Olympus 17mm f1.8 vs Olympus 14-42mm Kit Lens ep.146

[@rascalhusky8129]

Thank you for helping me save money . I was very tempted to purchase the 17 mm lens . I love travel photography and street photography. I already purchased the kit lens and after watching your very educational video I am satisfied I have done the right thing .

[@RobTrek]

Happy to help!

[@wparo]

Thank you. Why not do the most important test, low light performance? After all that's the only reason to get one for many

[@RobTrek]

I forgot about that. On other tests I've done, I do talk about the faster shutter speeds and/or lower iso in low light but I totally missed it here.

[@dwightjones3305]

Olympus sells a travel lens combo that includes this lens, the 14-150, lens hoods, and cases. The saving is substantial when compared to buying the lenses separately. The 14-150 is amazing light and small for a lens of this spec. The cost savings was enough for me to give it a try along with the 17/1.8.

[@RobTrek]

I have my eye on the 14-150 too!

[@gwarlow]

Not often that we can brag about the sharpness of a kit lens. Nice review. Thanks.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for watching!

[@oppimaniac]

I can't confirm the sharpness issues. Biggest difference to me is, that you act different with a prime (non-zoom) lens. You are more "moving" around. And for sure the 1.8 is hassle free in low light and the bokeh in streets with lights is just wonderful.

[@RobTrek]

You're right, it does make you move around more. I almost got flattened by a bus when backing up!

[@davebellamy4867]

7:47 The 17 looks a lot clearer on the background. Don't know if it's just focus or image softness on the 14-42 on that cross.

[@RobTrek]

It's hard to say, but I'd lean towards the 14-42 being softer.

[@cmalc8]

I know the idea of a lens hood is to shade the lens from direct sunlight, but in the UK they're fantastic for keeping annoying spots of rain off your lens 😉

[@Dunwich_Kev]

Rob, I have been following you for nearly two years since I bought my Olympus Pen F. I always reference your menu settings on EM mk 11 when not used for a while as always triggers my memory as to settings. Just this week I had issues for a couple of days with focus on my Pen F and 17mm lens. So I reset camera and set up again. Still focus issues and camera had “M” on panel. I kept going in menu but could not sort then had a lightbulb moment when I realised the clutch on the 17mm was open so I was in Manual focus all the time. Amazing how I missed it. So basic !! Good news is that thanks to you I had eventually worked this out for myself. Your tutorials are fantastic. I have learned so much from you and the Olympus Community, Thank you for getting me back into photography. Kind Regards. Kevin.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for the kind words. I can't tell you how many times I recorded blurry video because I forgot the focus clutch was on!

[@zardosspinosa6944]

Fair comment. I did order a second hand 12-40 Pro and straight away noticed how heavy it was and I was thinking do I really want this lens. I sent it back for another reason, it was not clear possibly a fault altho technically it was pretty much a brand new. So I am back to my 17mm 1.8 on the EM5mk2 for street. Its so wonderfully light and small and simply a pleasure to use. That said I usually carry a second camera to cover the longer end either the 45mm 1.8 or the gunship 40-150 2.8, yea I know its big and heavy!

[@RobTrek]

I typically carry the 45mm 1.8 in my pocket just in case! I should mention I misspoke when I said that it was heavy on the em1-ii, I meant to say em10-ii.

[@DrFlippin]

Hi Rob; I, too have the 17mm, 25mm and 45mm f1.8 Zuiko Primes. I've loved the build quality and manual/clutch focus ring of the 17mm but have been mildly disappointed with its sharpness/IQ compared to its 25mm and 45mm siblings. I find that for IQ (shooting in auto mode); the 45mm is sharpest, followed by the 25mm, and then by the 17mm. I'm wondering if you or your viewers have found similarly or do I have a defective lens? Thanks for your videos... its the best m43 channel on youtube!

[@RobTrek]

I"m hearing the 17mm has had inconsistent performance in the IQ department. I can agree with you that the 25mm and 45mm are sharper overall.

