It's very hard to find videos so good like this. Direct to the point, precise comparisons... I normally cant watch comparisons videos without jumping from minute to minute, yours was different. Thanks!!
Great comparison and great video. I bought the Lumix 20mm (silver model) in 2014 to use with my Olympus OM-D E-M5 MK1 and, since then, it has been my most used lens. I simply adore it and the focal length is ideal for 70% of my shooting. The AF is slow, but over the years I've learnt to overcome it. Love this lens. And the images taken with it on my Olympus are a. Not only that, but the silver lens looks soooo sexy on my silver OM-D E-M5.
Thanks for taking the time to make and post this - it just goes to show how much longer lens reviews are pertinent, versus camera reviews. I really like the clear, concise and well considered presentation & have subscribed.
Excellent, well thought-out, organized presentation. Good sample images as well. Thanks for the effort you put into this video. It helps with my decision.
Great review, tells it like it is, calmly and clearly. No stupid baseball cap on backwards, no talking too fast and too loud and no trying too hard to be funny. Good job.
I’ve watched several of your videos and this one I hit the sub and bell. Awesome comparison review without any fluff, right to the points and points well made!
Thanks for doing this breakdown! On point and taking real life shooting situations into consideration. The original 20mm was the first lens I bought for my m4:3: amazing, but that focus searching can be painful and for sure cost shots. Hoped v2 would be faster, but it seems not so much.
yeah i was disappointed in the AF performance of v2 as well.. and honestly i wanted it to work so badly because that lens was great optically, and it also looked amazing.. alas i found the 17mm 1.8 later, and it does the job and i love it, but i still think of the 20mm sometimes lol.......
Thumbs up to you, Kim. I just stumbled into your channel tonight and am enjoying your relaxed, BS-free presentations. This video in particular I found very interesting. I`m sort of a traditionalist (ie: stubborn), so was quite surprised by what you pointed out about modern reality. One thing that I don`t remember you mentioning is compactness in favor of the prime. Then again, the kit lens on the camera that I`m considering is the 12-32, which I believe is actually about the same size as the Lumix 20, if not a bit smaller!
haha thanks!! and yeah both of these lenses are super compact, but i think you're right the 12-32 might be smaller folded in! that kit lens is pretty amazing as well, it even has ois inside which both primes lack :O But sadly yes, zooms have made the biggest jump of lenses, besides maybe ultra wide zooms.. the optical quality is outstanding.. i still stand by primes on m43 just because i need the extra light and the shallow depth of field which an f2.8 can't really do as well... so, here's to tradition continuing..! until Panasonic's full frame camera comes along!
Wow - well done. I have both the oly 17 and the 25, to use as my go-to lenses, but I just use the 17 a whole lot more. In fact, it's almost always on my pen-F unless I need to use my zoom.
yeah i tried the 25mm too! just too narrow for how i see things everyday i always end up taking a few steps back lol.. also the 17mm produces great quality and I can't stress enough how cool it feels! also, nice camera with the pen f! I might get one of those if they ever update the current model!
I am a fellow RU-vidr and a Lumix G9 owner. This video was really interesting because I was choosing between these two lenses. Thank you. I subscribed to your channel and I hope you will grow soon 🙏🙏
Super video and I enjoyed your presentation style. I am looking for a zone focus friendly lens, so the Olympus wins it on that alone. The main sticking point is - I just love pancake lenses ....
