[Sibbi]

Hi Zoners,



here is the [url="http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/704-oly45"]Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm f/1.8[/url] review...



...comments are welcome.



Sebastian

[Brightcolours]

Nice little lens, and for sure nicer bokeh than the Canon 60mm f2.8 USM Macro.

[anyscreenamewilldo]

yes good - nice portrait shots too, ta

[youpii]

Thanks for the review



The face on your bokeh sample is quite soft

http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/704-oly45?start=1



Cute little lens but for me it's hard to see a F/3.5 DOF being called a portrait lens.



And I expected the center resolution to be as high as the Pana 20/1.7.



It's only 300€ but the FF 85/1.8 are too. I guess you pay for small size & novelty.

[dhazeghi]

[quote name='Sebastian' timestamp='1323624885' post='13623']

...comments are welcome.

[/quote]



Thanks for the review. Color me slightly surprised - reviews elsewhere suggested the 45/1.8 would be sharper than the 45/2.8, but apparently that's not so. Oh well...

DH

[Klaus]

[quote name='dhazeghi' timestamp='1323640151' post='13630']

Thanks for the review. Color me slightly surprised - reviews elsewhere suggested the 45/1.8 would be sharper than the 45/2.8, but apparently that's not so. Oh well...

DH

[/quote]



Macro lenses are still the benchmark - usually at least.

[anyscreenamewilldo]

[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1323637263' post='13629']

Thanks for the review........

The face on your bokeh sample is quite soft......

Cute little lens but for me it's hard to see a F/3.5 DOF being called a portrait lens.

[/quote]



well - pulling sibbi's face apart - on the samples page 3/4 portrait, it seems to me that the shiny and pointy bit on the nose, the adjacent cheek, forehead above and the closest eyebrow + the rh eyeglass are sharp, while the remaining softness might (or might not) be due to narrow dof - for me, not too bad at all for a portrait from a little camera - but i could be wrong (i don't have such a thing, although the lesser mps of my old d40x did produce a similar look with not too much skin texture from nice nikkors) …..



..... and the bokeh portrait is a very happy shot :-) …. ta

[Rover]

[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1323637263' post='13629']

Thanks for the review



The face on your bokeh sample is quite soft

http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/704-oly45?start=1



Cute little lens but for me it's hard to see a F/3.5 DOF being called a portrait lens.



And I expected the center resolution to be as high as the Pana 20/1.7.



It's only 300€ but the FF 85/1.8 are too. I guess you pay for small size & novelty.

[/quote]



I may be mistaken but no one needs the shallowest DOF possible all the time, and it depends on other factors as well like the subject-to-camera and subject-to-background distance.



If you want the shallowest DOF possible no matter what, you may need to invest a magnitude more. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[Guest]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1323640880' post='13631']

Macro lenses are still the benchmark - usually at least.

[/quote]



Still disappointing for a 45mm prime to reach only 2313 LW/PH in this system. A prime of this focal length should score closer to the maximum center resolution level of about 2600 LW/PH. In other systems (e.g. Canon, Nikon, Sony) 50mm primes reach top scores close to the resolution limits of the sensor.

[Klaus]

[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1323680493' post='13639']

Still disappointing for a 45mm prime to reach only 2313 LW/PH in this system. A prime of this focal length should score closer to the maximum center resolution level of about 2600 LW/PH. In other systems (e.g. Canon, Nikon, Sony) 50mm primes reach top scores close to the resolution limits of the sensor.

[/quote]



It is still "excellent" in the center at medium aperture settings. In real life situation you will have a hard time to distinguish within one "school mark" zone.