@sebfarges

You are getting very good at concocting excerpts of every day life into small videos. Always a pleasure to watch. Really nice editing this time around as well.

@slrmagic I own the 17.5mm voigtländer and I rarely use it wide open. Even at night I tend to stop down to f2 and push the iso a little "too high" rather than shoot wide open. I also use f1.4 more than 0.95. But there might be situation where it can be used to the advantage of the result, obviously. I´ve found over time that lens speed is not really that important for me. A lens has to look good wide open or stopped down. I´d consider swapping the 17.5mm voigt for a similar (slower) lens which has perfectly circular bokeh when stopped down.

Yep, never used the 17.5 Voight wide open.

I think, Seb Farges' 1st experience on OMD with such tasty details was worst individual topic...

@SebFarges I think OMD is great add-on to GH2, you can decide what camera you can use for specific shots or daytime with same lenses. I found EM5 takes better colors and skin-tone at daylight. Curve lets manipulate with contrast settings, but if I don't want make grading at post, default Natural is very good, but sharpness -2 (all modes). Be sure turn off "Keep warm tone" at color settings and set manual lens' value at IS settings. But I think OMD has better dynamic range and more filmic image by Natural default settings (with sharpness -2) than GH2 Standard (All -2). Your video style always great and rich of fast moves, but it not regular dslr video style, dslr-videographers regular to slower moving to avoid rolling shutter, so I have not seen moving vignette issue at my movies.

I very happy with Voightlander 17.5mm 0.95, it sharp since 0.95, sharper than 25mm 0.95. At wide angle all Vari-ND or Fader filters get vignette, I use LWC (mark 1) 77mm with step up ring, Nicna Fader (little sharper but not happy with both, because of average sharpness and bad color). I'll try go back to constant filters like Hoya NDX400 ND. I'd like hear your opinion to better filters if you find something quality products with reasonable price.

Thank you for your great input to MFT systems, and I hope you will share us your future tests with Olympus cameras. We know, hacked Lumix GH2 is the king of MFT, but OMD is MFT's black prince.

@slrmagic It looks like a very cool lens. It would be great to have it completely sharp wide open, but I know that's a hard thing to pull off.

It would have been of better evaluative benefit to seem some static composed frames with good framing and composition of background and foreground objects (moving cars, streets, lots of vertical lines) so we could get a better sense of how things look in the lens, but overall, it still does look like a very cool lens.

Thanks!

I'll have a comparison up soon with this head to head with the Voightlander 17.5mm for low light performance. So far so good :)

@gameb I don't have one

@johnnymossville $499.-

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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