« Pentax Q Beta Test! | Main | TOP Going Dim; Print Sale Delayed »

Sunday, 21 August 2011

Comments

A review implies some modicum of objectivity... Robin Wong has been compensated a number of times by Olympus in the past, including a free E-5. Since he has never said anything bad about the equipment he has "reviewed" for Olympus, is it really a review?

No.

But that takes nothing away from the pictures, which indeed look very good for a street m43 user looking for this focal length. I too hope to become an owner of this lens.

Why do they keep making lenses which are "normal" focal length for 35mm cameras, but too long for routine use on small sensor DSLRs? Where are the inexpensive 28 to 33mm f:2.0 lenses?

This may seem a minor note in light of what everyone else is looking at, but it was really nice to look at some good photos with a 3:4 aspect ratio. If I veer back into digital again, that fact alone might push me towards m43.

Why not the Leica 45mm for micro 4/3 that's been on the market for a while?

It's not my intent to pee on anyone's geraniums here, but to me the images have a pronounced cut and paste quality to them. Many of the scenes have back and edge lighting in them which accentuates the look, but others still have it. The reviewer says there's no sharpening applied, and I believe him,and I'm wondering if the camera default sharpening can be set to minus? For me, sharp is good but clinical isn't. I'd like to see a RAW file.

"it was really nice to look at some good photos with a 3:4 aspect ratio. If I veer back into digital again, that fact alone might push me towards m43."

latent_image,
I've enjoyed that aspect of the GF1. I set it on 3:4 when I got it and have never taken it off.

Mike

"Why not the Leica 45mm for micro 4/3 that's been on the market for a while?"

David,
Nice lens as far as I can tell, but as a Macro it's $700 vs. $400, more than a stop slower, not as petite and almost twice as heavy. Not a huge deal, but everything added up makes it less appealing as a general portrait lens. Of course if you need a medium-telephoto Macro, then it's better.

Mike

I loved my PL 45mm f/2.8 macro, and I took a gamble and sold it to get the money to pre-order this new Oly lens. After seeing these samples, I got a good feeling inside.

Looks good. Wide open is most critical anyway, can't imagine that a lens like this would be bad at f5.6-f8.

This lens looks like a small miracle. Nothing is left wanting despite the tiny package. However, if your after that soft glow you should really look elsewhere. The Oly 45 is sharp in a modern sense. "Razor sharp". look here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dslrmagazine.com%2Fpruebas%2Fpruebas-tecnicas%2Fm.zuiko-digital-45-mm-f-1-8-la-prueba.html

Thanks for the heads-up, now I've got to go and pre-order it. Not sure I need it but want...

Can't wait.

Okay, after reading that review (appropriate sodium chloride applied) and looking at the images, I am a happy camper. Sorry, old Hexanon 40 mm; you and your adapter will soon be relegated to my Big Shelf of Cheap MF Stuff.

@sneye:

If you look closely at the table, one of the included accessories is "tapas," which is a feature that I can believe in.

Dear Sneye,

Thank you for that link. I found this review to be much more useful to me than Wong's (which told me almost nothing I cared about).

I am sincerely hoping that in a week I will decide I can afford to spring for both the 12mm and 45mm lenses. With the 20mm Pano I already have (plus the 45-200 zoom), it will make my 14-42 kit lens irrelevant.

pax / Ctein

"Dear Sneye, Thank you for that link. I found this review to be much more useful to me than Wong's (which told me almost nothing I cared about)."

And to think, Wong's told me almost everything I care about, namely bokeh, bokeh, bokeh....[g]

Mike

Dear Ctein,
I must admit I'm with Mike on this one.

The comments to this entry are closed.