[@arthurrmcphee4885]

Wonderful video demonstaration of the lens and reasons for your purchase. I agree with you about the speed advantages with the faster aperture. I'm using the 45mm for street currently which gives me quite a challenge in respect to compositions, but wow it's so much faster in low light situations! I'm constantly amazed at how you have full understanding of the workings of these cameras, I had no idea there was setting for lens vignetting compensation! Bravo once again Rob, great video and I'm loving your photo's on Instagram.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. I love that 45mm and bring it with me for street. Nice reach and perspective.

[@chrisbrown6432]

Thanks Rob. I have both lenses and got the 17mm lens for night time shooting.

[@RobTrek]

Perfect for that!

[@PPISAFETY]

Hi Rob. I know I'm commenting on an older video, but even now, this is a bit of a dilemma for people. Some years ago, I was shooting with two bodies, the original EM-1 and the original EM-5, both purchased second hand. There was a pretty good size difference between the two, but both were smaller than the Nikon DSLR gear I was using for work. I began to shoot the Olympus more and more for fun. This came down to the same old choice which has been going on for me since 1977 when I was a young newspaper photographer. My paper issued me a couple of Nikon F2's for work, but on my own time I bought an Olympus OM-1 and just loved its size. The Nikon would stand up to any conditions, and if necessary you could use one as a weapon. The Olympus was a small handful of pure joy to use. Some things have not changed for me in 45 years. I still keep a battered F2 and an OM-1 on my bookshelf for old time's sake. To the two lenses in question. I owned them both, and choosing between them was like picking which of your kids you loved more. I had the EZ version of the kit lens which came used with the EM-5, and a old 12-50 that came along with the EM-1. I then bought the 17mm f1.8. Try as I might, I just could not find any discernable difference between the EZ kit lens and the 17mm when it came to picture quality. If you are not taking great pictures with either one, it's your own fault. Then I added a 12-40 2.8 Pro, ditching the 12-50 which was also a fine lens. That 12-40 has remained on my EM-1 pretty much continually ever since. It's not going anywhere, but as you say, its a bit big for casual situations when you just need something a bit smaller. It is just about perfect on an EM-1 with a battery grip on it. I let my friend who was just getting into photography have the EM-5 and the EZ lens and he is still happily shooting that little camera. In the end, my choice of the 17mm came down to factors other than optical quality. I'm a street photographer by nature, and used to shoot all over the world. I knew from experience that 35mm equivalent was my most used focal length. I loved the way the 17 f1.8 was always ready at that focal length and I didn't have to wait for it to turn on at 14mm and then zoom to 17mm. As I have gotten older, I don't go out to shoot as much at night as I once did, so the larger maximum aperture, while handy, wasn't an issue as much as I imagined it would be. I think the business about bokeh is much overstated, because if you are looking for that you aren't going to find it in a 17mm lens, and I think most people who look at photos are more concerned about an interesting subject than they are background blur. Back in the day nobody except portrait photographers gave it a second thought and they all used medium format anyway. I have used the bigger maximum aperture a few times in dimly lit museums, but have also done well there with the kit zoom due to the great Olympus IBIS. For me, the choice of the 17mm came down to it being pretty much the perfect focal length for my street and casual camera, and even more so that manual focus clutch. I love setting the lens to manual focus, and then following the advice of Galen Rowell of "f8 and be there" using pre-focus with the distance scale. I can't tell you how many shots I've gotten using my Oly with this lens used as a "point and shoot". The only thing I think Olympus could have done better with this lens is to provide some measure of weather sealing while keeping it about the same size. But since I now live in south Florida and am an old man who stays inside in bad weather, it's fine. So now I have two EM-1 bodies. The second was purchased for a shockingly low price with 2000 clicks on it. One lives with an HLD-7 battery grip and the 12-40 2.8 Pro on it. I take that for events when I just don't know what I'll run into. I love it. But when I want to travel a bit lighter, the other EM-1 (sans battery grip) gets the nod, with the 17mm attached. And, if for some reason I think I might need more reach, it's a simple matter to stick the tiny 40-150 f4-5.6 tele zoom in a vest pocket along with either setup.. It is a surprisingly good lens as well. So I'd say that unless you do a lot of street work, or are really in to manual focus, get the 14-42 in either the standard configuration or the EZ and you'll love it. But if you do what amounts to photojournalism, the 17mm is definitely worth the extra money,

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for sharing your experience.

[@jakedooom]

I am amazed at your skill in fixing the same pose twice, as well as making a very useful, informative video

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. I just find a leaf on the ground and stand on that spot.

[@allanosantiago5955]

@@RobTrek Great tip. Thanks Rob.

[@KRBY555]

Love the channel and M43 analysis Rob. I have an EM10 and am just a weekend hack. I have the Oly 25mm, 45mm and just got the Pana 14mm as I was missing some wide option. I do really notice the lower IQ with the Pana. Is this 3 lens set good bang per buck? Or is there a better mix you'd recommend? I shooting street, cars and kids... Thanks!

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. I think you have a great mix there. That said, in good light, the kit 14-42mm is a nice single lens solution. At night, the primes are a must. I'm surprised the 14mm is not as good. I've heard great things about it. I like the pancake size.

[@RickSperko]

The US link for the hood seems to point to the wrong product now. Brand new to all of this, do you prefer the threaded hood? It looks like some have a thumb screw? Thanks for your videos.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks! I inadvertently put a lens hood I just purchased for my tg-5. I prefer threaded so I can put filters on without taking the lens hood off.

[@c.augustin]

The slight vignetting at f1.8 is part of the appeal (look) of this lens, I would not compensate it in camera. Now that you mentioned it, I think this vignette is what made me like this lens, it has some "old-style vibe" … ;-)

[@RobTrek]

Yes, I prefer a slight vignette too. I didn't really notice it since I add vignette via art filter or in post a lot.

[@PT-re2gi]

That was weird when you zoomed in to look at sharpness the kit lens was sharper in your hair but when you zoomed out and looked at the entire image the prime looked much better. You looked sharper and more contrast with the prime. Your skin looked blurry with the kit lens.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for the feedback. There is always some micro differences in the focus point which might account for the sharper hair.

[@cmalc8]

The 20mm Lumix f1.7 is a good and inexpensive alternative to your 17mm. I find the 20mm (40mm in old money) gives an extremely natural field of view, very close to how I (and possibly others) see things by eye.

[@RobTrek]

The 20mm is a nice compact alternative. Unless you need faster AF, it's a great.

[@nexus7admintablet385]

I use collapsible rubber lens hoods for my non super wide primes. They are effective, cheap, don't look terrible, and compact. When putting back in the bag, I just leave them on the lens but push them in - collapse- and then they take up no more room than if the lens had no hood.

[@RobTrek]

I like the rubber lens hoods too. I use them on my wide angle zooms to maximize the benefits on the long end, and collapse them for the wide end. For my primes, I prefer the metal hoods. They slide in and out of my bag easier. Either way, the message is to use a hood. Thanks for the feedback!

[@sopisoningshen4716]

Hi Rob, great videos. I just came across the m4/3 XIAOYI 12-40MM F/3.5-5.6. Is this a good competitor for the Olympus?. Would like to hear your thoughts. Thanks in advance!

[@RobTrek]

I just skimmed a few reviews, it's too early to tell. When looking at new cameras, you have to consider the entire system of lenses, flashes, options, etc... By itself, pricing would be the key factor. Similar to when Sony started their NEX cameras, they lacked many lenses. But Sony had the deep pockets and determination to build on mirrorless. Not sure that is true for xiaoyi.

[@Impostertot]

Nice tip about the shading compensation in the menu. Thanks Rob for this comparison.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for watching! It's an easily overlooked feature, like most things in the menu.

