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 .

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.

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

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

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,

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.

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.

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.

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!

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 😉

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

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" … ;-)

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.😎🇦🇺👍

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!

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.

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!

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."

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 :-)

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.

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.

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?

Great review.

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.

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?

Always a fan of fast wide angle lenses : )

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!

where do u get the L plate for ur em10mii?

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 .

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What you need, is a ZOOM lens

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).

It's a great lens

comparing sharpness at 1.8 vs 3.5 seems futile.

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 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/q7F_ZbeKnJ3OlYE.html Thanks for your feedback...