17 v. 12-40 @ 17?

richarddd · Mar 5, 2015

I'm considering buying the Olympus 17/1.8 as a light walk around lens. I have the 12-40 and am wondering how the 17 compares. From other posts, it appears the general consensus is that the 12-40 is a touch sharper while the 17 has a bit better contrast. Of course, the 17 is better at apertures wider than f/2.8.

Does anyone have comparison photos taken with the two lenses? Anything to add?

Dave Bennett · Mar 5, 2015

I am in the exact same boat. I want to use my E-PL5 for street photography as it is nice and small. I don't want to use my 12-40 with it for obvious reasons but would like to pair the body with a couple of primes for use on the street. The nice and small 45mm f1.8 (which I also have) will be good for slightly more distant shots whilst the 17mm f1.8 (which I don't have) will be the 'classic' street lens. A nice compact systen without the bulk of a zoom lens.

aliasfox · Mar 5, 2015

I don't have the 12-40, but I've used the 17mm and 45mm as walkaround kit in a city.

The 17mm is great from a handling perspective - the focus clutch even works really well when I want to focus in the dark without the focus assist lamp coming on. It's small and light - it's shorter than the 45mm (with aftermarket hood), and lighter/smaller than the PL25 (with hood), making it incredibly easy to carry/swing around. In fact, on my trip to Cambodia, after carrying around my 14-54mm for 8 hours, I ended up using the 17mm as my backup lens much more often than my 12-32.

The lens is lightning fast to focus - probably similar to the 12-40. It's faster than any of my other m4/3 lenses, including the 45mm, PL25, and 12-32, none of which are slouches in the focusing department either.

From a sharpness and IQ perspective, I feel it's pretty much a wash with the 45mm. They are both pretty sharp from wide open, so the extra stop over the 12-40 is very usable. This is in contrast to my copy of the PL25, which is absolutely phenomenal at f/2.8-5.6, but softer at f/1.4 - of course, what I perceive as softness may also be due to high ISO noise (only go bigger than f/2 when I'm expecting ISO1600 or higher). I'd give an edge in contrast to the 45mm, but I don't have any complaints about either from that perspective.

I thought that I wouldn't use my 17mm after I got my PL25, but I end up using both in tandem on my two bodies. If the 17mm and PL25 are 'just different enough' from a handling perspective, then I'm going to bet it'll be a very nice change from the 12-40.

Hope this helps (somewhat).

jonnieb · Mar 5, 2015

I bought the 17 with my E-M1, then later acquired the 12-40.

There is something about the 17 mm pics I really like. It's fast, fast focusing, the perfect size for m4/3 cameras, has the manual focus clutch, and is a great focal length. What's not to like?

Inthecage83 · Mar 5, 2015

The Pany 15 is a real nice lens. Small, sharp and very fast. Kinda an in betweener, but in between two good very good focal lengths. Mine is every bit as fine as my Pany 25 in terms of image quality. There are very few reviews you'll find mentioning the Oly 17 1.8 as superior, other than the fact if you have to have a 17.

Oli4D · Mar 5, 2015

richarddd said:
I'm considering buying the Olympus 17/1.8 as a light walk around lens. I have the 12-40 and am wondering how the 17 compares. From other posts, it appears the general consensus is that the 12-40 is a touch sharper while the 17 has a bit better contrast. Of course, the 17 is better at apertures wider than f/2.8.

Does anyone have comparison photos taken with the two lenses? Anything to add?

sebiruns · Mar 5, 2015

I had both lenses but unfortunately I cannot offer comparison photos as I never really directly compared them. My impression was though that the Oly 17 is less sharp - even at f2.8. It is not a dealbreaker though. My 12-40 feels like one of the sharpest lenses I have ever had. Even wide open it is very sharp. For a smaller setup I use the Panaleica 15 f1.7. It is a little sharper to me and I like the colors I get with the lens better than the 17mm. I liked the built quality of the 17mm better though and the manual focus works the same way as on the 12-40 which is an advantage to some. I actually liked the wider fov of the 15 a little better for indoor usage. That and the different out of focus rendering you get from the lens are possible reasons to choose it over the Oly. The 17mm is a good lens too and hadn't it been so close to the 15mm in terms of fov I would have kept it. It is always good to have a smaller setup than the 12-40 can offer.

K25 · Mar 5, 2015

2richarddd said:
Does anyone have comparison photos taken with the two lenses? Anything to add?

photos with backlight...

