Personal View site logo
17mm SLR Magic topic

    Finally comes the first alternative to voigtlander 17.5mm! And to think that the 17mm could also be better in terms of focal length: in fact the crop in 16:9 mode should be a bit more of 2x, is not it? So to get even closer to the equivalent 35mm, it's better than 17.5 (just to make a speech of fanaticism, but there is!) So: what expectations we can feed? The build quality does not come close to voigtlander perhaps, but in terms of image quality, now we should be very close, is not it? Also the price will certainly be lower, you know if you can buy from a third party and take advantage of a street price lower? Let's keep up to date

  • 64 Replies sorted by
  • Actually the GH2 has a crop of 1.86X in 16:9 video mode. So to truly get a 35mm equiv lens, SLR Magic must produce a 18.8172043011mm lens for m43. That 17mm lens is just a sign of laziness, pure and simple.

    Why would I as a filmmaker want to shoot a scene of my latest spec video featuring rapping white guys in suits with devil clown makeup using a 31.62mm FOV?! It would RUIN THE WHOLE THRUST. I don't want the amateurish wide stupid 31.62mm look. Nothing says "this is not cinematic" like shooting with a 31.62mm lens.

    I want - no, I need a true precision 18.8172043011mm lens for m43 to get the look needed for cinematic greatness. Then my friend's white guy clown makeup rap group Chupa Chupa Anarchy will accept my vision as a fellow artist's, instead of just that guy they know who has a camera and won't be a little bitch about wanting to get "paid" and whatnot.

    We as members of the filmmaking community must reject this 17mm lens offering and demand that SLR Magic and anyone else who wants us to take them seriously produce instead a true 18.8172043011mm lens for m43 so we GH2 shooters can nail that elusive 35mm look without having to move our cameras a little bit closer to achieve it with that mongrel 17mm. Stand up for your rights, brothers, lest ye be trampled by the slippery slope of mixed metaphors.

  • Actually the GH2 has a crop of 1.86X in 16:9 video mode.

    You mean in relation to a full-frame DSLR -- a sensor-size not generally in use in cinema since Vista-Vision in the 1950s?

    Compared to a standard 35mm motion picture frame, the crop factor of the GH2 is about 1.2. So it's hard to see how a 17mm lens is useless, unless you've got something against a 20mm equivalent.

    As for a 32mm lens in 35mm cinema, that's pretty much the "normal" lens, a favorite of the likes of Roger Deakins, among others.

  • Oh god, please, not the crop discussion again guys!! :)

  • @vichariis

    I agree, but for the life of me, I don't know why folks insist on comparing sensors of what are supposed to be motion picture cameras, to full-frame DSLRs, rather than actual motion picture standards. Will it never end?

  • Nothing says "this is not cinematic" like shooting with a 31.62mm lens.

    Of course! Fellini, Hitchcock and Welles used to say "31.62mm is not cinematic! " at least twice a day.


  • Oh my god, never know 35mm full frame aspect was different than the 35mm of cinema. Now became a problem.

    Anyway: why talking about the gh2? It's the past, multi aspect ratio will not come back, the standard is "about 2x" (gh3, Omd, ecc.). It's the Mft world.

  • Anyway: the 17mm from SLRMagic will have f1.6 only.

  • Just might be priced pretty competitively too ;)

  • @sebfarges

    Your videos are always inspiring. A capture of a day in the life with your current tools, love it. The colors are actually quite unique and very pleasing to eye. Will be looking forward to this lens.

  • copied from separate topic by Seb :

    I've just had for few days the prototype of the upcoming SLR Magic 17mm T1.6 lens in micro 4/3 mount.

    This lens reminds me the one from Voigtlander the 17mm f0.95 I test once .

    Despite it's a T1.6, the SLR is a very fast lens, and I had to use strong ND filter on it to be able to use it at it's fastest speed at 1/50 shutter speed. This lens is a prototype so I can't show it, but this model looks quite like the 25mm T0.95 from SLR. It has also a no click aperture ring. Most of the shot of the movie are taken at T1.6, and you can see the very good sharpness of the lens, even at its fastest aperture.

    SLR Magic told me that : "this is a SLR Magic CINE designation lens and not a HyperPrime lens so it is made for the budget indie filmmaker. It is in the same series as our 35mm T1.4 CINE II lens. Price of the production 17mm T1.6 lens is TBA (to be announced). The SLR Magic CINE 17mm T1.6 will have the same mechanical build as our 35mm T1.4 CINE II lens that repeatable focus. The 35mm T1.4 CINE II lens will be compatible with our upcoming 1.33x Anamorphic adapter but the 17mm T1.6 will not be on the compatible list. Field curvature effects causing softness at extreme when focusing at close focus distance were put into consideration during lens design and edge sharpness should be quite sharp even when wide open. Light falloff during wide open aperture is well controlled."

    I have use the OMD E-M5 from Olympus. I've bought recently this camera because I was really impressed by the movie of Andrew Reid, where we can see the proficient internal 5 axis stabilization system. It was quite hard for me to use this new camera. Two main problems have appeared :

    1. I found that the contrast in classic image mode are very strong, the black are too black to my opinion (I've used the Natural mode). Then I decided to change the mode and I've used the Art filter 3 (ton neutre et lumineux, I suppose in english it's "neutral and bright tone") to have less strong blacks. But this mode gives green rendering (and the ND add it too), so I try to color corrected it. That's why you have two mode in this movie, the Art filter 3 is in the countryside and seaside shots. I did light color correction in quite all the clips.