Well done, clearly articulate set of values to judge each lens by. I have both lens on a Oly E-M5 mkII and completely agree with your evaluation of the two lens. Basically I find I'm using the Pano 20mm for occasions where the "look" is important and not speed. The Oly 17mm Is on the camera more than the Pano 20mm especially for those often "grab-it" and shoot scenarios. I'm moving to more Street photography and the Oly 17mm will be the choice here for it's speed and the use of the "clutch" (love it!) for manual setting. I've also discovered to my surprise that I like the Pan 20mm ( 40mm equivalent in full frame) more than the Oly 17mm ( 34mm equivalent full frame) small difference but pleasing all the same. On my Oly E-M5 mkII I like the "feel" (slightly warmer) and "look" (a tad richer) of the Pano 20mm to my Oly 17mm. I'm going to work on a series of street and landscape shoots in B&W to see if there is any difference between the two lens. Thanks for the good and thoughtful review.
not a problem i'm glad you enjoyed it! I definitely agree the 17mm colors is more subdued compared to the 20mm and if you care about absolute sharpness the 20mm is the way to go. but gosh if the 20mm just focused as quick as the 17mm that would still be on my camera today! let me know if you see any differences in your black and white work i'd love to see what you find out!
Funny. I found the Olympus a tad warmer. And slightly less contrasty. Both a plus for me. Maybe it depends on Quality control. Or if your version is from China, or Vietnam. 🤷🏻♀️
hey man you and me both lol! but i realized if you really get into video work and shoot handheld stuff manual focus is doable and many times preferred for technical shots!
About to pick up the 12mm Olympus F2.0 for my Pen F. Use this combo in sort of a multi aspect ratio like the Panasonic LX100II does. Because I am always cropping into 16x9, or square and full sensor. I shoot landscapes and streets and mostly post to social media and smaller prints. I loved my 17mm 1.8 very handy focal length.
I currently have the 25 1.7, would you recommend selling that for the 20mm (because it's a little too telephoto for I do with it), or should I save for the 17mm and effectively have a 35 and 50?
Troy Yoder honestly it comes down to focusing. If you need fast focusing for stills, get the 17mm 1.8, or the sigma 19mm 2.8 as a budget option with less low light capability. But if you don’t need fast focusing, by all means the 20mm is more than good enough!
Hey nice to see you back on the channel! I’ve only tested it at the shop, it’s basically a bit too wide for me (to shoot portraits) but if it’s cityscapes it’s great but didn’t test it it’s wide enough for vlogging, but keep in mind it’s not a stabilized lens. Optical quality it’s even sharper than the 20mm and focus speed is FAST.. so basically it’s superior to 17mm and 20mm but I didn’t buy it because it was a bit too distorted for portraits but should be fine for everything else!
thanks for the review. I was having the same question: which one to choose? I have the lumix 20mm 1.7 combined with the M10 III and want to keep it for the sharpness during still photography.
Great video, i also was looking a Sigma 16mm 1.4, more or less same price as olympus, better constuction, but a bit bulky, keep looking info to make a choice. I have a begginer camara, olympus omd em10 mark iii.Thanks again for your video!
No problem- I think by almost all accounts the sigma is better than the Olympus and Panasonic offerings ie weather sealing, sharpness etc.. however the sigma falls behind the two only in size and weight but if it's not important for you get the sigma!
Regarding the focus speed, the Panny 20 is an older lens, last firmware update 2009 which improved AF speed, but as it says on the Panasonic update page, "There are 5 cases of firmware update procedures depending on the combination of camera body and lens." which means you may have to run an update with the lens on the Olympus body; the Olympus updater app will do that. This puts the lens characteristics into the camera's lookup tables. It is already loaded in a Panasonic. The motors on the 20 are very fine which, if a trifle slower, allows very accurate focussing. They will usually focus quicker than you can think but if it is focussing on the wrong place use one of the spot focus tools.
ISO performance is determined more by the sensor rather than the lenses. The only part that lenses play in low light capability and noise is the F stop, in which case, an f1.7 on the 20mm, and an f1.8 on the olympus. That's a third of a stop more light in favor for the panasonic but in my experience that's marginal because it's easy to raise the shadows by a third of a stop in post, whether that's in stills or in video. While these are F stops and not T stops, the actual amount of light hitting the sensor between the two lenses is marginal, unlike say, the G7 kit lens and the 42.5mm 1.7. Between the kit lens and the 42.5mm 1.7, the camera meters brighter even with matched f stops, but that's probably more to do with more lens elements in the kit lens vs the prime (speculating now lol). You can find that comparison here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0GdpktTcQio.html
i have the 17 f1.8 and it is my most used prime. I just like the focal length, and the manual focus clutch is a great feature - I wish all my lenses had it. Nothing like taking a shot where you have something in front of your subject and the camera insists on focusing on the foreground object - pop the clutch and problem solved! Also, lets not discount the fact that it is such a cool looking lens. I also have to say your videos are great - informative and just the right length. Any chance you will compare the two 12-60 lenses by Panasonic?
