Should I wait for Oly 12mm f/1.2 or fork money for 17mm f/1.2?

I started using m43 with Oly EP1 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 - and it was superb.

I currently (mostly) use Oly EM1 + Pana 25mm f/1.4.

I have always felt that 25mm is too long for indoor parties/group photos etc.

My Oly 12-40mm f/2.8 is more useful, but I have always preferred no flash, so desire a brighter lens.

I have been waiting for the Oly 17mm f/1.2 (and now it is available to purchase); But I just read the rumor that Olympus is also building a 12mm f/1.2 which may be out this year (long wait).

I most probably cannot use shutter faster than 1/20 sec for indoor photos with people; so I will have the same exposure with either 12mm or 17mm (only the FOV will change).

I am also expecting 12mm to be similarly priced/sized/weighted to 17mm.

Confused. Any thoughts/suggestions?

is kind of specialized FL. For group shot indoors it generally is wider than needed and not a flattering FL for people. For this sort of thing the Oly 17 1.8 is fine. Really no need for the expensive glass for this sort of stuff.

If you want something a little wider the PL 15 1.7 would be a good choice also.

--
Jonathan

The FOV is completely different. Choose the lens based on which you prefer. The 12mm f1.2 is obviously not out yet but if you prefer 12mm then either wait or maybe get the PL 12mm 1.4 which got pretty good reviews I hear.

If you are looking for fast low light lenses, then I would not get any of the f/1.2 lenses. They are great for being weather sealed, sharp, and producing shallow DOF. But they have a transmission of about T1.8 due to the large number of elements.

The smaller and cheaper f/1.8 primes have a transmission of about T2.0. The difference is too small for the amount of money involved.

I haven't seen any transmission measurements for the 12mm f/2; with 11 elements it might be worse than the other primes. But by analogy the 12mm f/1.2 will likely be worse as well; and definitely way more expensive.

All we have on the 12/1.2 is a patent filing, so 2018 isn't in the cards IMHO. I'd start a one-year countdown clock when (if ever) a mockup is displayed at some camera show.

The tiny 12/2.0 is an option in the meantime, along with the 17/1.2 (which seems impressive to my eye in the early results). 17mm is reasonably the wide end of normal lens range, similar to how 35mm serves this purpose for the 135 format. You don't worry about distracting stretching of your subjects at the frame edges, so for group photos it's a "safe" focal length. I'd love to have one, frankly, and the new Sigma 16/1.4 also seem attractive for a lot less money.

Cheers,

Rick

I would prefer 17mm for those occasions. However, I did find my 15mm tight at times indoors. Why is the PL12mm f1.4 not a consideration? It has amazing sharpness and seems to have a warm character whereas the Olympus lenses are quite clinical imho. The T stop may be the same too.

Newbie12345 said:

I started using m43 with Oly EP1 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 - and it was superb.

I currently (mostly) use Oly EM1 + Pana 25mm f/1.4.

I have always felt that 25mm is too long for indoor parties/group photos etc.

My Oly 12-40mm f/2.8 is more useful, but I have always preferred no flash, so desire a brighter lens.

Click to expand...

A wider aperture means shallower depth of field, which can bite you real hard when you least expect it. Like seriously, I took a small group photo (5 people) with the PanaLeica 12mm at f/1.4 and one of the people in the shot was noticeably out of focus and another was slightly out. That's because the group was not perfectly lined up in front of the camera and that one person was like a head's width further away. The shot that turned up well with everyone in focus was taken at f/2.2. IDK, maybe that's just field curvature in action (that's my suspicion), but either way, f/1.2 can be tricky even on a wide lens.

Also, a more complex optical construction of some of those extreme lenses means that you are actually not getting more light than a simpler f/1.4 lens. The record breaker here is the Olympus 25mm f/1.2 with its 19 lens elements in 14 groups. But both the 17mm a 45mm have less glass in them, so probably are not as bad. And the patented Oly 12mm is 16 lens elements (10 or 11 groups I think) so maybe it too will not be as bad.