[@paulm8157]

Have the lens and like its performance. Shading comp. setting was new to me - thanks, Rob. Even though I shoot raw, the menu system of my EM1M2 did not have this option grayed out. So, I take it that the lens correction, when shading comp is set on, will affect the raw file. Correct? It is a bit academic because in LR I always invoke lens correction per Adobe data and then manually apply a slight vignette, as needed. Also, I wish the lens focus distance scale could accommodate more numbers so zone focus could be more precise.

[@RobTrek]

Yes, the camera applies lens corrections like distortion and chroma to raw files as well. Can't say it does it for all lenses, but every lens I've had it seems to fix and burn into the raw.

[@tomfreda7107]

Well done. Confirms my own testing. You should try the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 though. It's definitely sharper than the 14-42 kit lens at all apertures. But just a pointer on photography terminology; 1/640 shutter speed isn't stated as "one over six-forty." It's "one six-fortieth of a second," and 1/3200 is "one thirty-two hundredth of a second."

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. I like the 20mm f1.7 for the pancake size. Just I hear the video focus is not so great. Still, I may get one just for the photo part. Yes, my terminology is always a bit off. I'll try to get it right going forward. Please feel free to correct me anytime!

[@derekbarkham2314]

Thanks for both the informative video and the link to Amazon UK for the hood, it resolved the problem and saved me money.

[@RobTrek]

Glad to help! Thanks.

[@PhilippeOrlando]

The difference in sharpness is amazing! That little kit lens rocks! But I got your point about shooting at night in streets.

[@RobTrek]

It's hard to find a bad lens in the Olympus line up. Just pick the focal length and/or speed you need.

[@jakobhovman]

Hello Rob...Great demo of this lens...! The f-ring and 1.8 value sure is worth having. Colors seem a tad "deeper" too...!

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. Hard to say on color since lighting was not a constant.

[@maxheadroom7687]

Hi Rob, 17mm is about 35mm...that’s why it looks really great on street etc. much better build quality than kit lens. Like Ozzy Paul I use the cheap Sigma Art 19mm a lot! Plus like you find the pro lens too big and heavy for walking around the streets.😎🇦🇺👍

[@RobTrek]

I hear lots of good things about the Sigmas. There were always tack sharp on my Nikons. There just don't appeal to me anymore since they are generally larger and heavier than their native counter parts. That said, the 60mm f/2.8 is still on my short list!

[@maxheadroom7687]

@@RobTrek Hi Rob, these are the smaller original lenses with the smooth barrels which you either love or hate. They retailed here for about $250A, cheap but very good and light and small!

[@RobTrek]

I think that 60mm 2.8 might be fun for some street/event stuff. It's cheap enough to take out in public, lol. I'm so paranoid.

[@kalntera]

Hello Rob, 14-42 pancake is equivalent to 14-42 kit lens?

[@RobTrek]

Yes, no difference optically that I can tell. I just prefer the manual zoom.

[@lizdellar]

@@RobTrek I have a 14-42 pancake which came as a kit lens and also a 14-42 lens which is not a pancake but which also came as a kit lens. They both have manual zoom.

[@ordinosaurs]

I had this lens, but I sold it. There must be a 17mm malediction at Olympus, because I had the 17/2.8 before which I parted with some time ago too. The 17/2.8 was an industrial accident, I can't really explain it otherwise. It was plagued with an enormous amount of CA and distortion as well as overwhelming softness. The 17/1.8 is much better than its older sibling, no contest there. But it's still rather soft. 1.8 aperture looks nice, but it's way to shallow a DoF for street photography anyway. I'd rather have a 2.0 or 2.5 sharper prime instead. 1.8 is appreciated indoor though. Now, what aggravates the situation is the price. Yes, it comes with nice amenities usually found on pro lenses like the focusing clutch ring, but it leaves out the weather sealing which is a major disappointment for an outdoor f/length. And the price is in the ballpark of the 12-40 pro. Yes, you gain on weight and 2 f/stops, but the 12-40 is so much sharper and better corrected that it's worth carrying around, imho. And when I really want to go out light, I put the very inexpensive, optically better panasonic 14/2.5 on my camera. Verdict : the 17/1.8 is an overpriced and overhyped average lens. Do a plastic version like the 45/1.8, no fancy af/mf ring and slash the price by two, and then it will be a keeper.