Thanks and it's my most used prime too! I was going to go for the pana leica 15mm 1.7 but it was just a tad too wide for me! And I know this is subjective but i completely agree, I love how the 17mm looks! You know, even though the olympus have the focus clutch mechanisms, I find that i rarely need to use it and just use the focus ring without pulling it back. in general i find that olympus lenses tend to have more predictable focus rings than panasonic but that could just be me? as for the comparisons of the 12-60s, i have neither of those lenses! but luckily there are comparisons out there already, I'll link one of my favorites here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XIYQUuYxjwY.html thanks for stopping by the channel!
Outstanding video, Kim; logical, complete and well organized. I own and love the 20mm. The size, price and performance are great, but I can see that the autofocus speed isn't the fastest. That said, it is the lens that lives on my GX85 more than any other. Question: what camera bodies did you use to compare the two? I suspect the 20mm might perform better on a Lumix body with DFD than on an Olympus body in terms of autofocus speed.
thanks!! i used the panasonic g7 for the comparison! There are still days when i miss the 20mm's form factor and IQ.. even though the 17mm isn't that much bigger, it makes a difference especially if you have a lens hood! however like i said in the video, the AF speed is more important for my work! glad you enjoyed the video though!
@@KimCruz1 Since I have 2 small camera bodies I value small size over autofocus speed. It appears to me that the 20mm focuses faster on my GX85 with DFD vs on my GF6 without it. I have no scientific proof, as I'm not sure how to time such a small interval.
@@datapro007 yeah i think the newer bodies since the G7 and gh4 generation made a jump in af speed... a gf6 with the 20mm is quite a nice setup! i might look into a smaller setup this year!
Awesom channel man. I had 20mm Pan, but the slow focus did annoy me. I have a GM1 and a 45mm. I can't tell if I should go with the 25mm Oly or the 17mm(for the compactness?)
This video was exactly what I needed so thank you!! Just a question, is the 20mm the first or the second version of this lens? Because I've heard they've imporved to autofocus in its second version :)
not a problem! the lens I tested was version 2 and honestly from reviews that I've seen it seems like there's been no improvements to AF.. however, version 2 looks nicer? lol.. but if i were to start again today, i'd hunt for a version 1 because apparently it's sharper, and it's going to be more affordable!
I'm using a lumix g7 and i use final cut to edit videos. before buying the lumix g7, you need to know: -it's a two year old model -It doesn't have IBIS like a lot of new cameras do, but at it's price point of 450-600 dollars, there's not a lot of good competition for a hybrid camera. -the best part about buying a g7 is that you have a wide variety of lenses at a wide variety of price points (olympus and panasonic share the same format, not to mention the other lenses you can adapt). -last but not least, auto focusing for video is atrocious so you'll need to use manual focus so this is a big deal. if you want to use auto focus for video, i suggest going with a canon 200D (SL2) or any of the other newer canon rebel series with dual pixel AF. however, as a complete package, i think the G7 still delivers more than those cameras. at it's pricepoint, the g7 is hard to beat. only significant downside is that AF for video is slow and unreliable. the canon cameras i mentioned are good too, but their lenses can start becoming really big and the 1080p isn't as sharp as the G7.
