Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Lens focus > Standard zoom and mid range

Standard zoom and mid range Lenses with focal lengths larger than 12mm, but no longer than 60mm, includes standard zooms and portrait primes plus some macro lenses.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 1st January 2018
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 4,749
Thanks: 346
Thanked 1,047 Times in 796 Posts
Likes: 102
Liked 4,730 Times in 1,543 Posts
Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

https://blog.mingthein.com/2018/01/0...comment-560649

Looks a stellar lens... I want one
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pdk42 For This Useful Post:
Greytop (2nd January 2018), Internaut (6th January 2018), OM USer (2nd January 2018)
  #2  
Old 1st January 2018
Greytop's Avatar
Greytop Greytop is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Berkshire, UK.
Posts: 6,251
Thanks: 1,107
Thanked 587 Times in 544 Posts
Likes: 1,425
Liked 762 Times in 276 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

The file quality does look rather nice.
Practically it would have to sit on an E-M1 MkII rather than a Pen F IMHO.
17mm is a handy do all prime walk around FL, tempting but the size still bothers me a little.
__________________
Regards Huw


Olympus equipment (mainly)
Capture One Pro
My flickr
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 1st January 2018
Ricoh Ricoh is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 4,971
Thanks: 528
Thanked 366 Times in 327 Posts
Likes: 636
Liked 1,511 Times in 914 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

What's the purpose of a fast moderate wide angle? Such a lens is normally used to show the subject in context with its surroundings. Context being key.
__________________
Steve

on flickr
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 1st January 2018
drmarkf's Avatar
drmarkf drmarkf is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 4,444
Thanks: 284
Thanked 409 Times in 343 Posts
Likes: 1,512
Liked 1,044 Times in 586 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoh View Post
What's the purpose of a fast moderate wide angle? Such a lens is normally used to show the subject in context with its surroundings. Context being key.
Depends what style you're after.

In street photography, people like Joel Meyerowitz and Alex Webb developed the 'field' style of image, with lots going on in layers, and m4/3 is useful for that with the extra depth of field and use of zone focusing. This is currently trendy, but extremely difficult to do well (and the interwebs are full of chaotic, jumbled rubbish as a result).

However, think of street images from people like Diane Arbus and Robert Frank and you'll see often very shallow depth of field with much more subject isolation. The only way to get that sort of effect with 4/3 is to have a lens with this aperture.

It's good to have choices.
__________________
Regards,
Mark

------------------------------
http://www.microcontrast.com
Too much Oly gear.
Panasonic 12-35, 15. Samyang 7.5 fisheye. Laowa 7.5.
Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to drmarkf For This Useful Post:
Ricoh (1st January 2018)
  #5  
Old 1st January 2018
blu-by-u blu-by-u is online now
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Selangor, Malaysia
Posts: 1,415
Thanks: 165
Thanked 71 Times in 59 Posts
Likes: 197
Liked 469 Times in 250 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Not a lens for me..it's huge
__________________
* Henry
* Location: Subang Jaya, Selangor
* Malaysia


All my garbage so far.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 1st January 2018
drmarkf's Avatar
drmarkf drmarkf is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 4,444
Thanks: 284
Thanked 409 Times in 343 Posts
Likes: 1,512
Liked 1,044 Times in 586 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by blu-by-u View Post
Not a lens for me..it's huge
Depends what you're comparing it against!

It is 68.2 x 87mm and 390g.

Panasonic 15mm f1.7 57.5 x 36mm, 115g = yes, it's huge (as when compared with the Oly 17mm f1.8).

Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 69.9 x 84mm, 382g = everyday wear for most OMD shooters, surely?

Versus a couple of other ways m4/3 shooters can get shallow depth of field, there are:

Olympus 75mm f1.8 63.5 x 69.5, 304g

Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95 63.4 x 80, 540g

...and it sits in the middle of those two, for weight at least.

Yes, it is large, but for me only a try-out will enable me to decide whether the size/weight/cost is worth it. I've already found it will CA focus very well indeed at full aperture on the M1ii in the sort of way I envisage using it, so it's a matter of what the resulting images look like.
__________________
Regards,
Mark

------------------------------
http://www.microcontrast.com
Too much Oly gear.
Panasonic 12-35, 15. Samyang 7.5 fisheye. Laowa 7.5.
Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 2nd January 2018
iso iso is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Kent
Posts: 1,884
Thanks: 234
Thanked 132 Times in 127 Posts
Likes: 782
Liked 233 Times in 201 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Paul thanks forthe Link, it was particularly interesting given his early comment ----
‘A genuine concern, however, is the diminishing benefitof Micro Four Thirds systems having smaller, more portable lenses. These newF1.2 PRO lenses are no smaller or lighter than their DSLR counterparts. I can’tdeny that the size advantage is questionable now’------
This rather echoesmy comments in the Thread about the ‘Pro’ bias in the recent OlympusQuestionaire.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 3rd January 2018
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 74
Thanked 196 Times in 169 Posts
Likes: 610
Liked 512 Times in 337 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

