New Olympus 17mm 1.8

Started Mar 7, 2014 | Discussions thread
Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 21,468
Re: New Olympus 17mm 1.8

micksh6 wrote:

FrankS009 wrote:

“Photographers, like few other artists I can imagine, have an insanely personal relationship with their gear. …we can’t help it that our craft is so dependent on gear, but it’s scary how quickly the gear becomes the not the means but the end. “ This statement from David duChemin, one of my favourite authors about photography (and whom I quote in my signature line), reminds me just how attached we can become to our cameras, our lenses, and to the companies that produce them.

This thread began with an ode in praise of a particular lens by an owner. It then became an attack on critics of the lens, and against another lens that was perceived as a rival. A great deal of time has been spent on assertions about whether more people prefer one over the other, or quasi technical analyses of the differences from the points of view of owners, and sometimes of good photographers who write blogs where they give personal judgments not divorced from their own strong feelings and attachments. People feel what they feel.

Throughout the thread, Anders W. has taken a position that infuriates those that oppose him because he simply does not accept untested hypotheses and statements based on personal opinions. He has been called the most intelligent member of the forum; that may or may not be the case, but he certainly is one of the most rigorous in his judgments. He has both Olympus and Panasonic lenses, so he does not speak from the point of view of one company or another. No doubt he is attached to his gear too, but he is willing to stand up for what he thinks. Some of us might agree and let him do the work for us. Others might not. But for one I consider what he has been saying in this thread to be based on good sense, and a certain amount of restraint.

I like seeing these "Anders vs the World" fights

Why? The explanation you tried doesn't apply (see below).

because I'm always wondering how it's possible to put so much time and energy to defend some rather minor point.

Evidently you put even more energy into defending the opposite point of view, which by definition must be equally minor.

Especially if the point is wrong.

Which it hasn't been proven to be.

When 20mm lens reputation is in danger everything goes into a fight including double standards.

What about when the 17 mm lens reputation is in danger, as in this thread. Any different?

If one of very few tests confirms Anders's point of view it doesn't matter if the test was scientific or controlled.

Anders likes referring to Pekka Potka's test, but there is no mentioning of subject magnification in that test. I highly doubt that Pekka Potka kept FOV the same between different lenses, and other conditions are unknown.

On the other hand, when test results are opposite to Anders's view, the tests are put under unprecedented scrutiny, my tests are no exception.

You got that wrong. As I point out here

I originally believed the "received wisdom" that the AF of the 20 was significantly slower than that of other lenses. Hence, I was surprised to see Potka's findings and decided to test things myself to see whether he was right. I found that he was. The reason is that, unlike you, he didn't search for border-line conditions, where the slightest of differences would set one lens hunting and the other not.

I did several tests of 20mm, 45mm, 25mm F1.4, 17mm F1.8 and other lenses and all tests show 20mm F1.7 measurably slower than other lenses. Precisely - about 100 milliseconds slower when 20mm doesn't hunt, but it also hunts more often in the same conditions when other lenses don't:
Another test few months later, fixing flaws of previous method:

Of course I was accused in bias and all deadly sins because I didn't position focus box at exactly the same place in the first test. But, later I showed that such small errors don't matter:

Clearly, you didn't. You tried test after test after test and they were all shown to be subject to confirmation bias.

20mm F1.7 will be slower than other lenses anyway, regardless of test method. What matters more - focus target surface. 20mm mostly has problems with curved targets like human faces (where we often want to focus), that is at least on Olympus cameras. Focus tests on flat walls may not show 20mm slowness that clear.

As you know, I have long since proven that wrong. The target I used in the test of mine to which I linked in this thread is about as curved as the face of the toy chicken you used.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow