olympus om-d e-m5 mark ii with panasonic 20mm f1.7

[JH6JH6JH6]

Hi all. I'm new to this forum. I'm planning on buying a olympus e-m5 mark ii. Besides the standard 12-50mm kit lens I'm planning of buying a prime lens in the 35-40mm full frame equivalent focal range. I saw the olympus 17mm 1.8 but also the cheaper panasonic 20mm 1.7. I found a lot of good reviews regarding the panasonic but also complaints regarding slow autofocus and banding problems on the previous olympus e-m5.

Does anyone know if the panasonic 20mm 1.7 lens also has these problems on the new e-m5?
And is the olympus 17mm 1.8 really worth the extra money?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Corkcampbell]

I can't answer about the banding (20mm) but I sold my copy because of the slow AF, low performance for video, and lack of use. So, not sure that I recommend it. However, you might consider the very affordable Sigma 19mm. It's not a pancake, but it is a very good lens. That would leave you some money for other lenses in the future, such as the Oly 45mm, Sigma 60mm, or Pany 14mm - all good lenses in my kit.

Note: I had the E-M5 (two, in fact) and purchased the E-M5M2 in February.

 

[alfredo_tomato]

I have the 20mm on my EPM2, and its AF is slower than my Sigma lenses, but not so slow that it is a problem. The IQ makes up for any other considerations.

It's a very good walkaround lens.

I picked one up on eBay for $150, so if it had been painfully slow, I wouldn't have been out of too much.

Here are some images taken with the 20mm https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=lumix 20mm 1.7 So you can get an idea of appropriate uses for the lens.

 

[agnost]

Hi all. I'm new to this forum. I'm planning on buying a olympus e-m5 mark ii. Besides the standard 12-50mm kit lens I'm planning of buying a prime lens in the 35-40mm full frame equivalent focal range. I saw the olympus 17mm 1.8 but also the cheaper panasonic 20mm 1.7. I found a lot of good reviews regarding the panasonic but also complaints regarding slow autofocus and banding problems on the previous olympus e-m5.

Does anyone know if the panasonic 20mm 1.7 lens also has these problems on the new e-m5?
And is the olympus 17mm 1.8 really worth the extra money?

Thanks in advance.

I have the first version of the 20 f/1.7 (plastic body) and it's an excellent lens optically. The only time I encountered banding with my E-M5 was at high ISO settings, but I've not seen this problem with the E-M5 II. Although the lens doesn't focus as fast as some, it's fast enough for most of my shooting. You'll need to be the judge of whether it's fast enough for your needs.

 

[alfredo_tomato]

With a bit of effort, one can purchase the 19 and 30mm for under $400 total.

The 19mm is dying of loneliness since I bought the 20mm. 19 kept getting the lens error message.

 

[jkrumm]

Both are good lenses. The Olympus is sturdy and quick. The Panasinic has a slight though not extreme hesitation. After using both a fair amount I like the 40mm equivilant look better, the angle of view difference is noticeable, and it's sharper than the 17 ( though the 17 still has good contrast). I have both and keep on changing my mind.

 

[Hithertoo]

If you're not expecting to just be able to point and shoot off the hip with the 20mm you wont run into any issues. You tend to run into issues with the 20mm where you want an instantaneous off the hip shot. Where you've got time to measure and compose it's not an issue.

You will almost never shoot above ISO3200 so you wont run into banding issues, or at least I never have.

 

[Corkcampbell]

The Sigmas are much cheaper than that. My 19mm (first version), like all three of my m4/3 Sigmas, has worked flawlessly for stills and video on my GH2, GH3, E-M5 - don't remember which ones I've used on my new E-M5II yet; I know that the 60mm works fine on it.

I wish Sigma would bring out more of these lenses for this system. Their inclusion of hoods and cases, and a four year warranty (US, longer in Canada) is another boon.

 

[bs1946]

Hi all. I'm new to this forum. I'm planning on buying a olympus e-m5 mark ii. Besides the standard 12-50mm kit lens I'm planning of buying a prime lens in the 35-40mm full frame equivalent focal range. I saw the olympus 17mm 1.8 but also the cheaper panasonic 20mm 1.7. I found a lot of good reviews regarding the panasonic but also complaints regarding slow autofocus and banding problems on the previous olympus e-m5.

When I bought my first 17mm f/1.8, the image quality was a great disappointment compared to my 12mm f/2.0 so, I returned the lens. I was going to get a black Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN but, it was backordered everywhere and after waiting three or four months, I bought another 17mm f/1.8. This one has been excellent in every way. I still think my 12mm is slightly better but, they are very close.

I considered the 20mm f1.7 because it's a nice focal length, not as narrow as the 25mm, which is a focal length I don't like, and easier to use than 17mm. But, after doing my due diligence and finding all of the complaints about this lens with plenty of real world examples to support those complaints, I decided not to get one.

Does anyone know if the panasonic 20mm 1.7 lens also has these problems on the new e-m5?
And is the olympus 17mm 1.8 really worth the extra money?

The 17mm costs a lot more because it has a metal body, versus plastic on the 20mm, blazing fast and accurate autofocus, and the AF/MF snap-back feature.

To me the real sleeper here is the Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN. Just lokethe Sigma 30mm f/2.8 DN and 60mm f/2.8 DN, the 19mm provides sharp, corner to corner photos with excellent image quality, has excellent build quality with a metal mount and body, and comes with a hood and case. At less than $200, it's a real bargain. For the people who say but it's too slow, my answer is that it's just as fast as that slow 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro zoom everyone raves about.

Thanks in advance.

 

[JH6JH6JH6]

Thank you all for your quick replies.
Sounds like the panasonic 20mm is good for normal use as long as you don't need really fast focusing.
I will look into the 19mm sigma. Sounds like a good option. Looks a little larger than the panasonic. I liked the compactness of the panasonic.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Slow focusing of the 20 will carry forward, haven't heard anything about high-ISO banding with the E-M5ii yet. It's certainly there with the old M5. Nevertheless it's a good lens that I used quite a bit until getting the mZD25/1.8, which I now prefer. Since 25mm is out of your range of consideration, I'll leave descriptions of shorter options to folks owning them, as my next wider prime is the 12/2.0--a big jump.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[cptobvious]

If buying in the U.S., you might as well go with the Olympus 17mm because of the lens bundle discount ($100 off). If you don't like it you can sell it for a small loss and get the Panasonic. I'd get the Olympus personally, because fast AF is one of those perks with Micro 4/3 that keeps me with the system. If I had to use slower AF, I might as well use a larger sensor system.

 

[alfredo_tomato]

And f2.8 is not bad at all unless you have a shallow depth of field fetish.

 

[Lawrence W]

Me too, happily shooting EPM2 with the 20mm. It is VERY sharp.

Only until recently when I bought EM-1/12-40/f2.8, the above combo has been my favourite for 3 years, way over my EM5 and G5. My only complaint was its poor performance in video.

I have the 20mm on my EPM2, and its AF is slower than my Sigma lenses, but not so slow that it is a problem. The IQ makes up for any other considerations.

It's a very good walkaround lens.

I picked one up on eBay for $150, so if it had been painfully slow, I wouldn't have been out of too much.

Here are some images taken with the 20mm https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=lumix 20mm 1.7 So you can get an idea of appropriate uses for the lens.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alfredo_tomato/