Nope. Not sample variation. The Olymps 17mm f1.8 is a shit design. I tried and
returned five of them from B&H before giving up and every single one was
IDENTICAL. Several months later, I was at a camera store that sold them and
they let me try several of them and every one was the same. They just plain
have ZERO fine detail resolution off axis. Stopping down did not help, it was
the same wide open as it was stopped down. That's not sample variation, it’s
the baseline for that lens.
If you don't photograph detailed subject matter, you may not notice it. I
suspect, too that the lens was made for the 16mp cameras and just isn't sharp
enough for the 20mp sensors. I regularly sell 16x20 prints, and the lack of
sharpness is extreme in a large print, a problem I don't have with any other
lens I own.
It’s a $400 lens, it needs to perform better. The Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7 is
incredibly sharp all across the frame. I had one of those for a while and sold
it because I just wasn't using it much. I have the 7-14mm f2.8 Pro, 12-40mm
f2.8 Pro, 60mm f2.8 Macro, and 45mm f1.8 lenses all from Olympus. I also have
the Panasonic 45-150mm f4-5.6 lens, which is a super cheap zoom costing only
$150. All of those lenses, even the cheap 45-150 zoom, dramatically
outperformed the Olympus 17mm f1.8. They all tack sharp all the way to the edge.
My living depends on selling my prints. The 17 just wasn't up to the job, and I
wasn't willing to compromise.
--
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-437-8990
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
Like My Work on Facebook
On 8/28/19, 3:33 AM, "olympus on behalf of Frank"
<olympus-bounces+chris=chriscrawfordphoto.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of
wijsmuller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hmm... quite a harsh statement regarding the 17mm 1.8. Could it be sample
variation?
I'm happy with my 17mm 1.8. I actually compared it with a 17mm 1.2 on a
show, very unscientific of course, and was surprised that I found the
differences in sharpness and rendering not very big (surprised, because the
1.2 gets stellar reviews, the 1.8 less so).
Not the best shots to judge sharpness I guess, but do you see very soft
images just outside dead center in these?
Most in the theatres at f/2, some f/1.8: <
https://photos.app.goo.gl/BkpWHV8KRhD4Mg1Q8>
Frank
Op wo 28 aug. 2019 om 03:27 schreef Christopher Crawford
>
> I have used Olympus and Panasonic lenses on mine. Most of them are very
> good, but avoid the Olympus 17mm f1.8; it is super sharp in the absolute
> center but quickly becomes very soft as you move away from the dead
center.
> Worst modern lens from any manufacturer I have ever used.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|