GH3 Olympus Wide Primes on Sale! Please Help Me Decide

I

Ianscreations

Well-known member
Right now, the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 is $50 off and the 12mm f/2.0 has a $100 discount.
The widest lens I have is the 12-35mm 2.8.

I need a fast and wide lens for wedding receptions. With 2.8, I have to bump ISO too high to make the footage usable.

Would 2.0 be fast enough? Would 1.8? If so, which one should I get? Not sure why the 12mm is so much higher than the 17. Tempted to get the 17mm b/c of the lower price and (slightly) better f-stop.

Thoughts?

PS
I have the 25mm 1.4 and that is a great lens for receptions..just wish it were a little wider. I only need ISO 2500 max with this lens.
 
Take this with a grain of salt as we're discussing f-stops instead of T-Stops.

You state that f/1.4 at ISO 2500 is acceptable so we'll use that as a reference.

The 12/2 is one stop slower so require ISO 5000 to achieve the same level of illumination, while the 17/1.8 will require ISO 4000.
 
Last edited:
The 12mm f2.0 is a much better lens than the 17mm f1.8.

http://www.lenstip.com/310.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED-Introduction.html
http://www.lenstip.com/310.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED-Introduction.html

But the 12mm f2.0 is only 1 stop faster than the 12-35mm f2.8 that you already own (ie., you can use it to shoot a 1/2 the ISO of the 12-35mm). If you need fast and sharp, then the Voigtlander 17mm f0.95, Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 with manual focus, or the Panasonic 25mm f1.4 with autofocus are the way to go. If you want to add a longer focal length to your arsenal, for portraits, then either the Olympus 45mm f1.8 or the Olympus 75mm f1.8 would be good choices. The 75mm is arguably the best native m43rds lens that money can buy.

http://www.lenstip.com/351.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_75_mm_f_1.8_ED-Introduction.html
http://www.lenstip.com/316.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_45_mm_f_1.8-Introduction.html
 
Bern Caughey said:
Take this with a grain of salt as we're discussing f-stops instead of T-Stops.

You state that f/1.4 at ISO 2500 is acceptable so we'll use that as a reference.

The 12/2 is one stop slower so require ISO 5000 to achieve the same level of illumination, while the 17/1.8 will require ISO 4000.
Click to expand...

That is very good information. I didn't realize that formula. So, one stop doubles ISO?
 
noirist said:
The 12mm f2.0 is a much better lens than the 17mm f1.8.

http://www.lenstip.com/310.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED-Introduction.html
http://www.lenstip.com/310.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_12_mm_f_2.0_ED-Introduction.html

But the 12mm f2.0 is only 1 stop faster than the 12-35mm f2.8 that you already own (ie., you can use it to shoot a 1/2 the ISO of the 12-35mm). If you need fast and sharp, then the Voigtlander 17mm f0.95, Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 with manual focus, or the Panasonic 25mm f1.4 with autofocus are the way to go. If you want to add a longer focal length to your arsenal, for portraits, then either the Olympus 45mm f1.8 or the Olympus 75mm f1.8 would be good choices. The 75mm is arguably the best native m43rds lens that money can buy.

http://www.lenstip.com/351.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_75_mm_f_1.8_ED-Introduction.html
http://www.lenstip.com/316.1-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_Digital_45_mm_f_1.8-Introduction.html
Click to expand...

I looked at the Voigtlander. Unfortunately, I need something with auto focus b/c of the nature of wedding receptions. So, I guess the widest autofocus I can get with the lowest Fstop is what I already have: 25mm 1.4
 
Ianscreations said:
I looked at the Voigtlander. Unfortunately, I need something with auto focus b/c of the nature of wedding receptions. So, I guess the widest autofocus I can get with the lowest Fstop is what I already have: 25mm 1.4
Click to expand...
The 12mm f2.0 is twice as wide and only 1 stop slower. I have the 12mm f2.0 and the 25mm f1.4 and use them both all the time.
 
I wish I had not seen this thread. Oly 12mm for $699? I don't need it right now and it's not really in my budget at the moment... but so much want.
 
noirist said:
FWIW, even that site gave the 12mm f2.0 a higher rating in both performance and handling
Click to expand...

Yes, they gave it a 5/5 instead of 4.5/5, which means they are both excellent lenses, with the nod going to the higher priced 12mm over the cheaper 17mm lens.

Contrast this to the Voightlander 25mm f/0.95 which got a rating of 3.5/5 for performance and 4/5 for handling, well behind the Olympus 17mm lens.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... That's not my recollection. I've yet to see a bad review of the 12mm f2.0, and I've seen many raves.
 
Don't forget that you can also get 4/3 standard lenses, and an active lens adapter. The newest, and weather sealed, adapter is sitting at $99 right now on BH.


The Olympus Zuiko series, akin to Canon L, are pretty awesome. But pricey. They have a 14-35mm f2, but its $2300!
 
The 12mm F2 has also has the manual/auto option by the shifting of the focus ring backwards and forwards.
Get it - it's a great lens.
 
The old rule of thumb for building a lens set is to start with a "normal", then double, or half your focal lengths, & only later pick up the inbetweens.

Since you already have a fast "normal" lens (25/1.4) the next conventional choice would be a fast wide-angle, & as you want autofocus the 12/2 would be best choice. I'd also want something longer, around 50mm, & the Zuiko 45/1.8 fits that need.

That said I'd do some tests with your 12-35mm & decide whether you'd prefer to start with a 17mm, or 12mm.
 
Last edited:
Ianscreations said:
I looked at the Voigtlander. Unfortunately, I need something with auto focus b/c of the nature of wedding receptions. So, I guess the widest autofocus I can get with the lowest Fstop is what I already have: 25mm 1.4
Click to expand...

Hang on a second- If you need autofocus for video, you might want to make sure they work the way you are expecting before throwing them on your Panasonic body. The Lumix lenses you have been using are designed for HD video focusing as well as stills, whereas other micro 4/3 lenses are not necessarily (designed primarily for stills).

I have an Olympus 17mm F/2.8 pancake that I really enjoy shooting stills with, especially on my Olympus PEN that I carry around. But I tried to fly a GH2 steadicam with autofocus on it, and the results were awful. The autofocus was noisy and slow, and more often than not missed the mark. Because again, it was designed for stills.

Maybe someone else who has the lenses in questions and has tried AF with them can chime in on this, but I think you may have been spoiled by the Lumix zooms you have been using. They aren't all that good!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top