[@RobTrek]

I agree with you on all points here. The 14/2.5 was on my short list and very desirable for it's price, size and speed at f2.5. I would have gotten that lens were it not for that fact that I like to vlog too, and I never had good luck with video on panasonic lenses. I tried the optically superior 15mm f/1.7 in the store a few times and it was just way too slow to focus in video. I would love to see Olympus go back to making and updating their current line up with smaller and less expensive lenses in the f/2.8 range.

[@wahabdilawar]

Excellent video, but I personally don't think that I will buy this lens, for I prefer my 25mm f/1.7 for street photography. I have a question. I am trying to learn shooting video with my Olympus em10 II with the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 at f/2.2 it is sharp enough at ISO 800 for indoors handheld. What about autofocus. I turned on face detection but which AF setting should I use? Continuous AF or C-AF with tracking, because I shoot my 4 years old son and he doesn't stay very still. Thank you very much for your time and effort.

[@RobTrek]

Unfortunately, the Panasonic lenses never worked well for me in video. I did a comparison video where I show the issues I'm having. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iHLYhqx3YreUick That said, I prefer C-AF with Tracking for video. I'll have to test to see how difference there is between the various combinations of AF settings.

[@TheJcGlobal]

25mm you get 50mm in micro 4/3 good for portrait.

[@toshsimpkin4386]

Great review; thanks. It's helped me decide on my next lens choice. This review is just what I was looking for.

[@deckeremerson4649]

sorry to be so offtopic but does anyone know of a trick to log back into an instagram account..? I was dumb forgot my login password. I would appreciate any tricks you can give me.

[@cedrickody1189]

@Decker Emerson instablaster =)

[@deckeremerson4649]

@Cedric Kody Thanks for your reply. I found the site thru google and im trying it out atm. Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

[@deckeremerson4649]

@Cedric Kody It worked and I now got access to my account again. I am so happy! Thanks so much you saved my ass :D

[@cedrickody1189]

@Decker Emerson No problem xD

[@BobK58]

I got a used Panasonic 20mm/f1.7. It's the older version that DXOMark says is a bit sharper than the newer version. It's a pancake lens so on my E-M10 it's almost the size of a point and shoot. I like to hike and taking the camera with a small lens is great.

[@RobTrek]

I still think about getting this lens for the same reason. I love pancake lenses.

[@Woodenarrows]

Still considering the Oly 17mm f/1.8 so researching tonight (12/17-19). Once again you've shown what we realized on your live stream last weekend, "Kit lenses Rule" :-) Amazing what Olympus can do with their lenses. If not for the f/1.8 it looks like the kit 14-42 is plenty good enough so spend your $$ on something else, like a new camera bag :-) Post thought, the 17 will look better on a E=M1 II than the 14-42 kit :-)

[@RobTrek]

We need more pancake lenses too. I did just buy a new bag. Will share in a later video. Not bad for $14.

[@Woodenarrows]

@@RobTrek Ha, maybe I should have waited. I got that Large Amazon bag. My stuff fits much better for day to day use. I'll keep the Medium bag for travel with limited gear.

[@g.franch4097]

I was wondering to get this 17mm zuiko lens. On the uses I want for it is interior photography of people in events (symposia, dinner...). I have heard of some geometry distortion that may appear of human bodies (enlargement of parts of the body...) with this lens. Could you please provide me with some insight on that issue?