Newbie12345 said:

I am also expecting 12mm to be similarly priced/sized/weighted to 17mm.

Click to expand...

I would expect it to be more expensive, actually. I'd say it's a bit more of a niche lens type.

Newbie12345 said:

Confused. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Click to expand...

Why not just buy the Panasonic Leica 15mm f/1.7? An in-between focal length and a much cheaper proposition. And there's also the new Sigma 16mm f/1.4. Although that is a bit of a monster.

Newbie12345 said:

I most probably cannot use shutter faster than 1/20 sec for indoor photos with people; so I will have the same exposure with either 12mm or 17mm (only the FOV will change).

I am also expecting 12mm to be similarly priced/sized/weighted to 17mm.

Confused. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Click to expand...

Sure.

Use a larger format camera, and shoot at higher ISOs with faster lenses.

Or, use flash.

As noted above, the f/1.2 lenses don't transmit light at f/1.2. Those lenses aren't designed for low light use, they're specialty lenses for portraits. The emphasis is on shallow DoF, bokeh characteristics, and other rendering qualities.

I'd start with flash, as it can improve the sharpness of the images. Bounce it off the ceiling, and it will be less distracting for your subjects, and provide a reasonably smooth result.

jwilliams said:

is kind of specialized FL. For group shot indoors it generally is wider than needed and not a flattering FL for people.

Click to expand...

There is nothing "non-flattering" in that focal length (as in any). It is always the distance that is the flattering or not.

So simply use the Mpix in the sensor for something, shoot with 12mm from same distance as 17mm, 20mm, 30mm or 45mm or as wanted and just crop.

Cropping just makes limitation how large you can in the end print. So 2x focal length difference is fairly easy still to do as it is just 1/4 of the Mpix area. So 16Mpix becomes 4Mpix and that is still a plenty for many cases.

I agree. A 12mm m43 lens is pretty wide and if taking pictures of people, a wide angle lens can easily distort facial features if you're not careful. I think the 17 would be a much better general purpose lens for most folks. My suggestion is that since you have the 12-40. Set it on 12 for a while and see how it works for you, do the same at 17. Tape it if you need to.

Definitely 17mm is better for groups over 12mm. I own the 17mm f/1.8 and have used the 17mm f/1.2, and the difference in optics is not small.

Newbie12345 said:

I started using m43 with Oly EP1 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 - and it was superb.

I currently (mostly) use Oly EM1 + Pana 25mm f/1.4.

I have always felt that 25mm is too long for indoor parties/group photos etc.

My Oly 12-40mm f/2.8 is more useful, but I have always preferred no flash, so desire a brighter lens.

I have been waiting for the Oly 17mm f/1.2 (and now it is available to purchase); But I just read the rumor that Olympus is also building a 12mm f/1.2 which may be out this year (long wait).

I most probably cannot use shutter faster than 1/20 sec for indoor photos with people; so I will have the same exposure with either 12mm or 17mm (only the FOV will change).

I am also expecting 12mm to be similarly priced/sized/weighted to 17mm.

Confused. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Click to expand...

17mm and 12mm are very different focal lengths, not interchangeable. Generally people photos with a WA such as 12mm are not quite appropriate.

Newbie12345 said:

I started using m43 with Oly EP1 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 - and it was superb.

I currently (mostly) use Oly EM1 + Pana 25mm f/1.4.

I have always felt that 25mm is too long for indoor parties/group photos etc.

My Oly 12-40mm f/2.8 is more useful, but I have always preferred no flash, so desire a brighter lens.

I have been waiting for the Oly 17mm f/1.2 (and now it is available to purchase); But I just read the rumor that Olympus is also building a 12mm f/1.2 which may be out this year (long wait).

I most probably cannot use shutter faster than 1/20 sec for indoor photos with people; so I will have the same exposure with either 12mm or 17mm (only the FOV will change).

I am also expecting 12mm to be similarly priced/sized/weighted to 17mm.

Confused. Any thoughts/suggestions?

Click to expand...

You've had lots of technical replies and most of them confused me (my problem I guess). All I can add is what I found out over the weekend at a big family doo.
16 people in a large house, lousy weather so indoor photos only, the majority in the evening with the usual indoor lighting.
I had my G80, 12-32 f2.8, 15 f1.7 and 25 f1.4.plus flash gun.
For 2-4 people I could get away with the 25mm faster lens (15 way too wide) , no flash. But as soon as I took bigger groups I needed the zoom as it was wider but also because I had to use the flash to get an acceptable dof( at that point that faster aperture becomes irrelevant).

I learnt that fast primes are great if you are able to rely on ambient only or can find people who can pose for seconds whilst you take a picture using a tripod

Anyway, there you go, my thoughts
--
Adrian
An amateur, atheist, alliterationist

So you don't gain as much low light capability with the F1,2 lenses, in fact, your PL 1,4/25 is T1,8 as well. So both lenses have the same light transmission wide open.

The PL 1,7/15 is T2,0, not quite a half stop less. So this seems to be the lens you are looking for, and, what is more, it is between the 17mm and 12mm you are interested in.

Peter

I like 12mm people shots - some examples -








Some key stoning due to shooting from a low angle





All shots taken with a 12mm prime T1.6 at Byron Bay. I love either wide or long, and currently the PL8-18 lives on my camera.

Tommi K1 said:

jwilliams said:

is kind of specialized FL. For group shot indoors it generally is wider than needed and not a flattering FL for people.

Click to expand...

There is nothing "non-flattering" in that focal length (as in any). It is always the distance that is the flattering or not.

So simply use the Mpix in the sensor for something, shoot with 12mm from same distance as 17mm, 20mm, 30mm or 45mm or as wanted and just crop.

Cropping just makes limitation how large you can in the end print. So 2x focal length difference is fairly easy still to do as it is just 1/4 of the Mpix area. So 16Mpix becomes 4Mpix and that is still a plenty for many cases.

Click to expand...

if you like the distorted look go ahead and use one. That's your right. Don't think you'll find anyone else who would prefer that to a 35mm equiv for people pics though.

So many informative/interesting responses.

T-stops is something that I was not considering (assumed it would be similar for most Pana/Oly primes). It is true that more elements there are, generally higher the T-stop. I don't even know if T-stop data is readily available for all lenses.

It appears that, I should actually be looking at T-stops for low-light capability instead of just the f number.

What I do not know if the camera decides (Oly EM1 mark I in my case) the aperture based on f-number or does it actually base it on observed T-stop? I would wager that even if the camera decides the shutter based on f-number, images would be better for a lens with a smaller T-stop (higher light intensity on sensor pixels).

I am checking out Pana 12mm f/1.4 also to see if it would be a good fit.

The aperture is the f number and dictates depth of field. The t stop is how much light passes through the. For most lenses the t stop is higher than the f stop.

Nice shots Roderick and I really like the cropping. Your shots are outdoors and I love the results!

What I hate with indoor groups are when they are grouped in "rows" and then with wide angles the folks in the back heads are so much smaller than those in the front.

As such I'd really go with the 17 as a minimum and ideally try to keep the folks from lining up in rows!

To the poster, if it's really between the Oly's I'd get the 17 now and use it...when the 12 comes out rent it and if it knocks out your 17 sell the 17 and buy a 12.

Like others though if you are really going to be doing folks / groups at different distances from the camera go with Oly 17 f1.8 or Oly 12 f2 (Assuming it's the Oly's only still) since you'll need to stop down anyhow.

Anyhow, let us know what you decide and how it works out for you.

Dan

If you think 17 is wide enough... problem solved. But 12mm can always be cropped or zoomed with your feet although some extra edge "stretching" of group portraits is not desirable.

I would use 12-40 at 12 and 2.8 when 12 is essential and get the 17 1.2... unless your history of need shows 12 being used a lot.