The Olympus 45mm with superb performance (says DSLRmagazine)! + latest Olympusmarket deals.
Image on top by courtesy of DSLRmagazine.
There is a new and this time very detailed and complete review of the new Olympus 45mm lens at DSLRmagazine (Click here to read the google english translation). You can see all graph and test on their page. In short, this lens is a surprise! For 300 Euro you get a lot!
1) Resolution: The lens is surprisingly sharp! It has almost the same sharpness in the center and at the border of the image and actually there is almost no quality loss when shooting at f/1.8 aperture compared to the maximum quality aperture which DSLRmagazine found to be at f/4.0
2) Vignetting (light loss in the corners): At maximum aperture is less than 10%. That’s a very good result.
3) Distortion: There is no 
Interesting_1: The same lens performs better on the E-P3 comapred to the E-PL1. This confirms there is a different sensor-processor design!
Interesting_2: The results for the distortion, resolution, chromatic aberrations and vignetting are not improved in the JPEG respect to RAW, which speaks for a good optical quality inherent in this small, lightweight, useful and friendly target.
Now take time to read the full review at DSLRmagazine! Right now you can preorder the lens at Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), J&R (Click here) and in Europe at Amazon Deutschland (Click here).
Thanks V.Sama and M.San Fruits for the nice review!
Something different: Those are the refurbished Micro Four Thirds camera auctions ending at Olympusmarket today. Click on the names to see the auction:
Olympus E-P1
E-P1 with kit 17mm pancakeE-P1 with kit 17mm pancake and 14-42mm lens
Olympus E-P2
E-P2 with kit lensOlympus E-PL1
E-PL1 with kit lensE-PL1 with double kit lens
E-PL1 with double kit lens
E-PL1 with kit lens
E-PL1 with kit lens
E-PL1 with 14-150mm lens
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Sam: I use a Canon 5D mark 2 and a GF1, and d...
Comment from Pendant: @Bob B.
I think you and Deniz is right,...
Comment from elflord: So basically, you don't know, and if you...- Comment from elflord: If money were no object, it's possible t...
samshootsall
10 months ago |What a gorgeous combo!!
Gotta save $$ to buy the EP3 + 12mm + 45mm = Nikon D700 body!
john
10 months ago |I’ll take 2…
Bob B.
10 months ago |There is a great review of the lens here. http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2011/08/olympus-mzuiko-45mm-f18-review-petaling.html
Boooo!
10 months ago |Something is VERY weird with that test.
1) To my best of knowledge, there wasn’t a single lens ever built that is as sharp wide open at a large aperture as it is stopped down.
2) The MTF50 values, as *properly* measured by Lenstip/Optyczne, go close to 70 lpmm with many lenses and even as high as 80 lpmm in the case of the Panaleica 45mm macro, so seeing these flat at ~55 is strange, to say the least, and on the level of the 14-42 kit zoom (!). Also note that the E-PL1 supposedly has a slightly stronger AA filter than the E-P3, which in no way means that there’s a difference in the sensor, just in the filter.
3) Their resolution chart is flat, but when they present the photo of the wall with crops at different apertures, *HUGE* differences in sharpness are visible between apertures, especially in the corners. The image does not correlate with their presented resolution chart.
4) They haven’t mentioned which raw converter they used; dcraw is the only converter that doesn’t use the embedded lens correction info and doesn’t automatically apply it without the user knowing. Furthermore, their camera comparison crops display white halos around the octagons, which means there was software sharpening applied.
In other words, wait until Lenstip/Optyczne test the lens.
Duarte Bruno
10 months ago |You’ve got a few points there, most notably on 3) which I also notice immediately…
If the lens is as good as they say, it is going to be a massive sell.
TheEye
10 months ago |Raw Photo Processor (for Mac only) also does not apply any lens correction (or tone curve correction). Not that I believe DSLRmagazine used RPP.
Chris
10 months ago |‘on the level of the 14-42mm kit zoom’ according to Lenstip’s rating system or Dslr magazine’s? On Dslr magazine’s review of the 12mm that lens *also* peaks in the mid-50s. I fear you may be comparing results from different rating systems.
Boooo!
