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.

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

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.

LOL!!!

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

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 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.

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

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

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 http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/F-stop-blues

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. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51980430

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!).

@_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
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.