Would you say the 17mm has a more pleasing focal length than the 20mm? I currently own the 20mm but have been thinking of switching because the 17mm has a closer focal length to that of a 35mm full frame equivalent. Not too fussed with focusing speed currently but may require it for more motion portraiture in future.
we tend to get away with 'conventional focal lengths', ie 24, 28 35, 50 (full frame equivalents) etc... but at the end of the day, if i was watching a movie or a video on youtube, i wouldn't say 'damn, that angle of view was amazing (unless it's something uncommon like super super wide, or super super tight)...' the reality is that the 20mm and the 17mm looks exactly the same if you step back with the 20mm, or step forwards with the 17mm, they are that similar... it matters more for you as a shooter, in your mind do you step into a scene and see it closer to a 20mm? or a tiny bit wider at 17mm? I tend to see things wider at 17mm and so that saves me time having to compose. One more way to decide is if in doubt, pick the wider focal length because it's usually easier to step closer to the subject, whereas some areas might be too small to step backwards...
I remember when MFT first came out, they were basically selling the 20mm lens with a free Panasonic camera lol. People were buying kits just for the 20mm and selling the bodies all over the place till the GH3 came out, which people then started using for video. The 20mm became a hot lens ever on.
Are you using the newer version on the 20mm, the mark ii? Focusing is fine and pretty fast with me, I'm using and EM5 mark ii. I couldn't justify paying $200 more for the olympus 17mm
yup it's version 2 but the focusing speed of the 20mm version 1 or 2 can't really compare to modern m43 lenses. again, it really depends on what you shoot right? i was missing lots of pictures on the 20mm 1.7ii because my job requires a more photo journalistic style.. loved the 20mm but just couldn't make it work!
I want to see the Panasonic 85mm 1.8 VS the Olympus 75mm 1.8 on the G100 or any Panasonic camera body for that matter...I'm curious if the Panasonic lens performs better on a Panasonic body than the Olympus
nice video, I opt for the 15mm 1.7 instead, simply because it distort a little bit more, my kind of photography, besides it looks nice on my em5, but you're right, all subjective
ATT MEE exactly! I mostly need pics of people so I opted for either the 17 or 20 but the 15 pl is also great.. and to think we have a choice of 3 great lenses for a wide/standard lens is just crazy!
The Panasonic 20mm 1.7 is one of my most favorite and most used lenses...I'm a guy who spent his youth shooting Konica S2's and Yashica Electros....It feels more natural to me...
Nice video! I’ve been considering the Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7 for my portrait photography. Is this a lens you would recommend or are there better options?
zack coak that’s basically my favorite lens! Optical quality is superb, good build quality, and it’s tiny, like really tiny. All the b roll shots of the lenses in this video was made with the 42.5mm 1.7. Made a video about it here comparing it to the kit lens: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0GdpktTcQio.html It’s a bit more expensive than the 45mm 1.8, but it’s stabilized AND it has a much closer minimum distance. I would say having it serve as a portrait lens and a pseudo macro lens is more than enough to justify the cost difference. But I also shoot with a g7 so the extra stabilization helps even more. I highly recommend that lens!
mick m4/3 yup, the only other lens I would invest in if I was super serious about portrait photography is the 75mm 1.8, but it’s such a specialist lens it’s hard to justify the cost!
Question: I have a JVC LS300 and I want to be able to AF with a wide lens. My 35mm Rokinon is not cutting it because it's a manual and I can't record myself... Which one of these two lenses would be better to make a video like this one? Image quality is important. Where I'm talking? Hope to hear from you soon.
soo this comment apparently needed to be reviewed and approved! but found it now.. if you're just looking for a wide lens, I'd pick up the 17mm 1.8.. because it's wider I find it more versatile if you just want it for general things.. if you want it for double duty I'd suggest the 25mm 1.7 for talking heads and b roll (better bang for the buck but not as wide).. and if you want the sharpest of them, get the 20mm 1.7!