10 months ago |I am indeed – Lenstip/Optyczne measure the kit lens at ~50, and this site measures the 45mm at ~55.
In the Lenstip/Optyczne test, the 12mm peaks at ~70 at f/4.
Chris
10 months ago |If the results are gathered from different methodologies then you can’t compare results.
Oh well, it looks like the 45mm is much sharper, much more consistently than the 12mm. That’d be good enough for me!
Chez Wimpy
10 months ago |“1) To my best of knowledge, there wasn’t a single lens ever built that is as sharp wide open at a large aperture as it is stopped down.”
Canon has a few big, white, telephoto primes they would like to introduce you to :p
Nick Clark
10 months ago |The ZD 150/f2 also reaches maximum sharpness at something silly like f2.2…
Boooo!
10 months ago |It peaks at f/2.8, and it’s an f/1.7 or f/1.8 lens in nature, which presents itself as f/2 to the camera.
Jim
10 months ago |most oly 4/3 lenses are working near best wide open..
Esa Tuunanen
10 months ago |Few Canons?
Almost full sharpness already at biggest apertures is more like rule in higher quality 4/3 lenses, including even Leica D 14-150mm like ambitious zoom.
That high optical quality is no doubt the main reason for why they weren’t really smaller than that big amount of basic run off the mill APS-C optics.
Jan Francois
10 months ago |Field reports are also indicating superb performance at its largest aperture. Classic Zuiko.
Alan
10 months ago |It’s about time they made a half-decent lens. The 12mm is also very good, but costs twice as much. Actually the 12mm is really neat. At F2.0 you get UWA AND a narrow depth of field. Looks really weird (in a nice kind of way).
Marcelo Guarini
10 months ago |Alan,
The 12mm is a much complicated lens optically. It has dual aspherical, aspherical, super high refractive index lens and extra low dispersion glasses, which together makes a high cost package. I also wanted something less expensive, but the saying “in optics you get what you pay for” seems to be true.
Regards.
ijack
10 months ago |+1
It was rather shocking when I saw that list of glasses they use
Esa Tuunanen
10 months ago |12mm isn’t that superior when you consider that its geometric distortion is something like double the worst present in 4/3 zooms (like ambitious 12-60mm or 14-150mm zoooms) while ordinarily primes have lot better distortion correction than zooms.
Like you said you get what you pay and probably they just made it too small for including distortion correction.
Ulli
10 months ago |lenses which are optimized for use wide open tend to have less or no improvement when stopping down.
infared
10 months ago |Ulli, experience would tell me that EXACTLY the OPPOSITE is true. Almost always…if it is a large aperture lens.
Ulli
10 months ago |@Infrared
Keep in mind that most large aperture lenses are NOT optimized for for wide use…i was talking about lenses such as the Nikkor Noct..prob this Olympus 45 has similar style, according to the testdata, though keeping the resolution steady during stopping down, unlike the Noct which goes down quite early.
You are talking about the average fast lens type which has decent resolution wide open and goes up after stopping down…clearly not a case of optimizing the large aperture here.
Dan
10 months ago |Any idea how well AF would work on Panasonic bodies as compared to the Olympus models we’ve seen tested?
I’m curious to know if AF compatibility is part of the M4/3 spec or if it’s something that varies depending on the lens and body.
Interested in using this on a GH2, for what that’s worth.
Jim
10 months ago |I get the feeling that on the GH2 it will focus very fast, like EP3 fast…
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |You got it all wrong… The EP3 focusses GH2 fast!
infared
10 months ago |I would like to see this lens compared to the Pany/Leica 45mm Macro from f/2.8 forward. The sample images in the review made it really difficult for me to see how the Olympus 45mm lens performs….but for the price…it looks like a winner.
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |+10
The 2 M4/3 45mms head to head, or barrel to barrel, would seem like a natural comparison test. From the reviews of the Oly 45mm I’ve seen, no one seems interested in doing so.
Riki
10 months ago |Stick the old 50mm in the mix. then it gets interesting!
Parci
10 months ago |Understandibly… one is a very expensive, slow AF macro, the other is a cheap, fast AF portrait lens. Both are well good enough optically for what they do. What could a comparison meaningfully add to the above?
