www.ukdigital.co.uk have deals on SLR Magic 17mm T1.6 and other SLR Magic lenses. As usual, still more expensive compared to B&H US, but it is still a good news for Christmas for Europe m43 shooter!

Ok, so I got a different copy and it's much better. It still breathes a lot so I'm assuming that's just how they are. I attached 2 photos both shot at T1.6. Although it isn't perfect, I hope the tiles will provide an idea for the barrel distortion.

I love SLR MAGIC lenses. Yes they're a bit wild, i get purple fringing on the 23 1.7 and the 12 1.6 isn't particularly sharp at infinity with wide open apertures but they've got a 'look' and they're still sharp enough once you know their limits. I think the 23 1.7 works great and can be super sharp even wide open in the 1-2 metre range, lovely bokeh, gentle but cool flares and macro-esque performance. The 12 1.6 is great for out there shallow but wide shots (foreground and background) - not so great at landscapes as its a tad soft unless you stop down to about F4. I'm keen to get the 35 1.4mkII and the 50 0.95 but its slightly out of my price range at the mo. Something about shooting with these SLR MAGICs at 4K takes the edge off the sharpness / video-ness.

With the GH4 i think - Ideally a set of these or Voigtlanders (for cooler shoots, fashion films, music videos, short narrative films etc) and a set of Samyang Cine Primes for more 'clean' commercial shooting, plus some sharp modern olympus or pana glass for corporate stuff.

I have this and every other as well. The 12 V2 and 25 are built like tanks. The company works with people and defective products. If you get a bad lens and let them know within 2 weeks, they can get shipping refunded. Also concerning paying return shipping, welcome to buying just about anything from China.

So no one here in the community has this lens?

I have serious problem with @slrmagic and their lenses. 100% of their lenses I have used/owned have problems. Loose focus ring , aperture, breathing. I had to return their 25mm due to these problems. I also own the 35mm which has a loose focus ring as well, very very very bad......

I was told to send it in, but at $50+ for shipping and having to deal with wait time it is a bad experience.

The only and I mean ONLY reason I like Slr Magic lenses is for lens flare and bokeh, very creative for music videos.

If @slrmagic can please send me a private message I can provide picture or even video of this problem. Even still with all of this I am interested in 17mm focal length

17mm slr now available at UK resellers for 429 pounds also as a promo bundle with the 35mm.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3531460#forum-post-51980430

@slrmagic, from the link you gave it seems T/1.4 & even probably T/1.2 is quite worthwhile for the shallower DoF (even if the extra light gathering isn't 100% there)

Could be the place for the third party lens manufacturers to focus on for fast lenses: T1.4, and even T1.2 (if the trade off from T/1.4 to T/1.2 isn't too bad), but forget about F/0.95, which seems to have most value as a marketing ploy?

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/12/28/first-impressions-slr-magic-17mm-t1-6-micro-four-thirds/

I would say it's a 1.8 lens though the Voight is worthless at 1.4 and below. I'll post examples in my video. I've only used it once below 1.8ish for real work and it was alongside the new SLR 12mm. Last week the director of the film I worked on emailed me asking what lens I had used on a certain night shot that was intended for VFX plates. He thought it was the Voight and said the IQ was really good......it was the SLR 12mm. He was actually disappointed with the Voight. It was the first time I used it wide open. Useless footage. Glad I was shooting with two cameras mounted on top of one another otherwise I would have been screwed. Probably going to sell my Voight soon. Too expensive of a piece of glass for me to never use it if I can't use it below 1.8ish.

Ahh, I'm sorry. I guess I didn't explain it right. Exposure wise. The t1.6 on the SLR is equal to f1.9ish on the Voight. I'll put up a pic of the Voight where I marked off the equivalent exposure settings to try and get as accurate of a test as I could.

I'll have the video up soon but I realized today I messed up two exterior shots with the SLR. My focus was off so it's really hard to compare both lenses. Sucks because they weren't easy shots too get. Like I said the test will be pretty boring as SLR wanted a locked off, static comparison at large exposures. I might have time to do a fun one like Serb did with just the SLR. It just takes to long to set up each lens at each exposure with every ND.

Hmm, not sure. Thought it would by the end of the month. Almost done with getting some footage together. Bad time of year to do all this. I've found that the Voight is about at f1.8 or 1.9 as the SLR is wide open. I've put little tic marks on the Voight so you can see the SLR's equivalent setting for exposure. I'll post pics or have it in the long, boring test video :) The more I'm testing the Voight the more I don't even like it at 1.4. Not sure if my taste is changing or just my tolerance is less. There sure are trade offs for each lens though. But each lens is about even at t2ish and not sure I would use either below that anyways. Both of these lenses should be rated around t1.8 or t2 for paid, professional use IMO.

It's pretty hard to compare the two dead on with stops so far. Ones T and one is F so when I can control the light, I'm using false colors to get everything as close as possible. Then other times I'm just comparing t to f and saying fuck it :) But so far I would say the 17 is better wide open or just about the same as the voight at f1.4. And I agree,t he voight is unusable at .95. It really shouldn't be rated that just like the Rokinons shouldn't be rated T1.5.

@gameb Sorry but I don't have that lens.