[@RobTrek]

This phenomenon is not restricted to 17mm lenses. The wider the angle of view and the shorter distance to subject, the more distortion in the image. 17mm is often used to capture people in their environment, so they are not so close to the camera, but part of a larger scene. Essentially, if you can capture their entire standing body in the frame, the distortion will be minimal. Longer focal lengths, 25mm, 45mm and up, will require more working distance, thus move you further from the subject which in-turn reduces distortion. So for indoor photography where you don't have much working distance, you'll need to go wider and get closer. There is no work around, only balance. I think the 17mm is a good fit for indoor photography, but you may want to try 20mm or 25mm. The 20mm is arguably the most natural focal length relative to our human eyes.

[@g.franch4097]

Thank you for the advice!

[@AndriaMrs]

I had the Pen E-PL10 and the 14-150mm lens (only had point and shoot before), but in all this madness i decided to buy myself a good camera and lens. I live by a farm with horses and woods and have lots of birds i like to feed, and although i cannot go out yet, i do have lots i can practise on. I returned the camera and lens because the lens made it too heavy, awkward and cumbersome for me. Having looked at reviews of LOTS of camera have decided to get the Pen 10 again lol. I loved what it did and i realised things i did not know i needed in a camera. Problem is i want to choose a lens that is small and light but that is a good allrounder. I need a good zoom too, although i would settle for a small lens that did a lot and had a bit of a zoom. The lens that came with the camera did not zoom and when i tried to zoom in about 20 feet to photograph birds on the feeder, it did not reach. Any help please?

[@RobTrek]

I think the 14-150mm you had before is a great all-rounder. I'd avoid the 12-200, it's big and heavy and not as sharp as the 14-150 in my opinion.

[@AndriaMrs]

@@RobTrek Thank you so much for replying. That lens though was too big and cumbersome for me. Is there a lens that is not much bigger than the kit lens (pancake) i think is 14-45mm or something like that that can zoom in a bit more? That kind of size is good and although the 14-150mm lens zoomed a bit about 10x i think, it was too big and heavy for me. I have a bit of a shake in my hands. I try to look at on here the other lens i just do not understand what they do.

[@RobTrek]

@@AndriaMrs I'd recommend the Panasonic 12-32mm kit lens and Olympus 40-150mm R f/4-5.6 lens. The 12-32 is very compact and sharper than the Olympus 14-42mm and I'd argue nearly as sharp as the heavy 12-40pro lens from Olympus. For birds, the 40-150mm R f/4-5.6 lens is very sharp, compact and light. Expect to pay only about $125 for the Pana and $99 for the Olympus.

[@AndriaMrs]

@@RobTrek Thats great thank you so so much Rob. Going to have a look now and hopefully order my camera and lens today. Will let you know which one 😊. Just looked and found a Panasonic lens LUMIX 35-100mm Micro 4/3 Camera Lens H-FS35100E. Would that fit the Olympus PEN E-PL10 Camera? I cannot get a definite answer from Olympus or Panasonic. Each say speak to the other!!! I really want to buy a camera and lens today.

[@RobTrek]

@@AndriaMrs Panasonic lenses work well with Olympus with few exceptions. The 35-100 f/4 is fine but recommend the Oly 40-150mm instead. Also, you may want to consider the e-m10 mark III instead of the PL10. You lose the flip down screen but gain better ibis and evf for about the same price. Sometimes they include the 14-42 and 40-150mm lens free, just have to shop and/or wait for it. Either camera will take great pictures.

[@gerzoc2698]

Would the 17mm f2.8 compare favourably against 17mm f1.8 for street shots in your opinion?

[@RobTrek]

I don't own the 2.8, but others have said it's not a great lens. I'd skip it and get the panasonic 14mm f/2.5 or 20mm f/1.7 if you want a pancake lens and you don't do af in video.

[@ordinosaurs]

I owned it, an in all honesty this is a terrible lens. Now there's more to street photography than ultimate sharpness, and I've seen people making great pictures with it. But in actual use, personally, I've always had the nagging feeling that even if the picture was "usable" after some heavy post manipulations, it would have been easier and better with something else. The lens has an enormous level of barrel distortion, even for the MFT norm which is quite lax on the subject. The body can't fully compensate it. It has an ungodly level of chromatic aberration. Panasonic bodies can't correct that, and no Olympus bodies corrected CA before the Truepic VII engine (E-M1, E-M10, E-PL7...) ; so beware. And focusing is slow. For the same used price or thereabout, the Panasonic 14 f/2.5 lens is a much, much better choice.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for the feedback!