That's fair comment but the beauty of the system is that we have a choice. The laws of physics say the brighter the lens the bigger and heavier it will be, but if you prefer small and light at least Olympus offers both.
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Liked This Post:
benvendetta (4th January 2018), nathan1977 (6th January 2018)
  #9  
Old 4th January 2018
benvendetta's Avatar
benvendetta benvendetta is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Pontypool, South Wales
Posts: 3,659
Thanks: 82
Thanked 292 Times in 258 Posts
Likes: 160
Liked 310 Times in 214 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
That's fair comment but the beauty of the system is that we have a choice. The laws of physics say the brighter the lens the bigger and heavier it will be, but if you prefer small and light at least Olympus offers both.
Very true................and I will stick with the f1.8 versions which are still excellent optics and the perfect size for my Pen F. My zooms are reserved for my EM1.1.
__________________
Dave

E-M1 Mk1 & Mk2, Pen F, E-PL5, HLD-7, HLD-9, 17, 45, 60 macro, 12-40 Pro, 40-150 Pro, 12-50, 40-150, 75-300, MC-14, MMF-3 (all micro 4/3rds), 7-14 (4/3rds), 50, 135 (OM), Nikon F80 (film), 28-105 Sigma, GoPro Hero 3, Novo/Giottos/ Manfrotto supports. Lowepro, Tamrac and Billingham bags.

External Competition Secretary, Cwmbran PS & Welsh Photographic Federation Judge
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 5th January 2018
AMc AMc is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,163
Thanks: 91
Thanked 126 Times in 111 Posts
Likes: 578
Liked 264 Times in 141 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

The images look lovely - unfortunately it's listed at £1299 at Wex so I doubt I'll ever see it on my camera.
Thankfully the 17mm f1.8 is in my bag so I'll just stick with that!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 5th January 2018
MikeOxon MikeOxon is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: oxford
Posts: 325
Thanks: 31
Thanked 60 Times in 54 Posts
Likes: 33
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

I'm a bit puzzled by the statement in this review that "Neither myself nor MT are associated with Olympus in any way...." On his own blog (assuming it is the same Robin Wong) he states "I am an Olympus Malaysia employee" That was in 2016, so he may have moved on, but he clearly has had close connections with Olympus in the past

There is a direct comparison between the f/1.8 and f/1.2 on the Mirrorless Comparisons website, where you can compare images by the two lenses side-by-side.

I have no doubt that the f/1.2 is technically superior and weather-sealed but, for most practical purposes, there seems to be little to separate them and the f/1.8 is much smaller.
__________________
Mike
visit my Natural History Photos website:
http://home.btconnect.com/mike.flemming/
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
nathan1977 (6th January 2018)
  #12  
Old 5th January 2018
Bikie John's Avatar
Bikie John Bikie John is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wessex
Posts: 3,658
Thanks: 173
Thanked 602 Times in 533 Posts
Likes: 398
Liked 615 Times in 423 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

I think he parted company with Oly a few months ago. He was always quite upfront about his connections, from what I remember.

John
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
RobEW (5th January 2018)
  #13  
Old 5th January 2018
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 4,749
Thanks: 346
Thanked 1,047 Times in 796 Posts
Likes: 102
Liked 4,730 Times in 1,543 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMc View Post
The images look lovely - unfortunately it's listed at £1299 at Wex so I doubt I'll ever see it on my camera.
Thankfully the 17mm f1.8 is in my bag so I'll just stick with that!
The US list price is $1199 - so just over £900 at current exchange rates. Even if we add VAT it's still a lot cheaper. Leaves a bad taste about Oly stuffing us in the UK.
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
iso (5th January 2018)
  #14  
Old 5th January 2018
RobEW RobEW is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 1,369
Thanks: 135
Thanked 45 Times in 42 Posts
Likes: 801
Liked 113 Times in 78 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Yes, Wong did part company with Olympus a while back. I was surrised and I think I posted.

He really doesn't like the 17mm FL does he, and disliked the Oly 1.8 especially, whereas others give that lens a good review.

I'm absolutely not in the $1200 prime price bracket, but if this causes a glut of used 17/1.8s on the market I might be temptable. Though it does seem as though Wong likes an alternative I'm considering - the Pan 20/1.7. Probably don't need either realistically.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 6th January 2018
Internaut Internaut is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,993
Thanks: 267
Thanked 213 Times in 197 Posts
Likes: 1,072
Liked 360 Times in 164 Posts
Re: Robin Wong review of 17mm f1.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by drmarkf View Post
Depends what style you're after.

In street photography, people like Joel Meyerowitz and Alex Webb developed the 'field' style of image, with lots going on in layers, and m4/3 is useful for that with the extra depth of field and use of zone focusing. This is currently trendy, but extremely difficult to do well (and the interwebs are full of chaotic, jumbled rubbish as a result).

However, think of street images from people like Diane Arbus and Robert Frank and you'll see often very shallow depth of field with much more subject isolation. The only way to get that sort of effect with 4/3 is to have a lens with this aperture.

It's good to have choices.
I would certainly edge towards DoF, for subject isolation, given my style and limitation (I simply donít see or compose quickly enough).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Robin Wong's EM-1 MarkII updated review Shaw Camera conference 1 8th November 2016 06:43 PM
Robin Wong review of the 300mm f/4 Graham_of_Rainham Telephoto 8 10th March 2016 10:23 AM
Pen F review by Robin Wong Mrs T Micro Four Thirds 13 23rd February 2016 04:31 PM
Robin Wong's review of E-M5 mkII Shaw Micro Four Thirds 8 18th February 2015 11:35 PM
Robin Wong 40-150 review pdk42 Lens focus 1 7th October 2014 01:08 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:54 AM.


© The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2018, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger