skip to Main Content

New Olympus 17mm f/1.8 officially released! Costs $499 (or 499/549 Euro).


And here it is the new Olympus 17mm f/1.8 lens! This page will be continually updated with new info:

BHphoto for $499 (Click here).

Reviews and Image samples:
Street Shooting Review by Robin Wong. You can download his full size JPEG samples at Mediafire. He says:
– Bokeh is very smooth, creamy and pleasing to look at.
– autofocus performance of the 17mm F1.8 lens, used on the E-PL5, is exceptionally good
– no ghosting, no flare, no distortion and only very low CA.
– the level of fine details captured is very impressive.
Full test by Pekka Potka. Some of his interesting findings:
– Compared to the Panasonic 20mm lens the new 17mm lens shows practically no fringing. The Lumix shows more resolution but has also weaker (micro) contrast.
– Price and quality goes hand in hand. If you feel this is expensive, you will also find this lens being very good.
More image samples at Pen And Tell (German) and Petapixel.
The French website OpenPN posted the official Len MTF chart:

Press release:
Dpreview, ThePhoBlographer, DSLRmagazine (Spanish), Neocamera, Lepidi (French), Photoscala (German), Olympus (Japanese), OpenPN (French), Focus Numerique (French), Quesabesde (Spanish), Imaging Resource, Pixiq, SystemKameraForum (German).

European price: Some website write that the price is 499 Euro and some others write that the price is 499 Euro.


Are you going to buy the new Olympus 17mm f/1.8 lens?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • jevfp

    The question now,.is it worth it for the price,cheap or expensive is relative,.how is the optical quality?

    .is up to you guys,..

    • Kyle

      Yes…espectially in comparison with cheapter, proven Pana 20/1.7

    • tomm

      for me, the optical quality is much tooooo bad:

      IT IS NOT BLACK;-((((

      honestly.. ill never out a silcr-chrome bright shining tube on a black cam: looking like a PANDA

      too sad..

      • Tard the Cat

        Never go full retard.

        • Dobbler


    • Bob B.

      I have to say..this is certainly not a WOW lens, (like the 12mm or the 75mm) is just average. I think that for $500 for a lens of this focal length on an MFT camera…it could definitely have more WOW (yes, that is a technical term!)….This is a prime focal length for street shooters on a fast-focusing compact system camera. I think Olympus could have pushed the envelope a little further here.

      • Bob B.

        The fact that the lens only comes in silver could sway most to purchase it, though…regardless of image quality!

  • Jevfp

    Btw,Admin,.i think you mistyped the FL ,.is not 75 ,.have to be 17

    • admin

      Corrected! Thanks! :)

  • jevfp

    For comparison,.

    Lumix 14mm F 2.5 =299$

    Lumix 20mm F1.7 =355$

    Olympus 17mm f2.8 =299$

    and now,.The new Olympus 17mm F1.8 =499

    with metal material ,DoF scale,MSC for Fast focusing [better than the F2.8/17].but NOT include lens hood,..and now ONLY SILVER

    • You forgot the 12 mm f/2.0, which costs $799.

      I hope there will be a 9 or 10 mm f/2.8. Either one would be worth $800 to me, if metal construction is used. If there’s just plated or anodized plastic used, around $300 seems appropriate.

      • Jevfp

        Yup ,.+100

        I would include the 12mm but for comparison,.but it seems like the 12mm is to wide as being 24mm Fov compare with 17mm so ,i just limited the comparison range with the Closer FL available, 28mm,35 and 40mm fov

      • some how I think the lens contributes more to the cost than the encasing barrel.

        • Well, I would prefer to share your expectation, but I can’t.

          Take a modern and a pre-2000 lens of the same price class apart and compare how the internals (I am not talking about the quality of the lens elements) are made. I was shocked when I saw what’s in my 40-150.

    • Matthias

      $355 VS $499

      At this price difference, this 17/1.8 has to blow away Pana 20/1.7 into pieces. Having faster focus is not attractive enough.