[@gerzoc2698]

All feedback is appreciated and makes my decision and easy one. Get the cash for f1.8 option

[@valdiskrebs566]

GerzoC I actually have the 17mm f/2.8... got it a while back with my E-PL2. I just got a E-M10ii and thought I would try it with this small lens for some walk-around shots. It is not super sharp at f/2.8 but it is not bad! With some simple sharpening and contrast addition in Apple’s Photos app I got very nice results. I will use it as my street photography lens. Don’t believe all of the bad reviews of this lens. Also, at f/5.6 or f/8 (apertures often used for street photography) this old 17mm is very very good.

[@KankukanAiki]

Great review.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks!

[@KankukanAiki]

@@RobTrek I've subscribed 🙏

[@kahit_ano15]

try putting the prime lens the same aperture with the kit lens before comparison

[@RobTrek]

I tested both at f5.6 around the 8 minute mark. I made the assumption that people by primes to shoot wide open, so I started with that.

[@kahit_ano15]

@@RobTrek thank you

[@saltheangler5114]

where do u get the L plate for ur em10mii?

[@RobTrek]

Unfortunately they don't make the exact l plate anymore. I bought it on ebay and it was made y iShoot. There are still many similar L plates on ebay and amazon. amzn.to/2yuWS7c

[@reedbernstein9354]

Great information but of course the kit lens will be sharper wide open its 3.5 aperture that’s is the way aperture works. I think People get primes because they prefer primes. I love my 17 mm 1.8. I never use zoom lenses because when I’m out shooting I like to move all around and I think zooms make people lazy.

[@RobTrek]

I prefer primes for most things too.

[@Noealz]

Always a fan of fast wide angle lenses : )

[@RobTrek]

I love them for astrophotography too!

[@paulosilvalmeida]

Witch lens is better the 17mm 1.8 or the 12mm 2.0?

[@RobTrek]

The 12mm 2.0 is sharper wide at f/2.0. I love the 12mm and might have to do another comparison. Maybe cropping the 12mm to 17mm in post is sharper than the 17mm? Will have to test this. But I mainly bought the 17mm for the field of view over the 12mm.

[@paulosilvalmeida]

@@RobTrek I'm between these 2 lens for landscape photo... But I already have the kit lens with were I have the 17mm. So maybe I will go for the 12mm I found one for 250€, seams a good price. Anyway, thanks for your opinion and please continue with your videos!!! You are doing a great job!

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. You might want to consider the wide angle adapter if you have the older manual zoom kit lens. It gives you 11mm. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gXSokpKsart5rac

[@555ontario]

Could you clarify what you said at 0:39 of this video? Thank you.

[@RobTrek]

I just prefer small light primes vs carrying the heavier 12-40pro. On the penf, em10, and others, there is no grip and the balance is front heavy. Of course, it's good practice to hold the camera by the lens with your left hand, but I often have two cameras in hand when vlogging.

[@555ontario]

Thanks, Rob. I have a 17mm 1.8 (used, obviously) on the way and looking forward to playing around with it on my EM5. Thanks again for your reply.

[@duncanrae7504]

My Pen F came with the 17mm f 1.8 , rarely shoot wide open ,I have an issue with my Pen F shutting down for no reason ? and focus peaking disappearing ? would a firmware update sort those probs ? thanks for another great comparison .

[@RobTrek]

I doubt a firmware update will fix this. I had a similar problem with the penf shutting down and sent it in under warranty. I got it back a week later and no problems since. Had something to do with the viewfinder, but the description was vague.

[@duncanrae7504]

@@RobTrek Thanks .isn't a rare issue apparently ! read that SD card can cure it ,or new battery ,mine was grey import so warranty repair not likely , it seems to be erratic ,some times doesn't shut down much . very annoying though .

[@RobTrek]

Might not be a costly repair. You can send it in for a quote and see.

[@duncanrae7504]

@@RobTrek Thanks ,will enquire .

[@romualdb5968]

Is the 17mm 17mm the best affordable lens for street photography? I have 12-40 pro, a pana 12-32, à 45mm 1.8

[@RobTrek]

If you shoot at night the 17mm is helps with f/1.8 (1.3 stops more light), otherwise your 12-40pro and/or 12-32mm is perfect.

[@romualdb5968]

hi Rob thanks for your advices 😁

[@romualdb5968]

@@RobTrek hey Rob wich lense wouldnyou advice to take pictures of birds? The 40-150 5.6 seems a bit short

[@RobTrek]

@@romualdb5968 You have several options, the 75-300mm at $400 or the 300mm f/4 pro at $2,300. You could also do 40-150mm pro with 2x teleconverter for under $2000. There is also the new 150-400mm for $1500 which is probably your best balance for quality, reach and price.

[@romualdb5968]

@@RobTrek my budget would say the 75-300 lol I'll have to think about it...

[@kentxx12]

The old Olympus 14-42mm Kit Lens is a very good lens :)

[@RobTrek]

Agreed!

[@cmalc8]

The kit lens is OK at wider angles, but worse as you get towards 42mm.

[@RobTrek]

That sounds about right.

[@Woodenarrows]

Rob, quick ? I'm thinking of using my old E-M10 with the 14-42 IIR kit lens for my hiking trails to save the better cameras/lenses for less harsh use. I need(want) a lens hood for the kit lens for frontal protection as I don't want to be removing the lens cap every time I want to stop and take a photo on the trail. I carry the camera on my backpack strap with a Peak Design capture clip. Do you think I can get away with a straight(tele) hood (more compact) or should I get the wide lens hood (vented and larger). Both will probably just be screw in hoods as I will have no need to reverse the hood on the lens. You can see my setup at the very beginning of this video kzbin.info/www/bejne/q3yyY4ePbJydm68 Thanks for your feedback...

[@RobTrek]

I use a rubber lens hood. This is the exact one: amzn.to/2YpOVvN I find that metal lens hoods can vignette at the wide angle and/or don't provide enough shade on the long end. I also avoid vented lens hoods as they were designed for range finders with optical viewfinders so you can see "through" the lens hood and don't provide any benefit for electronic view finders.

[@Woodenarrows]

@@RobTrek Thanks Rob...

[@sergiodaguru]

Rob great video but you can’t compare sharpness of the kit at 3.5 with the 17mm at 1.8, the right comparison would be 17mm at 3.5

[@RobTrek]

Thanks. True about comparing sharpness at different apertures. My intent was more along the lines of showing the shallower depth of field of 1.8 vs 3.8. I should have been more clear about that.

[@eagleeyephoto8715]

Think you have a lemon 17mm. Kit lens is nowhere near my 17 f1.8. If you stop down 17 to f3.5 it will outperform kit. Be aware with MSC I went through 3 copy due to clicking AF motor in video mode. It is known issue with 17,but the last one I get (made in Vietnam) does not have the issue like previous one (made in China).

[@RobTrek]

It could be. I've heard the 17mm in particular has had variances like this. Mine was made in Vietnam. I remember reading a thread where one person went through 3 or 4 copies before getting a good one.

[@martinelfver4074]

A lovely lens, easily my most used one. Great video.

[@RobTrek]

Thanks for watching!

[@buckleyrobinson7415]

comparing sharpness at 1.8 vs 3.5 seems futile.

[@RobTrek]

If I didn't do it, someone would would call me out on it!

[@seanmangan2769]

What you need, is a ZOOM lens

[@RobTrek]

I like my kit lens.

[@Srulio]

It's a great lens

[@RobTrek]

Loving it so far!