Bob B.
10 months ago |I shoot portraits all the time with my Pan/Leica 45mm 2.8…That is what I bought it for. When the lens came out there was NOTHING else available for portrature with even a f/2.8 at the time that had auto focus for the MFT format. The lens is great…Its small, has image stabilization, is very sharp….but is expensive and a little slow…but not horribly so. Beats manual focus any day of the week as far as I am concerned. With a MFT camera and that lens you have a LOT of photo-taking potential in a VERY small package…AND it does take stunning portraits. So a comparison to the Olympus lens would be meaningful to me….I would like to see the difference in sharpness and how much better the Bokeh is on the new Olympus lens… I am sure that a lot of people would.
Bob B.
10 months ago |I am also wondering how well this new Olympus lens would perform on a GF1…as it seems to be optimized for the EP3. I guess it would be somewhat slower.
Riki
10 months ago |As someone who mostly shoots with the 50mm f/2, does anyone know what this really means:
“We may use the superb Zuiko Digital 50 mm f / 2 Macro Adapter through. The picture quality is excellent, but the volume that is overkill for a PEN.
And the autofocus of this objective, which is not exactly lightning on Four Thirds bodies on bodies PEN is the closest park to see a beginner. And also … surprise: the Micro Four Thirds, the shooting distance of our testing protocol (not macro), the performance of Zuiko Digital 45 mm M f / 1.8 is, in general, eight percent higher than the Zuiko Digital 50 mm F/2 Macro.”
M
10 months ago |It means they have no clue. m43 lenses get autosharpened. do that with the 50 mm macro and it will blow the 45 out of the water.
Conrad
10 months ago |Autosharpened? Can you provide a source for that?
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |The translator is broken.
MrL
10 months ago |When will the black version be released??
JF
10 months ago |+1 don’t like the silver bling bling style…
lnqe-M.
10 months ago |The is not only silver, but this is silver/plastic, not realy metal like 12mm F2
Thierry
10 months ago |+10 , I don’t want a shiny attention attracting lens. No black, no buy.
Nico Foto
10 months ago |+20. I’d rather avoid bling silver…In fact, i was this close to buying the 12mm, but will rather wait to see if they come with a black version…
Techfreak
10 months ago |I wonder, whether stabilization is really needed for this focal range? As on my GF1 there will not be any
voldenuit
10 months ago |I use a legacy 50/1.4 on my GF1.
The thing to look out for is that you need to keep shutter speeds at 1/100 or faster when handheld. This can be hard to do (even with a fast lens) indoors and in poor light, meaning you may have to push your ISO higher than comfortable. Even with IS, though (I also have the PL 45/2.8), you want a shutter speed faster than 1/60 for human subjects, so you’ve only lost a stop of hand-holdability with the 45/1.8 from losing IBIS (by using it on a Panny body).
I think it should be fine (I’m seriously considering the 45/1.8 as well).
Don Carrot
10 months ago |if you’re after image quality
for the same price as the e-p3 + 12 + 45 you can buy a used D700 and a the latest version of the cheap and sharp 50 1.8 nikkor, only that you will be in a different league of image quality
if you need a small or second system to replace you point and shoot, with slightly better iq than your p&s, and have money to burn, you can fearless buy into the pen system.
Techfreak
10 months ago |I do not agree, that mirrorless are only “slightly better” than p&s.
Chez Wimpy
10 months ago |If you’re after image quality, for the same price as the e-p3 + 12 + 45 you could get a used MF film camera, with a couple of primes, and be in a yet another “different league.” m43 users are paying for compactness, and have no illusions about IQ/$ value. This isn’t a cheap system by any measure, nor anywhere near “above average” sensor-IQ-wise (it is objectively worst of all interchangeable digital cameras). But it is small… very, very small.
CHRIS
10 months ago |Yes, but only if you’re making darkroom prints or are using a dedicated film scanner. Flatbeds are cheap but don’t cut it for absolute image quality.
Agent00soul
10 months ago |Yes, you’ll be in a different league of image quality. A lower league. Just have a look at SLRgear’s test of the Nikkor: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1432/cat/12
This is what they say about the sharpness of the Nikkor 50/1.8: “The 50mm ƒ/1.8G didn’t blow us away for sharpness, but it’s not bad, either. At its maximum aperture setting, where arguably it will be used the majority of the time, it offers only average results for sharpness.”
elflord
10 months ago |So where does your quote say “using m43 lenses on an m43 body will give you better IQ than this on a D700″ ? How many m43 cameras beat the D700 on the DXOMark ?. As for the lens itself, don’t forget that you can stop it two stops on full frame and get comparable dof an m43 lens with the same fov/aperture (e.g. 25mm 1.8).
Agent00soul
10 months ago |The camera’s DXOmark won’t help if the lens is soft. SLRgear haven’t tested the Olympus 45 yet but you can have a look at their test of the Olympus 12/2.0. The Nikon lens just reaches the same sharpnes as the Olympus 12 wide open, when the Nikon is stopped down to f/4. But it never matches the sharpness of the Olympus stopped down. I expect the Olympus 45 to be at least as sharp as the 12.
elflord
10 months ago |So basically, you don’t know, and if you did, you still wouldn’t quite have it right because image quality is not just about “sharpness” (I also don’t quite follow how you compare lenses on different sensors). In fact usually if I have a fast prime on my camera I care much more about high ISO performance and dynamic range than sharpness in the corners.
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |It’s all a trade-off.
If I wanted to hump a D700 and my Nikon lenses around, I’d have bought a D700. Hiking and and biking and wandering around with full frame kit just isn’t much fun.
Instead, realizing the IQ for size trade-off and vice versa, I bought a GH2 and Nikon to M4/3 lens adaptor. It all works great. I even bought a Nikon 60mm f2.8D macro lens, which is bigger and heavier than any of my other lenses, btw.
I can take my GH2 and 20mm or Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f1.4 pretty much anywhere and barely notice I’m carrying them.
joesiv
10 months ago |“for the same price as the e-p3 + 12 + 45 you can buy a used D700 and a the latest version of the cheap and sharp 50 1.8 nikkor, only that you will be in a different league of image quality”
I have a similar combo (D700 + 50mm G), and while you’re right the image quality is incredible, especially in low light… you’re being really narrow minded.
the e-p3 + 12 + 45 offers near ultra wide angle perspective, and short telephoto with the two lens’. WHile the 50 on a D700 is mearly a standard lens’. Standard lens’ are the cheapest of any system.
So while the IQ may be better, you’re left with a boring focal length (Believe me you can make great images, I shot solely with the 50G for months). But you need a 24mm and 85ish with the D700 to get comparable pictures. The 85 f/1.8 is not nearly as cheap, and unless you want the terrible 24mm f/2.8, you’ll be paying much much more for JUST the 24mm f/1.4 than you would the entire ep-3+12+45mm… touche! (I’m hoping nikon releases a 24mm f/1.8 or f2 that’s cheaper but still fantastical soon!)
You started with “if you’re after image quality”, which is true, but really it seems like you’re just unneedingly stirring the pot… The D700 is a brick of a camera (not like a D3 but still a brick), and not in the same league as the pen series for casual/on the go use.
Pendant
10 months ago |+1 on the black version! We want professional equipment
Don Carrot
10 months ago |“As for the lens itself, don’t forget that you can stop it two stops on full frame and get comparable dof an m43 lens with the same fov/aperture (e.g. 25mm 1.8)”
correct, people seem to forget that a nikkon lens stopped down to F4 is a F2 in the 4/3 sensor size realm.. fov wise, the tremendous iso performance, allows you to get same and even much faster shutter speeds as on the oly with bright lenses and IS,
any blind olympus fanboy will call dxo biased, when they come up with a good sensor in a couple of years and it will change and dxo will be the bible..
you can decide, if you want to use your gear today, or wait for something to use it tomorrow… the e-p3 is oly latest and gratest in releases and alredy lagging behing at the day of lauch… disappointing
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |Is this Son of Pablo?
Bob B.