      • M43lover

        Lets see..
        1) much Faster focusing
        2) better distortion control, 20mm’s barrel distortion is quite bad
        3) no ca, even at corners
        4) no vignetting and corner softness like the 20mm
        5) much better built quality
        6) 17mm having better micro contrast
        7) superb resistance to flare

        The 20mm is blown into pieces already

        • Anonymous

          you just nailed some point for us as consideration to buy,..congratulation,.we will get some fever again,.GAS

        • JF

          You can delete 7), flare resistance is one of the strong quality of the 20 mm f1.7

        • Photographer

          exuse my ignorance, but would you enlighten me WHY DO PPL CARE ABOUT DISTORTION?

          I (and 99% ppl) shoot to RAW where distortion is easily (autocratically) corrected by lens profile either in LightRoom or (better) DXO optics.

          You can’t correct sharpness (the details are lost forever) and only partially correct vignetting (you can brighten it to level the image but dynamic and shadows information are lost by capturing) but with distortion which is corrected without any visible lost (if it isn’t extreme like fisheye) – why the hell you care?

          Thanks for reply – I learn all the time.
          Personally, Panasonic 20mmm is clear winner -> sharper & more compact, and focus on OM-D is faster than 95% P&S cameras…

          • JF

            Where do you find lenses profiles for olympus and panasonic lenses ?? For what I know, they don’t provide them which is too bad…I know you can create them with an adobe software but I think oly and pana could make an effort and provide them…Every big manufacturers provide them (Nikon, Canon,…).
            Apart of that, I agree that you can correct distorsion manually in ligthroom when distorsion hasn’t a too much particular shape…that operation produces a little bit of sharpness loss however…

            • Charles

              assuming to my knowledge lens correction on m43 is provided by the (heavily corrected) software in the lens -> which is stored in RAW file.

              Lightroom will read that info automatically…

              • JF

                Ok right, I forgot that…in fact what I assumed to be distorsion with some lenses is just the residual distorsion after correction…indeed the true distorsion must be much higher and the residual distorsion I sometimes noticed in RAW is very low…

          • Matt

            Because if the digital file is corrected by being warped it is destructive. Pixel information is stretched and condensed and it makes the image less sharp. You aren’t startin with a true image to begin with.

        • Anonymous

          On the flip side,

          panasonic 20mm:


          Thats a hard one to beat!

          • slower AF
            extending during AF

            I like the optical performance of the 20mm but I’d nmever buy it for the above mentioned reasons

          • D3xmeister

            Lens correction works only in lab and in a limited shooting style. It is catastrophic for people photos and other real life subjects. The correction is actually much worse than having a strong distorsion in the first place.

        • Ryan K.


          1) much Faster focusing —> Oly is faster but the difference is not a big issue. Pana 20/1.7 is fast enough for general use. I even use it for 3D tracking shooing on E-M5

          2) better distortion control, 20mm’s barrel distortion is quite bad
          This is not true.

          3) no ca, even at corners
          CA? I’ve never heard about CA problem with this lens. Moreover, you will never see CA issue with Pana bodies.

          4) no vignetting and corner softness like the 20mm. How do you ensure that Oly 17mm doesn’t have vignet ?

          5) much better built quality – Yes,if you are like World-war photogragher. 20/1.7 built quality is actually proven in terms of bulit quality. It’s more than enough for general users.

          6) 17mm having better micro contrast – Micro contrast? What a strage comment. Are you kidding? Have you ever used 20/1.7?

          7) superb resistance to flare – In fact, this is one of the strong points of 20/1.7

        • Matthew

          Robin’s review is always good. I’ve never seen any negative reviews from him. In fact, 20/1.7 has been proven as a reference for m4/3 format.

          I will hold my decision and will wait and see the reviews by and We don’t have to be in rush buying this lens.

        • #2, #3 and #4, those are cine lens qualities.