If you look in the metadata you will find the Panny 20 is a Leica. Leica lenses come from a tradition of reportage where a very sharp lens is wanted, this is designed into the lens; seven elements in five groups. Olympus have a reputation for portrait where a softer lens is desirable (think Bailey). Panasonic bodies generally have better colour rendition, colour authenticity, than Olympus despite often using the very same sensor. There is a violet stripe often seen on a yellow pansy flower that Olympus cannot see but Panasonic will reproduce. This will be down to the camera engine rather than the lens. I have several Olympus and Panasonic cameras collected over the years, which one I'll chose to use is often down to haptics. The Panny 20 gets so much use I have two of them, likewise two Panny PZ14-42. The advantage of both, haptics again, is they're pancakes, so on a smaller body (like E-PL7) can be dropped into a pocket. If you're shooting video, vlogging, you really do want a Panasonic back because Olympus lack the heat sink and cannot sustain long video shooting. You might get 12 minutes out of the E-M5ii before the video turns purple, whereas the GH4 will shoot video all day. Panasonic battery consumption is better than Olympus, which is weird because the Olympus batteries are made by Panasonic. The Olympus Body-IS does work well for short duration run and shoot video. For stills though the Olympus Body-IS is perfect for unstabilised lenses like the 20mm, even shooting at a ridiculous 1/5s hand held.
Hey. I was always convinced that the 20mm F1.7 had a Leica look. Can you please point me to the direction in which I can confirm that it is indeed a Leica lens? Thanks
@@jeffslade1892 Ok so I downloaded PhotoMe. Thanks for that. I can't seem to find anything that says "LEICA" specifically. Is there a particular combination or code for Leica lenses that indicate that it is a LEICA?
Even your philosophical arguments between the two is backed by sound reasoning, while excluding for the most part, choices based on whims and prejudices. If you do make a personal choice, it is still based on your needs, which is street photography and the fast focusing capability in order to capture the shot. I like that. For my situation, already in possession of the "pancake," the question being whether the merits and price of the Olympus warrant an upgrade based on my photographic needs. I would say no. Nevertheless, your clip does substantiate the drawbacks of the pancake, and stimulates thought on how to do a work around (such as manual zone focusing), for that known focusing issue on the Panasonic. Thanks Kim for the clip.
thanks i'm glad you liked it! honestly, i just wish the two lenses fused together, the 20mm form factor and image quality, with the 17mm focusing! i think panasonic tried to do that with the 15mm 1.7, but that one's a bit too wide for my taste :/
Does it matter for the speed of the autofocus if you shoot with the Olympus lens on a Panasonic body, especially for stills? Autofocus speed is quite important to me, but if the Olympus AF gets slower on a non-Olympus body i might as well go for the Panasonic lens...
Noortje hey man as far as I can tell the 17mm isn’t slower on my Panasonic body compared to an Olympus one.. if you have a new Panasonic lens like the g7 kit lens, the 17mm focuses around as fast as that.. the 20mm is noticeably slower but it really depend on if it matters to you!
Well it depends what I’m shooting or if its for video or photo.. in general i would pick a wider lens because it’s more versatile so personally I’d take the 20mm.. but I’d take the 17mm 1.8 or 15mm Leica over the 20mm personally..
All MFT lenses behave differently between Olympus and Panasonic backs. The exposure mode can be critical in getting the shot you want. I change exposure mode on the fly. This is easy to do on one button on a Panasonic but on an Olympus you have to go through the 'Super Control Panel' (SCP), easy enough but more buttons to push. Adjusting the +/-EV and/or the curve can be beneficial, as can hosing the right photo-mode for the occasion; the default Olympus 'i-Enhance' can be OTT. They're not point and shoot cameras, at least not for best results.
I have both lenses and both Panasonic and Olympus 20mp bodies. Technically speaking the 20mm is lightly sharper and slower focussing, but this should not detract you from either lens, unless you need them for video. In the end preference is in the eye (litterally) of the owner and it depends on how you usually see things. I think I prefer the 20mm because it's the closer focal to how I see the world, but in your case it could vary. One caveat is that on Panasonic body (I have a GX9) the 20mm can benefit from DFD and improve focussing noticeably: it goes straight near the focus distance and minimize the bumping in and out, while on my Pen F it starts much farther and wobbles quite a bit. on the other way I noticed that Olympus glasses usually focus more confidently on Olympus bodies, especially for video while Panasonic tend to loose the subject more easily. For video 20mm is more clumsy in AF but the linear focussing motor is quite good in MF: this lens does not accelerate focussing when turned faster, which makes it slower to focus but also more tweakable compared to a Panasonic 25mm. Olympus clutch focus mechanism is very secure and allow good control, but the focussing scale is VERY tight so do not expect to confidently pre-focus the lens for street photography
honestly from what ive seen, the 20mm is sharper, like, easily visibly sharper, and i know what you mean about it being closer, it's great for getting up close and personal on env portraits!
actually no! but i find the focus ring hard to work with.. even when i spin it fast, it just moves at the same speed which is different from how olympus lenses are calibrated..
I like pancake lenses, but if I was looking for a wider and faster lens, I would go for the Sigma 16mm f1.4. It’s got a wider aperture and field of view compared to both lenses. I also believe it may be sharper. It sits between the prices of the Panasonic and Olympus lens.
Yeah I think the sigma is the sharpest of all the lenses in this range and the only downside is the size and weight.. I've been without the 20mm for years now but I still miss how small it is haha..
Hi! Can you make a video about how to use tri grid (golden ratio) please. I dont see a lot of how to use tri grid vid on yt that would be nice, thanks !!
oh man if i knew i would! the only video i remember watching about that was from the art of photography right here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-a-3zOuqaUBY.html&ab_channel=TheArtofPhotography it was made a long time ago but it gave me a basic understanding of it, but i wouldn't say I understand it enough to teach it.. i hope this helps man!
A compact, but very informative review, thank you! I have had the same question. I loved my MZuiko 17 for its beautiful make and the focusing clutch, but wasn’t satisfied with the image quality. It just lacks detail contrast, visible especially wide open. So I exchanged it for the Lumix 20mm plus the Leica 15mm. Both are optically very good and the Leica is made as good as the 17mm. It’s (auto) focus is up-to-date, too.
Yeah the 15 is quite nice but oddly I like shooting even wider these days ie 24mm so I might look into getting the 12mm 1.4 Leica but it’s way too big and heavy for what I would it use for!
Hauke they said it’s good for the size but heard it’s not particularly sharp (I’m guessing it’s not bad but more like the 17mm oly than the 15mm Leica). But hey who knows honestly I use my phone for a lot of the photos I need unless I need a more ‘exotic shot’ like more telephoto or for more bokeh! The landscape has changed so much in the last couple of years it’s hard to keep up!
When comparing 2 lenses that are that close in sharpness, It can be hard to determine if the difference is due to sharpness or minor variation in contrast. Both these lenses have a reputation for not being great lenses, but reviewers often love them.
Photography gears are just tools. Product shoots are for a different clinical purpose. Being an artist I just need to tell a story. Currently Olympus E-PL7 What lenses do you recommend for < 300. used, that are small and light. 💁🏻♀️
yo kim I have the 20mm 1.7 mark 1... Im looking at the 15mm 1.7 you think it would be worth it in terms of focal length..it seems like a very high rated lens
hey man sorry for the late reply- i've been away for a while but trying to make a come back.... the 15mm is great man, but don't think it's going to be miles better in optical quality than the 20mm... from what i've seen, the optical quality is similar between those 2, but the main difference you will see is the focusing speed
@@A1Bokeh never used it, but hear great things about it- just note that it's manual focus only... i wouldn't be caught using that on the street, especially at 0.95 haha!
