Before
I have made several post regarding my opinions on certain camera gears but I posted it in my other blog. I guess, this next entry regarding the Oly 17mm 2.8 is more appropriate to be posted here.
Late, better than never.
I have entered the Micro Four Thirds arena, a bit late, approximately only in the last 3 months or so. I must say, that my instinct in wanting to ditch my sony, systems were very strong. There was something missing or something too ordinary in the e-mounts and the a-monuts. I needed more. So I sold off one of my lenses, a Carl Zeiss Biogon 25mm 2.8 ZM mount for a measly sum of SGD$800. With that money, I bought an EP1 and an EP2. One for my son and one for my nephew. It turned out, that I like the camera or the experience so much, I bought the EP3. I passed the EP1 to my nephew and traded in the EP2 with an EPL2. The EPL2 is one of my often used camera body. Attached to it are my countless lenses, although currently it it the Minolta 50mm F2.0 MD lens. Beautiful combo, if only I have the time to pick and choose the pictures that I took with it and post it on a blog post.
The Oly
Many reviews on the internet has somewhat said that this particular lens is not worth the money. According to those sites, this lens is not sharp, focuses slowly and should be kept as far away as a poisonous sack of poo. I was swayed by the reviews, and I was very sceptical as to what pictures it will gives me when I bought it. I decided, to be a man! and get one one myself and see if its actually true.
The picture of my son was taken at 1/8 iso 400 @ 2.8. Obviously its quite dark. Yes, the focussing hunts. Could it be because of the camera body? I don't know. Should I care? I should but at this point in time, I don't. Because I got the shot! If I were to pixel peep, (which to me, means just to magnify in LR) I do admit the lens can be sharper. But I also admits that I can have a steadier hand. What I wanted to say, and to point out it the back ground. I think its very nice.
I was very surprised by the very pleasant blur background. It really makes the subjects stand out in a very pleasant way. Would I shoot wide open with this lens? Sure I will.
Another sample pictures highlighting the background. I like it. Although I must admit, I do like the background produced by the Planar 45mm much better, but that a different range, in terms of cost and more importantly, in terms of focal length.
A friend
I think that having both lens, even if it sounds absurd, it totally sane. You would want the 2.8 for its compactness while you may need the 1.8 for shooting in low light. With the current Micro-Four Thirds bodies which excel in high iso, I'd say, the 2.8 is a no brainer for indoor shoots.
Seeing that the Lunar New Year is just around the corner, Here is me, Slim wishing you a fantastic Lunar New Year and may your days ahead be blessed.
And be safe on the roads please.
Slim
I have made several post regarding my opinions on certain camera gears but I posted it in my other blog. I guess, this next entry regarding the Oly 17mm 2.8 is more appropriate to be posted here.
Late, better than never.
I have entered the Micro Four Thirds arena, a bit late, approximately only in the last 3 months or so. I must say, that my instinct in wanting to ditch my sony, systems were very strong. There was something missing or something too ordinary in the e-mounts and the a-monuts. I needed more. So I sold off one of my lenses, a Carl Zeiss Biogon 25mm 2.8 ZM mount for a measly sum of SGD$800. With that money, I bought an EP1 and an EP2. One for my son and one for my nephew. It turned out, that I like the camera or the experience so much, I bought the EP3. I passed the EP1 to my nephew and traded in the EP2 with an EPL2. The EPL2 is one of my often used camera body. Attached to it are my countless lenses, although currently it it the Minolta 50mm F2.0 MD lens. Beautiful combo, if only I have the time to pick and choose the pictures that I took with it and post it on a blog post.
The Oly
 |
| The 17mm 2.8 on my EP3 |
Many reviews on the internet has somewhat said that this particular lens is not worth the money. According to those sites, this lens is not sharp, focuses slowly and should be kept as far away as a poisonous sack of poo. I was swayed by the reviews, and I was very sceptical as to what pictures it will gives me when I bought it. I decided, to be a man! and get one one myself and see if its actually true.
I am in love
There are 2 olympus 17mm lens in the olympus line up currently. This lens, the 2.8 is considered to be the poorer big brother. The older one. I believe it came as a kit lens with the EP2 or the EPL2. I don't know and such history rarely bothers me. For your information, the 17mm 1.8 is a kit lens to the EP5.
This lens fits my EP3 very well. The size and more importantly the weight is very, very manageable. I would think, the lens makes the set up more, er, beautiful.
Focussing
Bear in mind, that I used manual focus lenses on my EPL2, this lens does not focus that slow. It does not focus that fast either, but I am just being safe. I rather not say its fast or slow, since I do not have the sort of fancy equipment to measure the speed. What I can tell you, is, I am not complaining. It locks, it fires.
 |
| Idris up close. |
 |
| Chain and Lock |
I was very surprised by the very pleasant blur background. It really makes the subjects stand out in a very pleasant way. Would I shoot wide open with this lens? Sure I will.
 |
| Car door |
Another sample pictures highlighting the background. I like it. Although I must admit, I do like the background produced by the Planar 45mm much better, but that a different range, in terms of cost and more importantly, in terms of focal length.
 |
| Circles in the sand |
A friend
A friend of mine said, if a lens cost twice as much as the other, does it gives you twice as much better pictures? I think thats absurd. One need to contextualise when reviewing a lens and although comparison is sometimes needed to contextualise the value and the images it produces, its neither a one all and an end all. Seriously, I would never say the sharpness of the 17mm 2.8 is wanting. The 17mm 1.8 is being sold, used, at SGD$500. The 1.8 is a lens all of its own. It's a faster lens and for that price, I hope it will make a difference to the pictures it can help to produce.
 |
| Water and Light |
I think that having both lens, even if it sounds absurd, it totally sane. You would want the 2.8 for its compactness while you may need the 1.8 for shooting in low light. With the current Micro-Four Thirds bodies which excel in high iso, I'd say, the 2.8 is a no brainer for indoor shoots.
Seeing that the Lunar New Year is just around the corner, Here is me, Slim wishing you a fantastic Lunar New Year and may your days ahead be blessed.
 |
| Oranges |
And be safe on the roads please.
 |
| Be safe |
Slim
Comments
Post a Comment