          No vignette, I’d really like to see in my own eyes. Un-corrected video clip of slow camera panning against brick wall or foliage, see how little vignette there really is…

      • Duchemin

        I have the Pana 20 1.7 and for me a better bokeh and faster focus is enough to make sell the Pana and buy the new Olympus. The Pana focuses slowly and hunts a lot in dim light and the bokey is nervous and harsh.

    • Gabriel

      >Lumix 14mm F 2.5 =299$

      In Asia it cost less than $150 (from kit set)

    • tom

      yes, only silver: Olympus supports the world foundation for the survival of the PANDA photographer…;-((((


    • Lumix 14mm F 2.5 – $160.

  • dgreene196

    Pekka Potka has some good thoughts on the review at his site. The lens seems to give up some center sharpness for consistency across the lens along with superior micro-contrast (in comparison to the Lumix 20 mm).

    Still seems like a very interesting product. Will be looking forward to more reviews and, hopefully, a more specific release date. I moved to µ4/3 for the wide-angle primes, so I’m never upset to see another one released.

    • napilopez

      Pekka Potka’s review is really interesting. It thankfully brings to light some points other than sharpness. The mention of consistent frame performance and microcontrast was great.

      But man, do his thoughts on the 12-60 zoom make me wish Oly would reincarnate that lens in M4/3 form. That type of performance from a zoom is outstanding. I know many of us wouldn’t mind having the option for it, even if it’s big and heavy, as long as it focuses fast.

      • michael

        From a business standpoint, Oly will first do a 25/1.8 and possibly a 10/2.8. The zoom will only come a year after these lenses, so it does not eat on their sales. Possibly have to wait even longer for fast AF for the 43 lenses on m43. People then have to buy new stuff instead of using their old 43 lenses.

        Makes sense from a business standpoint, but it seriously pisses off customers. How will oly decide?

  • Bite Me

    YUP! This OFFICIALLY replaces my Panny 20 & 25. Best of all: FASTER FOCUS!

  • Alex

    Shame on you Olympus and the whole micro43 bunch for the astronomical prices!

    • Anonymous

      The prices are not ‘astronomical’

      The Canon EF 35mm 2.0 is $309 at B&H

      This 17mm is faster & smaller with metal construction & snap focus.

      Get a grip.

      • Will

        You shouldn’t compare this lens with that FF lens. That Canon lens has better subject-vs-background separation.

        • Anonymous

          We can not compare to the Ff lens,.but,its not the lens who mainly make the separation but the size of sensor

          • Rayes

            Yes. And the fact is that nowadays the price of m4/3 lens is almost the same or even going beyond that of FF lens.

      • Anonymous

        so thats another 80% or so price on a lens that can cover a FF sensor…. m43 lenses are expencive, especialy since they use smaller elements, and big elements cost alot as optical glass is stupidly expencive…

        So yes us m43ers are paying over the odds for glass!

        • Bennie

          Yeah! You can invest just $196 for nicely famous Nikon 35mm/f1.8G

          • dgreene196

            The Nikon 35 f/1.8 G is a very nice lens, but it is also a lens optimized for a DX (APS-C) sensor, meaning it is really an approximate 50 mm equivalent lens. And Nikon’s newer 35 f/1.4, which covers the full-frame sensor, retails for well over $1500!

            The best recent comparison would be Canon’s announcement earlier this month of the release of a 35 mm f/2.0 with IS. That lens is to come out next month and retail for $849. A somewhat different beast than Olympus’ newest lens, but welcome to the modern world of new lens prices…

            • Pete

              FYI This lens can be used with FF as 35mm lens with extremely low vignet.

    • rob

      you cannot compare lumix 25mm with this lens. it totally different lens… keep the one you like and enjoy it. or if you pocket allow you to keep both? haha

    • Astromical? Let’s see other 35mm options:

      New Canon 35/2 IS USM, $850. Yes it has IS but Oly has IBIS.

      The cheaper Canon 35/2 is much older. Same goes for the Nikon 35/2D, which is around $350.

      Sony Zeiss 24/1.8 E (NEX), $1100.

      Canon 22/2 M, $250. Really??

      There aren’t really any native options for APS-C DSLRs. So…

      Nikon 24/2.8D, $360.

      Nikon 28/1.8G, $700.

      Canon 24/2.8 IS USM $660. Non-IS is discontinued.

      Canon 28/1.8 $450.

      Price is all over the place for this short list, which doesn’t include the expensive (real) Zeiss, Leica, etc. The Olympus is nowhere near “astronomical”. It is cheap compared to the NEX option but is twice the EOS-M. The cheap Canon 22/2 has questionable IQ.

      • Ryan K.

        You forget Nikon 35mm f1.8G which is just $196. This lens is proven among Nikon users. Even though it’s APS-C lens, it also can be used with FF bodies perfectly.

        • Bobby

          I miss this lens so much. It’s pretty cheap but its optical quality is second-to-none. m4/3 lens is sadly more expensive every day.

        • That’s 35mm in DX; mount it in a FX body and it’ll be in crop mode. What’s that equivalent to? 52.5mm – different FoV.

          My point was, if you want a lens/system with an FoV equivalent to 35mm on FF, like this Olympus, you’d have to normally spend more.

      • Vlad

        Not astronomical, but the m43 system is actually quite expensive, when you think about it. And I don’t see a reason for that.

  • I ordered it:)

  • donsantos

    Hope to get it before christmas. What is the official release date?

  • Karen

    I will wait and see how good this lens is. Pana 20/1.7 is such an excellent lens, a lot cheapter and optically proven, although its focus is not lighting fast, but it’s fast enough for general use.

  • Jevfp

    So guys ,.the Image sample of this lens view days ago,[i believe was a french site] compared to Robin Wong its so different ;,.

    Was it The Lens ,.or the photographer fault?,

  • Both reviews are interesting, but Robin’s images really make the new 17mm. sing.

    As he says this lens will probably become an absolute bestseller. I am also impressed how well it matches the E-PL, both in resolution and colours.

    With P. Potka you get an interesting assessment of the true performance. Even resolution across the frame, good microcontrast even wide open are quite impressive.

  • man

    European price: Some website write that the price is 499 Euro and some others write that the price is 499 Euro.


  • Alfons

    Pekka Potka’s images show no CA while Photozone says there’s plenty of it. Is CA in-camera corrected like the distortions?

    I don’t like this evolution of making cheap lenses and correcting the flaws digitally, especially when you don’t see the cheapness on the price tag. Oh, and you have to buy the lens hood separately! Ridicilous.

    Otherwise there has to be a lot of variation between samples of this lens, which doesn’t sound encouraging either.

    I have thought of retiring my E-3 early next year. I was expecting a lot from this lens as ~35mm is my favourite focal lenght.. We’ll see.

    • If you can’t tell if it’s correct through the lens or corrected via software, then it doesn’t make a difference.

      So, can you tell? I’m guessing not by the fact you asked.

      • alfons

        I can tell there’s CA on other shot and not in another and I can tell the boarders are not as sharp as they could.

        CA is easy to hide digitally. Distortion on the other hand is impossible to correct without a loss of image quality.

        I’m just afraid the latest direction in lens making is not what I have become familiar with Zuiko brand.

    • Pekka Potka wrote that he converted the RAWs with LR with activated CA correction.
      @admin: so there is no new fast telezoom from Oly? Pity but probably it will come later

    • Photographer

      CA is corrected automatically in Panasonic bodies – but not in Olympus.

      So in OM-D -> you’re out of luck. I guess this is a miss from Olympus in my point of view, but go jump on hype of ‘improved autofocus’.

      The only problem of 20mm (for me) is it can’t focus at night. And it’s 1.7 lens so one would use it at night hehe – so it should. But can’t properly, like the ‘I get the lock all the time’ 14mm F2.5 snapper.

  • Jevfp

    Admin,.i believe you will get a long list post of comment,again.from both side ,.Pana lover and LumiX hater,.lol,.Not include THE HONORABLE,.TROLL

    i will wait for Adriaantie to comment,.in this site,.must be interesting and amusing,.lol

    and Also the black Lover/silver hater version

    • admin

      We all wnat to hear Adriaantie’s voice :)

      • fl00d

        I bet it’s a squeaky girly one.

      • T-L

        Do you hear voices, when reading written text? :D
        I dunno, but if so, maybe you need a vacation without access to the internet.. ;)

  • Sam Waldron

    Ummm what photozone review?

    CA is a non issue these days – easily autocorrected in either raw or jpeg anyway.

  • Anonymous

    How is Robin Wong even worth listening to? Olympus could take a dump, and he would eat it for breakfast and call it delicious.

    • jocky scot

      I call him wobin rong. It is better suited

      • Photographer

        am I the only one that calls him Robin Wrong?

        he’s wrong so many times… ;-)

    • tobby.m

      Why do you guys hate him? He seems like a genuine person. his photography work is excellent. He handles his gear very well. Not many people can accomplish his level of work.

      • Anonymous

        I’ve also seen excellent work done with an iPhone 3. Some of the stuff done with an RX100 is well on par with m4/3. These kind of reviews don’t say anything about the actual performance of a camera/lens.

      • Anonymous

        Also, the first picture in the review… is terrible.

        • Tobby.m

          So you are saying you take better pictures? I would like to see them !!

          • Anonymous

            Be realistic. My girlfriend can take a better picture than the first shot using a P&S.

            • E-1

              Woahaha, Anonymous. Not enough money for a name?

              • lets assume his gf is ellen von unwerth…

      • Lyden

        Robin is an excellent photographer with a high level of knowledge, I for one, value his opinion. He’s also a super nice guy – taking time to personally respond to an inquiry of mine with an extensive detailed answer. Dude rocks.

    • No need to listen to him mate.

      He’s posted the pictures for you to download and look at yourself. You can draw your own conclusions.

  • Miroslav

    What happened to the tele zoom?

  • Jalo

    I always get suspicious when lenses are not compared / tested on full aperture… why 2.8?

    anyway, this is the lens I wanted, so have to change 17/2.8 to this one :)

    • BB

      Americans get cheaper electronics, but when they get a serious illness they go bankrupt and end up homeless and starve in the streets from the healthcare costs.

      Consider yourself lucky.

  • Dave

    And as usual in Europe we are expected to pay more for this lens than almost everywhere else in the world – when are we going to see fair pricing?

    • Bob2

      Blame yourselves and your Euro socialist governments that have imposed so many taxes and tariffs in the name of social welfare (bureaucratic waste in reality), driving up the cost of anything sold in Europe (and you thought it was the rich paying for it). You can easily compare the difference by taking out the VAT–and that does not include the import taxes, etc. already added at the wholesale level.

  • Anonymous

    Read Robin’s reveiw, very impressed with the sample images. Glad I went for the 25mm Leica instead of the 20mm Lumix now, so I can just justify the need for this 17mm to fill ‘huge gap’ in my prime collection :)

  • わからない

    Excellent price, IMO. US MSRP of $500 compared to the Panasonic 20 f/1.7’s $429 MSRP makes both lenses essentially complimentary. If I needed such a lens, with this kind of a price difference, I’d take the Oly for the distance markings.

    We’ll see if we get as steep of a discount on the Oly at B&H as we do with the Panny (my guess: not for at least a few months).

  • oluv

    too big, who needs this if he can have a smaller and brighter 20mm?

  • Ulli

    as usual, nice review from Robin…love his photos. They show the 17mm renders very nicely.

  • JF

    Bokeh of the 17 mm is really better than 20 mm, much smoother…

  • This lens is all? Nothing else? No good zooms?

    • Ren Kockwell

      Well, fingers crossed for a “nice” zoom soon…

      • admin

        Yep, working on that rumor now…

        • Thank you :-)

        • Ren Kockwell

          Rumour or not you’ve saved me a lot of money and buyers remorse by stopping my Panasonic 35-100 purchase at the 11th hour. Thank you admin. Looking forward to more rumours.

  • Ken

    You know what. It seems that this is the first time that we see such a long debate between two m4/3 lens. The competition between Oly and Pana is very nice to users. Hopefully Oly will release more and more lenses that have similar Pana’s focal length.

  • Shpadoinkle

    Pictures taken with the Panasonic 20mm have a magic quality about them that is lacking in all the pictures I’ve seen taken with the new Oly 17mm. They look really good, but are missing what makes the 20mm special (fairy dust or something). And at EUR 499 it’s way too expensive. Also, silver is a shitty colour.

    • Charles


    • Really?

      It came out today and your stating you haven’t seen any amazing pictures yet? Amazing photographers don’t waste their time “reviewing” lenses for stupid people to read. Give them time man!

  • Sammer

    This is unquestionably a best lens ever for m4/3 format. I’m sure that it’s not only superior to Voigt 35/0.95 but also every 35mm lens in the current market.

    • Samer

      Sorry for my typo. I mean Voigt 17mm/0.95

      • Anonymous

        You do know that f/0.95 is 2 f-stops faster than f/1.8, right? That’s 4 times more light.

        • Sammer

          Of course, I know. But, faster doesn’t mean sharper or better contrast, right?

          • Mymaco

            At 1.8 voigtländer is really sharp. At f5.6 it’s a razor. You can’t really compare it with this Oly lens: it’s only manual, it gathers a HUGE amount of light (I use it for my night landscape shots), it’s heavier and bigger. Using a lens full manual is something special, but I miss a fast AF sometimes. By the way, voigty is not coupled electronically therefore there are no in camera correction. I assure you that raw files are waaaay better than this Oly 17mm, and only purple fringing (CA) when shooting wide open against bright light needs to be corrected.

      • Obviously you are working for Olympus , lol

        • Charles

          indeed he is, the reviews are actually quite calm, and images average at best…definitely not zeiss F1.8 (nex) or leica…

          skip this lens, you won’t loose much (sharpness isn’t there anyway at ANY aperture)

          P.S. Voight is a strange lens, soft as babies bum unless at around 2.8-4.0, with color cast and half kilo of weight. And manual focus. Thank you.

  • Then,
    hey, all of yo

    What about “new three announce including Pana”?
    there is only one, until today.
    hearing about that, and jumping and hopping you!, hey you! how do you think ?

  • Mojo

    Sorry Olympus. Too little. Too late. Don’t want to wait 4 years to be able to have a set of om fast standard focal length primes (35equiv: 35/50/70 or 90). Have already bought and sold all 4/3 lenses. Final kit is: Voigt 17.5 and 25 and Oly 45. So rather than portability and light-weight, the kit was designed for unique OOC photography like with my Leica and Sigma. Also have a couple OM that I will not part with: 100/2, 50/2 Macro, 75-150.

    Too bad. It would have been nice to have a Leica-style PEN with HQ small fast primes from Olympus, since you started the craze anyway.

    I guess playing the timed release thing with the market really is all about the timing. Hope you have a Leica-style plan in your 4/3 future and that last 25mm prime in the works. Otherwise I’m all outta G.A.S. with ya ;)

    • KI

      Can I have the OM Zuiko 100/2 when you die?


      • Mojo

        You should get one. The old Oly OM f2 lenses are really great on these new 4/3 cameras. I also converted my Sigma SD15 to use them. Fun Fun Fun. I was so enamored of these old lenses I went on a mission to get them all with their original leather cases. The hardest case to find was the one for the 100/2. Finally after 2 years, I just got one off eBay! So now complete as follows: 24/2, 35/2, 50/2, 100/2. I currently use the 24, 35 and a rare-earth Oly 55/1.2 with the Sigma. It gives me 40-60-90 in 35mm on that camera.

        • Zukio 55/1.2 is spesial because this have very low contrast give nice image for portrait, i hope olympus come by a 30mm F1.2 in m43 and same low contrast too.

        • Zuiko

          You’re missing the OM Zuiko 90mm f2 macro in that list.
          Just trying my best to give you GAS :)

    • hlbt

      Out of G.A.S.? I envy you! :-)

  • I don’t get why all those negative feelings towards Robin Wong. The guy is honest – everybody knows he loves Oly cameras, thus his reviews come from that vantage point. I don’t see anything special so far. At least from Robin’s images, the bokeh seems ok, if a bit nervous when there is fine detail in the background, some of the portraits seemed too close for my liking (probably to exaggerate the out of focus area), thus creating weird looking faces. Some of the pics seem to have blown highlights as well. All in all, nothing that would make me say “YES!!! This is the lens I want!”.

    Oh! And don’t get me started on the silly blingly silver lens topic…

    • QBNY

      “everybody knows he loves Oly cameras, thus his reviews come from a Biased, Pro-Olympus vantage point.”


      By the way, I don’t take reviewers opinions that serious, when they do reviews shooting jpgs. To me, that’s just lazy journalism. You not really telling me how the camera/lens performs.

      • Ulli

        showing raw is more important when testing a camerabody’s sensor, jpg’s cando for lenses provided the settings are not exaggerated, especially the way Robin tests lenses; shooting outside the lab.

        • QBNY

          It’s STILL a jpg.

          • lol,did you even try to process the comment i just gave?

  • prometheus

    Anyone know if this is weather sealed? That would probably convince me to buy when considering all else.

  • This looks every bit like a terrific addition to the m43 collection. Right off the bat, a candidate for m43 lens of the year.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe having an option on the poll that said if it was black I would buy it, would be educational.

  • Frye

    Much of it is subjective but to me the lens looks pretty good.

  • jimbo

    $500 is a decent price for a f1.8 lens with metal construction and markings. It seems to have good sharpness across the frame. Compared to the f2.8 version, this one is not a let down and the sharpness will allow you to produce nice large prints with it. I bought the 25mm f1.4 over the 20mm f1.7 due my preference for the 50mm POV. This lens with a 35mm POV will be perfect for casual shooting. I might sell my Panny 14mm f2.5 to help fund this.

  • If you look at the resolution charts you will see that the old 17/2.8 has the same resolution at the center of the frame. Where it improves it’s at the edges, but it’s no longer a pancake.

  • closest focus distance is 25cm

    By comparison, the pl25 is 30cm and the 1.7/20 is 20cm.

    None of those are sold as macro, yet for general purpose, this is an extra 5 to 10cm short distance reach that sometimes does a hell of a difference. Having sold my 20mm and bought the 25mm, I know a thing or two about that.

    I’d still choose the 17mm over the 20mm.

  • For me, the winner between the Panny 20 1.7 and the new M.Zuiko 17 1.8 is the Sigma 19 2.8.

  • LucioF

    WTF??? IT’s just me or the scale focus is completly WRONG?? :O !!!

    2 option, or this lens is FF or they can’t even calculate DOF….

    I search for a lot of img and they are all WRONG…

    somebody can flag this to olympus?? here the img
    Oly 17
    1m to 3m at f/22 are you CRAZY?!?
    hyperfocal is reached to 1.2m at f/8 !!!!

    please FLAG FLAG FLAG THIS!!!!!

  • IMaybewrong…

    The manufacturers have had a good time selling body upgrades as sensor sizes and ISO benefits were selling points, and they could probably afford to reduce lens prices. With bodies and sensors being all good for most people, I guess lenses and accessories (hoods) will be where the profit will be.
    A good thing, as good glass is what we really want.

  • DeFinitive

    I bought the OM-D along with the 45 f1.8 a few weeks ago with a view to buying the 17 f1.8 when it came out. I didn’t want the kit lens. Here’s a review from Ming Thein

Back To Top

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website,, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.