lines on larger sensor formats than 1" performing not better or even less good than the RX100 in certain situations (in good light as you described for instance). In this regard the 17/1.8 is just being normal

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow