Lenstip Review of 17mm f/1.2 is up: New Resolution Record!

The latest, from the only review site that matters:

https://www.lenstip.com/554.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_ED_17_mm_f_1.2_PRO_review.html

From the summary:

"After a slight misfire with the PRO 1.2/25 model which price, compared to its possibilities, was definitely too high, the continuation of PRO f/1.2 lenses series can be called completely successful. Both models announced in 2017, the M. Zuiko PRO 1.2/17 and the 1.2/45, proved to be optically excellent and both were able to break resolution records. Perhaps they aren’t completely free of any faults and you can’t call them cheap either but the number of their assets and their performance are truly impressive. As a result, the Micro 4/3 system finally got fast, fixed focal length lenses that are able to profit from the advantages connected to the size of the detector they are designed for."

Mine has really been excellent in HR mode!

Jan

Jan Chelminski said:

The latest, from the only review site that matters:

https://www.lenstip.com/554.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_ED_17_mm_f_1.2_PRO_review.html

From the summary:

"After a slight misfire with the PRO 1.2/25 model which price, compared to its possibilities, was definitely too high, the continuation of PRO f/1.2 lenses series can be called completely successful. Both models announced in 2017, the M. Zuiko PRO 1.2/17 and the 1.2/45, proved to be optically excellent and both were able to break resolution records. Perhaps they aren’t completely free of any faults and you can’t call them cheap either but the number of their assets and their performance are truly impressive. As a result, the Micro 4/3 system finally got fast, fixed focal length lenses that are able to profit from the advantages connected to the size of the detector they are designed for."

Mine has really been excellent in HR mode!

Jan

Click to expand...

The 17 is a stunner, but I do love that 25mm, I honestly think Olympus was trying to produce a beautiful lens rendering with the 25, not a resolution monster

Good find. I freaking love mine, not just for the obvious speed benefits but as an all-around, go-to prime. Could not be happier with it.

Will we see a 12/1.2 this year?

ETA--somebody apparently snagged the pouch from the test lens, that or they don't get the pouch in Europe. Cheeky!

Cheers,

Rick

--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.

Ab Latchin said:

Jan Chelminski said:

The latest, from the only review site that matters:

https://www.lenstip.com/554.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_ED_17_mm_f_1.2_PRO_review.html

From the summary:

"After a slight misfire with the PRO 1.2/25 model which price, compared to its possibilities, was definitely too high, the continuation of PRO f/1.2 lenses series can be called completely successful. Both models announced in 2017, the M. Zuiko PRO 1.2/17 and the 1.2/45, proved to be optically excellent and both were able to break resolution records. Perhaps they aren’t completely free of any faults and you can’t call them cheap either but the number of their assets and their performance are truly impressive. As a result, the Micro 4/3 system finally got fast, fixed focal length lenses that are able to profit from the advantages connected to the size of the detector they are designed for."

Mine has really been excellent in HR mode!

Jan

Click to expand...

The 17 is a stunner, but I do love that 25mm, I honestly think Olympus was trying to produce a beautiful lens rendering with the 25, not a resolution monster

Click to expand...

There is something special about the f/1.2 images from that 25mm f/1.2 Pro.


Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

It won this editor's award, so there!

Wait, whose editor's award?

Jan

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.


Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

I have found mine to be most enjoyable overall and is excellent wide open where it is really useful... one of those rare lenses that produce more than you are hoping for. The 25 sometimes is unpredictable but has even more magic when it does fire.

Jan Chelminski said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

It won this editor's award, so there!

Wait, whose editor's award?

Jan

Click to expand...

The editor of Lenstip. They give the Editors Award to the most impressive lenses.

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised they finally reviewed it! I would have preferred to see the Lens Tip review before buying one, but got a good deal on an open box item not long after launch. I'm loving the 17mm f1.2 and have no regrets whatsoever. I don't care that it didn't win an "Editor's Choice badge" as the results speak for themselves. I'm pretty confident the 17mm didn't get the badge because of the distortion, as Lens Tip has always harped on software correction of distortion. I personally don't care as long as the other optical qualities are not severely compromised.

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.



Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.






E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9





There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.



(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)



In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Its like someone has suddenly burst into the room speaking a foreign language. "Are you sure this is your room, dear, can you understand me?"

Jan

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone in this thread (at least this sub-thread) bring full frame into the equation. Lens Tip certainly did not in the review. Do they say anywhere that they consider this when handing out awards? Why do you always feel obligated to insert this stuff into discussions that have nothing to do with sensor size? People will say if I don't like it, I don't have to read or respond. So I will respond no further...but if you can always get a word in, I should be able to as well, just once...

ristar said:

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone in this thread (at least this sub-thread) bring full frame into the equation. Lens Tip certainly did not in the review. Do they say anywhere that they consider this when handing out awards? Why do you always feel obligated to insert this stuff into discussions that have nothing to do with sensor size?

Click to expand...

We are talking about a lens that's has got a fantastic review. The lens cost, its usefulness, and comparisons to other lenses with a similar cost and size must be relevant. Or should all these matters be ignored?

ristar said:

People will say if I don't like it, I don't have to read or respond. So I will respond no further...but if you can always get a word in, I should be able to as well, just once...

Click to expand...

I'm glad I do not live in the vacuum of Olympus or M43, or have bought too many of their expensive lenses to have to wear blinkers.

ristar said:

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone in this thread (at least this sub-thread) bring full frame into the equation. Lens Tip certainly did not in the review. Do they say anywhere that they consider this when handing out awards? Why do you always feel obligated to insert this stuff into discussions that have nothing to do with sensor size? People will say if I don't like it, I don't have to read or respond. So I will respond no further...but if you can always get a word in, I should be able to as well, just once...

Click to expand...

In answer to your question: it's called bashing and trolling. It's utter garbage. It's deliberate and cynical. It's ongoing. It never ends.

If somebody put a stop to it, that would be a really, really good thing. Because we all know that the perpetrators have no intention to end their self-entertainment.

Jan Chelminski said:

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Its like someone has suddenly burst into the room speaking a foreign language. "Are you sure this is your room, dear, can you understand me?"

Jan

Click to expand...

Ask yourself. Is this forum a fan club? Forums are most useful for sharing, discussing and bringing out issues, solutions and help for members. Good assessments include the good and bad points about a product.

It's healthy for a forum to have different opinions. I suggest you comment on any errors I made instead of commenting on me personally.

Sergey Borachev said:

Jan Chelminski said:

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Its like someone has suddenly burst into the room speaking a foreign language. "Are you sure this is your room, dear, can you understand me?"

Jan

Click to expand...

Ask yourself. Is this forum a fan club? Forums are most useful for sharing, discussing and bringing out issues, solutions and help for members. Good assessments include the good and bad points about a product.

It's healthy for a forum to have different opinions. I suggest you comment on any errors I made instead of commenting on me personally.

Click to expand...

Sergey,

Honestly, I don't think you are actually bringing anything beneficial to the conversation. You are disruptive, and frankly, obnoxious. And, I have had enough of you, so you can go into the box with Stirling now. Bye.

Jan

Need to brush up on your consumer behavior.

Imagine a kit comprising a Pen F and the three 1.2 primes. Now imagine a special matching finish and custom bag.

That's what I would call a winning kit.

TN Args said:

ristar said:

Sergey Borachev said:

Sergey Borachev said:

James Pilcher said:

Sergey Borachev said:

It didn't win the Editor's Award. The 45mm PRO did.

Click to expand...

Hi Sergey,

I don’t understand your point. :-| I see no relationship between resolution numbers and an Editor’s Award.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life at 9100 ft

Click to expand...

I think it's more than resolution that the editor considers. There are other qualities, optical and mechanical, usability issues that can affect that, I believe.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention comparative value, since we do not live in a vacuum.

Forget the lpmm for a moment, and just look at how the lens compares when mounted on a camera in terms of cost, size and also the actual resulting image you can get.

The Nikon Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8 lens would be just as small and light, and priced in between the two M43 cameras with this PRO lens. As for the resulting image quality, I will let the experts debate that. If the 35mmm is anything like 50mm Z lens already given a Gold by DPReview, I doubt that the new Olympus lens with all its.fantastic lens measurements would have much of an advantage either. With so all these things about equal, then other differences would be what should be considered, e.g. ISO performance.


E-M1 II, Z6 + 35mm Z f/1.8, G9

There must a practical limit to how much you can push a smaller sensor system. The E-M1X and all these PRO lenses have exceeded that limit for all UWA to portrait prime lens use cases. I have previously posted a similar diagram showing the very similar results comparing the portrait lenses on M43,

Fiji and Sony cameras.

(The A7 III is not shown because it does not have a top quality 35mm lens with an aperture around f/2. It would be very competitive, if we are to compare probes with other common FLs.)

In afraid it would be hard for Olympus to attract new buyers with these f/1.2 primes by themselves.

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone in this thread (at least this sub-thread) bring full frame into the equation. Lens Tip certainly did not in the review. Do they say anywhere that they consider this when handing out awards? Why do you always feel obligated to insert this stuff into discussions that have nothing to do with sensor size? People will say if I don't like it, I don't have to read or respond. So I will respond no further...but if you can always get a word in, I should be able to as well, just once...

Click to expand...

In answer to your question: it's called bashing and trolling. It's utter garbage. It's deliberate and cynical. It's ongoing. It never ends.

If somebody put a stop to it, that would be a really, really good thing. Because we all know that the perpetrators have no intention to end their self-entertainment.

Click to expand...

It is not bashing, what I wrote is fact. Check the physical measurements of the lens and camera, the selling prices, avaiilable DPReview results from their tests. They are all there. Stopping my post would be censorship. Negative comments are the most useful for members and potential buyers.