I prefer the wider look of the 17mm and although the 20mm is sharper and images look more saturated... I don’t know lol! I guess I just like the less constrasty look on the 17mm + I have a crush on Olympus’ bokeh- don’t ask lol
@@KimCruz1 Exactly. You used the word “clinical” in the video. Totally agree. I like some character and warmth. Sharpness is overrated. I’ll just use my iPhone 15. Maybe I’m getting old. Some of my Fujifilm lenses are too damn sharp. Haha. 💁🏻♀️
Hey man great question, I think part of it is to do with the quality of glass, but a lot of it is to do with coatings. If you take vintage lenses without fancy coatings you'll see that there's less contrast and the lens flares are more 'natural' ie, the flares are exactly what should happen if you point a light source directly into the lens. In new lenses our coatings are super advanced that it can eliminate flares all together.. and yes, change the level of color saturation as well. So I guess at the end of the day, there's a level of quality the glass has to meet (and I think most new higher end lenses aren't too different in this regard anymore), but after that it's really all about coatings, and how the manufacturer wants to 'style' their lens to color the scene. In my experience lumix likes the more saturated, punchy look, Olympus prefers their more toned down 'natural' look. At this point it's personal preference man!
I love the 20/1.7, but this seems like a very fair evaluation. The 20mm is pretty slow-focusing compared to many other lenses. The PL 15/1.7 would be a tougher competitor for the Olympus, I'll bet. Panasonic and Olympus were clever in not building the exact same FL and aperture combo lenses, weren't they? :-)
Yeah although I'm surprised at how the 17mm Olympus vs 15mm lumix really compare- outside of slightly different focal lengths the sharpness is actually really comparable, it's really more down to, which one do you like better in terms of looks and brand lol! Btw I sold my 20mm but when I'm out with my 15mm sometimes it feels too long compared to the 20! You wouldn't think it makes much of a difference but if you're out on a long day it's noticeable!
4:26 In real life, the minimal focus distance is 18 cm for both lenses - in Autofocus mode (tried it yesterday). Of course optical wise you get a bit closer to the object with the longer panasonic lens. With the mechanical focus ring engaged on the Olympus 17 mm on the other hand, it keeps you at the nominal 25 cm minimal focal distance. No way to get closer. But manual focusing on the Olympus lens is a breeze with the mechanical focus ring, compared to the ultra slow, non feeedback electric manual focus ring on the 20 mm panasonic.
@@purpleneonsYou are right! I just tried it - by turnig it super fast - feels like mechanical speed (no limit). But its as fast in electrical Focus position (in Manual Focus mode on the camera) - and it stops moving at all without power from the camera - with and without clutch. When I get into the "mechanical" Focus Ring mode it immediately changes the Lens position according to the distance setting on the ring. They did this really, really well! I was sure its an actual mechanical clutch, but its pure electrical magic! The closer minmal focus distance stays there nevertheless in camera Manual Mode. Seems the manual focus ring simulation has less range on the minimal distance position.
I do not have the Olympus 17mm f/1.8. I do, however, have the Olympus 17mm f/2.8 and the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7. I prefer the image quality, focal length, and maximum aperture of the 20mm.
@@KimCruz1 Now I just wished Olympus or Panasonic would hear me and release an improved 20mm, with a snappy auto-focus. I prefer this range over the 17 and the 25mm.
@@maggnet4829 yeah although I think the way they view it is the 15mm 1.7 is the modern replacement although in my book the focal lengths are still quite significantly different.. having a pancake lens is really nice!
@@KimCruz1 I agree. I shot on 35mm full frame before and for me it was to wide. I like to shot close up portraits that show enough background to add to the story, without making the background the story by either including to much or pulling it towards the viewer like the 50mm does. Though my actual dream is something like a 35-80mm f2 lens with great bokeh and a light plastic build. A 40-70mm 2-2.8 would do it for me as well, but I guess many would want the 35 mm too. Tamron made a good shot in this direction with their 35-150mm 2.8-4, but it's to big and I personally don't think it has a pleasing bokeh and colors. For MFT I don't know anything in this direction, where it would be 17-40mm. They all start with 12mm, what introduces a lot of weight or other steong compromises.