10 months ago |Looks like Carrot juice is in order here. There is no hope for that post…it isn’t even approachable.
marilyn
10 months ago |like your comment haha
Ninjafish
10 months ago |People also seem to forget that everyone who is using m43 is doing it by choice…
It is not the default option that is peddled out of every camera store; in fact in many markets, one has to search quite hard just to find it.
The stereotype of the uneducated camera user who bought m43 only because he doesn’t know any better, has got to be a tiny tiny minority – in fact, compared to the more popular brands and formats, I predict you will find FEWER m43 users who don’t know the limitations of their equipment, than you would in the general population of canikon users.
Yet for some reason, people seem compelled to proselyte with an almost religious ferver to try and convert us to “see the light”.
I’ve owned enough camera equipment over the years that I am quite comfortable using the equipment I use… for the reasons I do! In my opinion, m43 is the perfect format for the majority of camera users – even if they don’t know it. Many people would dissagree with me on that. Even people who only use their cameras to post pictures of their cats on facebook, still think that they NEED professional gear.
And they are welcome to their opinions. Just because you disagree with someone, doesn’t automatically make them a blind fanboy.
Mr. Reeee
10 months ago |+10
When i show people my GH2 and try to explain what it is and why it’s so small, I get blank looks. At this point, you have to know someone who knows about M4/3 because of the dreadful marketing job that Olympus and Panasonic are doing.
A friend showed me his GF1 and some images and I was impressed. I’d have bought a D7000 or D700 otherwise.
As for the Canon/Nikon DSLR default factor, people assume that a “real camera” is a big, fat black DSLR with a long zoom lens. Where I live in NYC, every day I see lots of Nikon and Canon DSLR toting tourists with their pop-up flashes up and ready for fill-flash family shots in front of some noted sight. It’s astounding how many there are and how few M4/3 I see. I see nearly as many Leicas as M4/3!
Although lately, I’ve seen a lot of hipsters carrying old 35mm SLRs… probably loaded with Tri-X.
Maybe I should sell them the leftover rolls of Kodachrome 64 and 200 I still have.
Four by Six
10 months ago |I actually like the less narrow DOF of the m43 2X crop ratio. I find the DOF of m43 at F1.4-F2 to be just about perfect for my uses. If I had a lower crop ratio, like a full frame, the DOF gets razor thin at these apertures.
I am big fan of the 2X crop ratio. Higher like XZ-1 is too high, lower like APS or full frame is too low. It will be interesting to watch Nikon’s entry into mirrorless with its 2.6X crop.
WT21
10 months ago |“you can decide, if you want to use your gear today”
Spot on! Lumping around a giant DSLR means NOT using the gear today. Pablo, I’m glad you have finally seen the benefits of m43!
Chris
10 months ago |Me too. I see the DOF of 4/3 as being a strength rather than a weakness, and this lens seems to give as little DOF as I would ever want. I don’t get all the ‘it’s ok if one eye is blurry as long as the other one is sharp’ stuff you particularly get from FF devotees.
Perhaps because focal lengths etc. are compared to their 35mm equivalents so often I think lots of people get the idea there’s something magical about that size, when in fact it became a standard mainly because the film was cheap. In contrast, Olympus could have chosen any size sensor; they chose 4/3 because they thought it was the most suitable size. I wish they’d described lenses according to the angle of view rather than focal length. Angle of view is immediately understandable without prior photography knowledge. ‘Focal length’ is only understandable to most people in reference to some established standard, in this case 35mm, and this constant comparison makes 4/3 sensors seem intrinsically inferior simply in virtue of its size.
Ah well, maybe we should start describing the Nikon mirrorless lenses in terms of their m43 equivalent….;-)
Don Carrot
10 months ago |@joesiv
I appreciate your comment, well thought with good arguments, it’s a discussion after all.
my goal is not to compare exact equivalent focal lenght, but i think for what the m43 today are, they are all overpriced, the times of lacking DR and shadow noise should be over, but apparently they arent… same stuff like i had on my G1… raw files look almost identical on an e-p3
for FF to m43 i agree it’s apples to oranges anyway, not really comparable, what i wanted to point out, is that if you look on such a big ‘budget’ like you need for a premium m43 kit you can easily find better iq around the corner,
the 24 1.4 is of course expensive, but also a league of its own, you compare a true 24 1.4 and a 24 f4 equiv. which is nothing special at all in FF world and kit zoom can fulfil that FOV, there are worlds between light gathering, only thing going for the oly is the size, if you think that the oly is 50% of a hiigh end nikon, it’s expensive in my book.
i will stop ‘stirring the pot’ then, i know that fanboys are resistant to the unconfortable truth anyway, maybe i can avoid somebody of sinking pointless money in a mediocre system which might disappoint them heavily in the long run
marilyn
10 months ago |well i guess you still don’t get the idea of a olympus user… good luck carrot with your point… you will always stir the crackpot…
Patric
10 months ago |“i will stop ‘stirring the pot’ then, i know that fanboys are resistant to the unconfortable truth anyway, maybe i can avoid somebody of sinking pointless money in a mediocre system which might disappoint them heavily in the long run”
Now Don, who is the real fanboy. A 4/3 owner who visits a 4/3 site to read and write about 4/3 or a Nikon owner who visits a 4/3 site to pimp the brand he/she has bought? Do you work for Nikon or are you a self appointed Nikon messiah with devine konwledge about cameras?
Pendant
10 months ago |@ Don Carrot
Don, I just sold my Sony a850 because I always exclusivly carried my Panasonic GF1 & the 20/1.7 with me the last month and the a850 didn´t see much use.
I perfectly happy with 4/3, great corner sharpness and the noise of a halfframe GF1 12MP is pretty much the same as the fullframe 24MP
I used a Canon 5dII and an Sony a850, but right now shooting the lovly GF1 is the most fun for me! Hope Panasonic brings on the GF7. Black with lots of manual controls please (look at my favorite camera of all time Contax G2)
I compared the a850 with a 50mm/1.4 with the GF1 and the 20/1.7. I shoot wide open most of the time.
Yes – there is less DOF with 4/3. But the effect on the pictures was not of that much impact as I thought it would be. Take a fullframe cam and shoot at f2 and with f4. You´ll see – there is visually not THAT much difference in DOF between these.
John
10 months ago |To add to what Pendant said, I will quote Chase Jarvis:
“The best camera is the one that’s with you.”
I believe that embodies what m4/3 users are. I know that I can get something else, but in my eyes my EPL1 is just fine, and feels right to me. I’m not lugging around a huge brick, I’m not going to be shooting in pouring rain or in a sandstorm. I don’t need to be carrying thor’s hammer to take pictures. I get envious looks all the time with how tiny my camera is, and how easy it is for me to get shots in crowded areas. And to be honest when I compare shots with other cameras the quality is still there. I don’t have a problem competing with those d700s, because I know we’re both not going to be printing a huge-ass poster from our shot, and I know that shot will be cropped down anyway.
The only time I’ve wished I had a full frame is in extremely low light. But hey, m4/3 should be getting better sensors for that soon too. I hope Olympus can get Kodak to make them a new sensor or maybe even Fuji. This system is also still in it’s infancy, and I’m sure it will grow to be even better. This only the beginning, and it shows that the market is scared of mirrorless, especially when everyone wants to enter the fray, including Nikon.
Bob B.
10 months ago |I love MFT..(I have a GF1)….but I also have a Canon 5D Mark II. I this the MFT format is wonderful…and the images from my GF1 are it NOWHERE near the quality I can shoot on my Canon. If I slap the 85mm f/1.2 on the Canon…the Dynamic Range, and the bokeh at this point in time are not achievable in MFT. Also If I am shooting in low light with the Canon and a fast “L” lens…MFT ain’t touching that. No way. But MFT camera make you want to take them with you and you can get great images especially with all the lenses that are available and becoming available. I think having both systems for me it great..each one fills a need and has its place. We can compare them…but they are really two different planets..
deniz
10 months ago |i think a full frame slr and a m43 complement each other nicely. one is lightweight the other is workhorse.
aps slr on the other hand seems kind of pointless to me.
elflord
10 months ago |If money were no object, it’s possible that many APS users would switch to full frame (it seems that nearly every APS enthusiast is “planning” to go full frame) but APS sticks around because the users have access to very good systems at a modest price. They also have their niches — for example, anything that requires long telephotos.
Paulus
10 months ago |High time for the black version of the new m.Zuiko lenses 45mm/f1.8 and 12mm/f2.0.
… and an Olympus E-P3, m.Zuiko 45mm/f1.8 and 12mm/f2.0 “Fast Power Kit” – even if the standard kits are far away from being “shit”.
(Sorry! – but todays 43rumors-interview with Vitaly Kiselev has a detrimental factor on my wording).
pisto
10 months ago |I was not very happy with the shift from 43 to M43 but… I must admit that the set of:
Oly 12mm f:2,0
Pana 20mm f:1,7
Pana 25mm f:1,4
Oly 45mm f:1,8
starts to make sense as an interesting system with good quality lenses. I always thought that a 28 + 50 + 90 Summicron/lux would be all I needed.
Now, Panasonic, Leica, just design a body with a proper and excellent viewfinder, good manual controls… and you are on the road.
pisto
10 months ago |TYPO:
Now, Panasonic, OLYMPUS, just design a body with a proper and excellent viewfinder, good manual controls… and you are on the road.
Brod1er
10 months ago |Don, your comments are rather tired. Of course you can get higher IQ elsewhere (and better AF tracking etc), but people buy mft for it’s size/performance ratio and flexibility. It is easy to identify something better if you just focus on one attribute eg many would say you could get much better IQ for less money than a D700 by buying a second hand large format film camera :-> Now let’s move on and take interesting photos with whatever camera we choose.
Jan Francois
10 months ago |I can’t understand people who feel the need to remind us they know about full frame (or other) systems here. Yes, we (already) know a D700 has a big sensor and is special, too. Its also A Big F****NG CAMERA. Now where were we…ah yes, the superb (little) 45mm f1.8…
SteveD
10 months ago |I’m always amused by accusations of “fanboyism”. It implies that people are so taken with a device that they are unable to see it’s obvious flaws. Of course this implies that the accuser cannot see the obvious attraction to the item. Apple gets this accusation most often so hopefully Olympus will suffer the same “terrible” consequences.
Pendant
10 months ago |@Bob B.
I think you and Deniz is right, m4/3 and fullframe complement each other nicely.
Regarding the “two Planets” – fullframe and m4/3: at least for me the difference isn´t that big.
Shooting with my Canon 5dII with a 50mm/1.4 and the GF1 with an adapted 55mm/1.2 (Olympus Zuiko) I can not see ANY difference in image quality – only a difference in crop
The RAW files are equally sharp and have the same bokeh…
Especially as my Canon 5dII isn´t that good in the “low iso banding department”. I prefere the RAWs I get from my GF1 – they look more “filmlike” to me.
But of course the Canon 5dII is a class of it´s own. But I had a hard time confessing myself, that it costs 10x of a GF1 but just isn´t THAT much better – at least for my photografphy
Sam
9 months ago |I use a Canon 5D mark 2 and a GF1, and dont doupt the image quality from the GF1 at all, in fact, it always seems to suprise me, especially with the 20mm F1.7.
A high quality compact camera is something ive been wanting for such a long time, I had the Canon G11 which was good but just didnt feel like it was good enough in the IQ department especially for stock imagery. The M4/3 range has hit the mark for me, and the range of lenses released this year is very very exciting. I use the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 alot and the quality is superb, also have the 45mm F1.8 on pre-order which im really looking forward to receiving!!! The GF1 goes with me everywhere and I have captured superb images I would have othewise missed from not having the 5D at hand, probably the main plus point with the M4/3 format.
With the G11 I used to feel dissapointed that I didnt have the 5D, but with the GF1 that isnt even a worry. Obviously low light the 5D will blow the M4/3 range out of the water (and a recent trip to Vegas the 5D and a 17-40mm at ISO3200 was unbeatable!!), of course overall it would be the choice, but realistically, unless your a pixel peeper and obsessed with looking at every image at 100% the M4/3 range produces stunning images and even on print images from a M4/3 can be produced that would be hard to tell apart from a 5D Print.
The range of lenses this year for the M4/3 has really stepped it up for me!!!