The 12-40 is very good but can produce flare, sometimes quite strong. Usually a small adjustment in framing the subject can solve the problem - but sometimes is difficult to see it on the back screen.

The 17mm is an excellent lens for backlight photos: never a bad surprise! I never compared directly with the 12-40 (would be intersting to do!) but from my experience I consider it better.

Here two recent examples of flare: one from 12-40mm. Actually no poor performance having the sun in the frame! And - being another possible choice - one from Pana 20mm. Despite of using a hood a strong flare: I consider it a poor lens for backlight photos.

Sorry, nothing similar to show from the 17mm!

Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 (at f8)

Panasonic 20mm f1.7 (at f6.3)

aliasfox · Mar 5, 2015

Here's some flare from the 17mm, though it could be caused by the Hoya filter on the front of the lens. Small and localized, on the ride side of the frame, mostly blue.

Drewpy · Mar 5, 2015

I now just use the 17 1.8. with my E-M5. There is 'something' about it I love: the size, feel, angle of view, it's all nice. When you're 'street shooting' people think I just have a film camera and it's all so compact and easy to carry all the time.

I'm selling my 12-40 2.8 because it's just too heavy to carry while I'm bouldering in the desert. I like a super light kit, which is why I went M43 in the first place. I sold my Nikon D200/18-200 because I got tired of lugging it around.

K25 · Mar 5, 2015

aliasfox said:
Here's some flare from the 17mm, though it could be caused by the Hoya filter on the front of the lens. Small and localized, on the ride side of the frame, mostly blue.

being so small, looks indeed like flare from the filter

eddiehawe · Mar 5, 2015

I don`t have the 12-40 but regularly use my em5 with 17mm as my walk around.

I love the build of this lens, it just feels substantially and weighty without being heavy. It is always in my bag (for work too), while I couldn't justify carrying around the 12-40 everyday due to its sheer size.

My copy is not super sharp but sharp enough for me even wide open. Sharpness sweetspot for me is around f4 but I could be wrong as I don't look at charts.

If I had a panasonic body I would consider the 15mm f1.7 but I don't like the idea of having an aperture ring which doesn't work (on olympus).

ristar · Mar 5, 2015

sebiruns said:
I had both lenses but unfortunately I cannot offer comparison photos as I never really directly compared them. My impression was though that the Oly 17 is less sharp - even at f2.8. It is not a dealbreaker though. My 12-40 feels like one of the sharpest lenses I have ever had. Even wide open it is very sharp. For a smaller setup I use the Panaleica 15 f1.7. It is a little sharper to me and I like the colors I get with the lens better than the 17mm. I liked the built quality of the 17mm better though and the manual focus works the same way as on the 12-40 which is an advantage to some. I actually liked the wider fov of the 15 a little better for indoor usage. That and the different out of focus rendering you get from the lens are possible reasons to choose it over the Oly. The 17mm is a good lens too and hadn't it been so close to the 15mm in terms of fov I would have kept it. It is always good to have a smaller setup than the 12-40 can offer.

I have both lenses as well. I bought the 12-40mm first. When I bought the 17mm f1.8 a few weeks ago, I did take comparison shots. However, I realized I am not very good and/or not well equipped to do it. I set up the camera on a tripod and tried not to bump it when changing lenses, but found that the view was different between the two lenses at the same focal length. I had a really hard time getting the same framing. I am hesitant to post the photos since someone is bound to complain I did not set it up properly. So given that caveat, if my photos are comparable, then I would say the 17mm f1.8 is definitely softer than the 12-40mm at equivalent apertures. Long story short, I was able to test three copies of the 17mm f1.8 and they all performed about the same, so copy variation should not be a factor. I don't find the difference in sharpness to be that big when viewed at a "normal" size. However, if you like to pixel peep then I think the difference is apparent, especially in the corners. This is consistent with sebiruns' impression as well as most reviews. Ultimately, I don't think I mind the difference in sharpness but I haven't had a chance to really put the 17mm f1.8 through its paces yet.

I bought the 17mm f1.8 because I found that there were situations where the depth of field at f2.8 was not quite shallow enough for my tastes, though definitely good enough. I wouldn't have bought the 17mm f1.8 if I didn't find it at a good price ($350 used, like new).

Jeff Tokayer · Mar 5, 2015

I never thought of getting this camera.

