Which Olympus Prime Lens

I'm looking at getting an Olympus Prime Lens but can't decide which focal length would be best. Deciding between the 17mm and 25mm focal length. Any suggestions?

There are the impeccable 17 & 25 f1.2 Pro lenses,
the excellent & smaller 17 & 25 f1.8 lenses (I have both and prefer the 25 for IQ), and, alas,
the economy 17 f2.8 tiny pancake.

I use both focal lengths extensively, choosing one is a personal choice, and there are plenty of sample photos on flickr.com

Agree that focal length is a matter of personal preference; it depends on what you like to shoot. If you have one of the kit zooms, try setting it to 17mm and walk around shooting, then do the same at 25mm.

I do admit I’ve never liked the 25/1.8, though. It’s always felt overly clinical to me, and too many pics I took with it lacked the kind of fine tonal rendering gradations that I prefer.

There’s a comparison shot that illustrates the issue, I can try to dig up if you want, between the 25/1.8 and the Panny 20/1.7. It’s a dusk shot of a floodlit statue against a river, with a couple of spotlights in the distant background. With the 20/1.7, you can see clearly defined edges of the spotlight beams, and the reflections in the water have a glossy edge; the beam edges are fuzzy and indistinct with the 25 - it looks more like a blotch than a beam - and the water is pretty flat.

Do you mean F1.2 or F1.8 lenses? I have both F1.8 and both are great small lenses. I usually use 25mm for "normal" distance portraits while the 17mm as landscape or mini grouphies (maybe three to four people).

What do you use now?
If you have a zoom that covers those focal lengths, put it at 25mm and use it at that setting for a week or so then do the same for the 17mm. No zooming!
Which did you like? How did they make you see the world?
Buy the one that you felt most comfortable with and met your needs the most.

Both are very versatile FLs.

I prefer the 17mm FL to 25mm since with 17mm you can reach the camera controls when doing tabletop vlogging. Also I find myself preferring a slightly wider lens for casual shooting. While 25mm will reduce perspective distortion, when this is a concern I usually defer to a 35-45mm option which would do a slightly better job. Also, there is a look I get from my Oly 17mm f/1.8 that I like a lot (totally subjective).

You really can’t go wrong with either.

As the others have said, it's really kinda up to you so looking at your past shots to see what you tend to favor can help decide.

That said, I would start with 17mm since you can crop in a bit to get closer to 25, but if you're using 25 and you need more width you're kinda stuck unless you wanna get into stitching photos together (which I dread doing).

Both the 17/1.8 and 17/1.2 are great lenses - the 17/1.8 for it's portability, solid optics and build, the 17/1.2 for its shallower DoF, excellent feather bokeh (when used wide-open). I personally love the 17/1.2 for environmental portraiture where I want a bit more "context" beyond just the subject I'm shooting.

What lens or lenses do you have now, what do you photograph, and what do you hope to gain with a prime? Which Olympus 17mm prime and which Olympus 25mm prime? It wouldn't make much sense to recommend something without knowing why you want it.

I want to buy a tea kettle...which is better, a 4 quart kettle or a 6 quart kettle? Which is better, a shotgun or a rifle? I won't strain the analogies, I hope you get the idea.

It took me months to finally decide between 8mm F1.8 and 17mm F1.2 as my first prime lens ever. And this indecision was despite knowing exactly what I needed a prime lens for. This is more a decision you make for yourself, don't listen to anyone else. If you aren't sure then just keep zooming.

The 25mm isn’t perfect for anything, but it’s nearly perfect for everything. If you’re opting a single prime, that would be a good choice.

The other thing to consider is how you intend to round out your kit with other. An ideal two prime kit would be 15mm (or 12) and 45mm. If you ultimately intend to have three primes then it would be 12-25-45.

50 years, I bought an Olympus film SLR and my first lens for it was not the 50mm f1.8, but the 35mm f3.5. I've always liked the wider view of the 35mm over the 50. In M43 crop size terms, I feel the same way about 17mm to the 25mm, and today both can be either f1.8 or f1.2. I figure you have a kit zoom right now. Spend some time constraining yourself to either 17mm or 25mm? Maybe you will prefer one or neither focal length,

I own the Olympus 17mm f1,8, and have no need for the f1.2, Instead, I think owning a 12-40 and a 17mm f1.8 prime would be a better combo,.

Must it be Olympus or any in m43 mount?
I'm quite partial to the Panasonic 15mm f/1.7.
The Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is great bang for your buck although I like the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 better but it's a bit long for indoor use.

Selecting lenses is highly subjective and depends a lot on what you are using them for (size & weight.)
Personally I don't really like either the 17 or 25mm FL, When using a prime I have settled on the P14, P20 and occasionally the Sigma 30mm lens. When indoors or in low light and just for fun I often use the Laowa 10mm lens ( the P9mm wasn't an option when I acquired the 10mm and probably would have been my choice if it had been.)

WhyNot

Well I have just bought myself a second hand Olympus 45mm f1.8 and it just arrived today. I am totally shocked at how small and lightweight it is and I am looking forward to trying it out. I also have a TT Artisans 17mm f1.4 which is a cracking lens but a manual focus lens so not as quick to use compared to an AF lens.

I copy-paste my answer from DPR in similar (Yours? - different user name) thread just 2 days ago:

"My choice: Oly 17/1.8

You need very universal, multitask focal length (FL) paired with fast aperture, but not at the cost of bulk.

As You have full set of zooms with relatively slow aperture, You'll really need this prime mostly for indoor shots or evening scenery from street to landscape.

Alternative choice is Pana 15/1.7, (it may have slightly better image quality) but I would personally prefer 17/1.8 anyway.

I always travelled and hiked with ultrazoom (14-150) + 1 fast prime (currently 2 12/2.0 added). Started from 14/2.5, but later changed for 17/1.8 and never regreted, though 14 was quite a fine lens. Switch was not only due to faster aperture, but also to FL.

14 mm was slightly too wide for some task, creating unnecesary distortion of shapes due to its perspective (its just a matter of FL and distance). Close shots of people are not good, for example.

17 mm proved to be enough wide for most interiors with less geometric issues. 20/1.7 is known from slow AF in the dark and in my opinion would be too narrow for some interiors, just like 25 mm. They would be better on the street and for human photography, I guess."

Regards,
-J.

I bought my 17/1.2 only because it is the one of two wide-normal WR prime lens (Sigma 16/1.4 is the other but it's not 'pro' rated). When I don't need WR, I prefer the 15/1.7. The 25/1.8 is just as good, IQ-wise, as the 15/1.7. I recommend looking at 15/1.7 and 25/1.8

What a question! 25, 25, 25mm! All day long, and even at night ;-)

(I don’t like the 17mm focal length, but it is nice for video in constrained spaces)

I’m speaking about the f/1.2 lenses, as I don’t own the slower ones. They are really great lenses, and you can’t go wrong with any of them.

In the end it’s your personal choice which focal length you prefer.

Yeah, I agree. I don’t know which software you use, but the better ones are able to filter by lens / focal length so that you’ll get an overview in an instant.

The argument kind of goes both ways. I prefer longer focal lengths for portraiture. With the 25mm I can crop and get near that 85mm equiv. focal length. This is impractical with the 17mm, as the loss in image quality would be too huge for the sensor size.