    2. The second problem is the using of ND filter on OMD with the stabilization. At the begining of my shooting I was using a variable ND filter from Cokin. The problem is that there is slight vigneting when you are closing it. And this vigneting is moving because of the stabilization. You can see this issue in some of the shot, the traveling with the girl with the yellow bag, for example.Then I decided to use another ND filter, not a variable, the Hoya NDX400. With a constant ND filter, the problem of the "moving vigneting" disappear. But it's less easy to use. Especially with the OMD that has less efficient dynamic range than the GH3.

    Anyway despite this problems I have discover with my first use of the OMD camera, I'm really impressed by its internal stabilization sytem, for example it allowed me to do these shot from the car in the small roads of north Ireland, with a third part lens such as this SLR Magic 17mm T1.6. I'm really happy using this lens, it is a good experience and it's useful to have a fast 17mm, especially when you think that 25mm is not enough wide, and 12mm too wide.

    • Olympus OMD E-M5
    • SLR Magic 17mm T1.6 (prototype)
    • 1080P 30
    • "Natural" and "Art 3 bright and neutral" modes
    • Variable Cokin ND filter
    • NDX400 ND filter from Hoya
    • edited on Adobe Premiere CS6
    • CC on Premiere

    Music (mash up) :

    • Midlake "The Courage Of The Other"
    • King Crimson "In The Court Of The Crimson King""
  • Thanks for watching :)

  • Thanks Seb, every video you shoot looks great. Even the lens looks great, but i've ordered the CV 17,5mm. Can't resist.

    Think the price will be the point: if low, this is a must.

  • Damn I was hoping their 17mm would work with their anamorphic!

  • @Renovatio The SLR Magic 17mm T1.6 CINE lens will be in the same series as the SLR Magic 35mm T1.4 CINE II lens. Introductory pre-order pricing when the lens is available should cost around $499 USD or $449 EUR.

  • @slrmagic Thanks. So: about the price, your lens it's there, in the middle. There's the 20mm 1.7, than your SLR Magic 1.6 (against PanaLeica 25mm 1.4 just a little bit more expensive now, maybe the same in the next feature: really really hard to choose), and than CV 17,5mm f0.95, more expensive. No game for the Olympus 17mm 1.8 right now! All IMHO

  • @slrmagic Andrew, you can plan on sending one my way of course! :)

  • @vicharris I might be in LA in April

  • @slrmagic Long ways away but let's catch up again if you are. Same reasons as last time?

  • @Renovatio it depends if you need to rack focus.

    The 17mm lens sharpens significantly when stopped down to 1.8. We recommended shooting with it at 1.8 but it seems @sebfarges managed to show 1.6 is entirely usable. Just like the 12mm T1.6 the max aperture is there if you need it.

  • For this lens we decided not to make a 0.95 lens.

    DxO tested some sensors seem to be unable to absorb all the light for lenses that are faster than f/2

    It would mean you get shallower DOF but you do not get all the light due to limitation by the sensor. Someone pointed out it is pointless to only have shallower DOF if you do not get more light.

    What does everyone really feel about this? Do you shoot 0.95 for more light or for shallower DOF? It does cost more to manufacture a fast lens and would be interesting for a discussion if T1.6 was a good choice for this lens. Not exactly slow like a T4. Not extremely fast like a T0.95. T1.6 would be a good balance where you get as much light as the lens can accept by the image sensor for the best value to price ratio. Or maximum DOF is what everyone wanted? Another reason for us to choose T1.6 over T0.95 for this 17mm lens with price on the side is advantages in size/weight, IQ at extreme corners during close focus from field curvature, and lower distortion. We had quite a battle if we should make this a T1.6 instead of a T0.95 in the beginning of the project (We had so many requests to make a 17mm f/1.4 lens by email over the past 2 years!).

  • Andrew, I noticed a lot of vignetting in Seb's video. What are the vignetting characteristics? Do they also go away by 1.8 substantially, or do you need to stop down further?

    Then again, he was using a variable ND I believe, so it's possible that the vignetting was caused by the added filter?

    I love Seb's video work, but I'd love to see something a bit more test-like done with the lens with some labeling of aperture settings, etc.

    In any case, excited to see the lens up close.


  • @_OZ I did notice that too. It was due to two reasons and @sebfarges can correct me if I am wrong

    Reason 1) Seb was using the 5 axis stabilisation from the OMD and that caused some wierd vignetting especially with variable ND filters. The ND even caused color cast and I confirmed that with @sebfarges so it has nothing to do with the lens itself. All lenses will have slight vignetting but we do not consider this lens to have strong vignetting.

    Reason 2) When we say there is no vignetting it is a test done without ND filters. ND filters does add vignetting to many lenses towards the corners since it darkens the entire image thus make light falloff more pronounced than normal. When contrast is "pushed" towards the center either by ND, by slight underexposure, or from PP vignetting would show up slightly.

  • @slrmagic Something make me think the 17mm f.095 it's a question of time, anyway ;)

  • @slrmagic
    Thanks for clarifying! Look forward to trying it out. More control over depth of field is better than saving 200 dollars, but I don't know what the actual difference in price would be.

    In any case, f1.4 is already pretty fast.

    As an owner of the 25mm, I have to say that I use it wide open A LOT! However, it is mostly for light and not depth of field. To that end, if what you say about the sensors is true, then it depends on the reality of my sensor. The extra light is definitely worth paying for in my case because I use it a lot at live music events with dark lighting.