Sony Canada decided to close all their retail outlets, putting many items on clearance. I managed to get a brand new RX-1R for $1900 CDN.

To subsidize this purchase, I sold my 15/1.7, 17/1.8, 20/1.7, 25/1.4 and the E-P5. No regrets.

This camera oozes quality and it weighs about the same as the E-P5 body only. The full frame 35mm Zeiss lens is to die for.

My nickel, since the penny is now discontinued...

Jeff.

tkbslc · Mar 5, 2015

Inthecage83 said:
The Pany 15 is a real nice lens. Small, sharp and very fast. Kinda an in betweener, but in between two good very good focal lengths. Mine is every bit as fine as my Pany 25 in terms of image quality. There are very few reviews you'll find mentioning the Oly 17 1.8 as superior, other than the fact if you have to have a 17.

Absolutely agree. 15mm has amazing contrast and sharpness.

sebiruns · Mar 5, 2015

Jeff Tokayer said:
I never thought of getting this camera.

Sony Canada decided to close all their retail outlets, putting many items on clearance. I managed to get a brand new RX-1R for $1900 CDN.

To subsidize this purchase, I sold my 15/1.7, 17/1.8, 20/1.7, 25/1.4 and the E-P5. No regrets.

This camera oozes quality and it weighs about the same as the E-P5 body only. The full frame 35mm Zeiss lens is to die for.

My nickel, since the penny is now discontinued...

Jeff.

Good for you, Jeff. But that is a tradeoff that many would probably not want. A camera without viewfinder or tilt screen. No more interchangeable lenses means only 35mm - at a stellar quality though. Anyways, congrats to that price. This was truly a bargain. B&h currently sells it for 2800 US Dollars.

K25 · Mar 5, 2015

My 17mm f1.8 is a sharp lens. Maybe no biting microcontrast, but on urban landscapes I often see moiré effects in smallest details - even in the corners. To me that means that will be fine with a sensor with higher resolution. So I would never use the word "softness" speaking about it. Possibly corners are less good at 1.8, but I rarely use it full open and when I do mostly I don't need highest corner sharpness. Overall sharpness is in the same class of Panasonic 20mm and rendering usually is better.

The 12-40 is a great lens, wonderful in the 15-25mm range. I have both and the 17mm is my standard lens. But I don't chose the one over the other because of optical quality. Both are excellent. If I need a zoom, then 12-40. As walk-around lens, the 17mm. Wanting the best image quality I would use a tripod (usually I don't).

Yxa · Mar 6, 2015

Jeff Tokayer said:
I never thought of getting this camera.

Sony Canada decided to close all their retail outlets, putting many items on clearance. I managed to get a brand new RX-1R for $1900 CDN.

To subsidize this purchase, I sold my 15/1.7, 17/1.8, 20/1.7, 25/1.4 and the E-P5. No regrets.

This camera oozes quality and it weighs about the same as the E-P5 body only. The full frame 35mm Zeiss lens is to die for.

My nickel, since the penny is now discontinued...

Jeff.

Sweet deal!

I'm hoping for the RX-2 and that the RX-1 will be heavily discounted

ristar · Mar 6, 2015

K25 said:
My 17mm f1.8 is a sharp lens. Maybe no biting microcontrast, but on urban landscapes I often see moiré effects in smallest details - even in the corners. To me that means that will be fine with a sensor with higher resolution. So I would never use the word "softness" speaking about it. Possibly corners are less good at 1.8, but I rarely use it full open and when I do mostly I don't need highest corner sharpness. Overall sharpness is in the same class of Panasonic 20mm and rendering usually is better.

The 12-40 is a great lens, wonderful in the 15-25mm range. I have both and the 17mm is my standard lens. But I don't chose the one over the other because of optical quality. Both are excellent. If I need a zoom, then 12-40. As walk-around lens, the 17mm. Wanting the best image quality I would use a tripod (usually I don't).

I don't disagree with your statement that you typically won't choose one over the other over image quality. But I do want to point out I never called the 17mm f1.8 soft. I said it was softer in comparison to the 12-40mm. Perhaps it was a bad choice of words. It is less sharp, at least to my eyes and most reviews. Once again, I own both and am happy with both. So whether one is sharper than the other is of no consequence to me. Just stating my observations, albeit with little experience with the 17mm f1.8 so far.

17 v. 12-40 @ 17?

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts