Olympus 45mm f/1.8 Lens: USA - amzn.to/2VuuOuD UK - amzn.to/2AthCxb My Amazon Storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/robtrek Social: Instagram: instagram.com/robtreklens/ Facebook: facebook.com/RobTrekLens/ My Blog: robtrek.com Thanks for all your support! *We are a participant in the Ebay and Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Ebay.com Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Thanks Rob. I really like my 45mm f/1.8 but shown the minor difference between the kit and the prime, if the 45 prime was $500, I would have stayed with the kit since I don't shoot photos for profit and I don't care to spend more than necessary. I'll also add, when I first got my OMD's I was swayed like most that the KIT lenses were not worth a hoot and I needed to have better lenses if I was going to be happy with my photos. However, the more I use them the more I realize... for us 'regular, not for profit' folks, the kit lenses are just fine.
It would be interesting to see the difference between the 14-42mm and the 12-50mm. I have the 12-50mm and love it, especially the macro ability, it’s slightly wider and longer and is weather sealed.
Just what I was looking for. Thanks a ton, Rob! While f1.8 is bound to give blurred background, the sharpness and colors of 45mm are excellent. I've the 12-40 & 40-150 kit lenses, your video has convinced me to buy 45mm to add into bag.
Very good video: it also indirectly shows as the Kit lens performances get worse as the focal length of the zoom increase. A zoom lens is always a short quilt that cannot cover well every part of the focal range and has a sweet spot focal length were it outperforms every possible others. This is not the case for Prime lenses that are designed and built to perform as good as it gets at their fixed focal and where the only variable is the aperture. This being said I think the 12-40 is a more realistic comparison with a bunch of fixed focal lenses like a selection of 12mm 2.0, 17mm 1.8, 25mm 1.8 and the 45mm 1.8: the 12mm is a bit more expensive then the other primes, but all together have a price tag in the same ballpark of the 12-40 Pro and it makes sense for someone willing to get something better then the kit lens to give a thought about which path to follow: primes or pro zoom. What you are actually trading is about 1 stop of light and size/weight for the convenience to be able to snap that shot at the exact focal length you deem appropriate when occasion presents, and this is really a difficult dilemma to solve unless you are lucky and have both options in your camera bag. I'm still not sure keeping the 12mm 2.0 is worth considering that the 12-40 2.8 is so much close and has its sweet spot right at the minimum focal and maximum aperture.
I thought I replied to this earlier, but it's gone now. So sorry if you're seeing this again. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. You are spot on here. Right now I'm just establishing a baseline and will continue with the next logical comparison as you have outlined. I like my 12mm f/2.0 for night vlogging and astrophotography. That extra stop can be a big deal.
Hi Rob another good video thanks.One aspect I like is that you don’t bother to show lens spec charts but actually what we want to know ie how the lens performs in the real life situation.
Great video and a very real world comparison between the two lenses. The Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is indeed..."next" on my list. Thank you very much for your time and effort. We really appreciate it.
Sorry, I don't have the 12-100. You might miss the f/1.8 by going to f/4, but the convenience of a zoom is hard to deny and the 12-100 has I.S. for the inevitable lower shutter speeds.
I'm a little surprised at the length of time the 45mm f/1.8 takes to "re-acquire" focus. It seems significant or at least noticeable. The 14-42mm kit lens did not appear noticeably slower which also surprised me (contrast detect AF I presume). I rarely shoot video so that part is not so important for me, but the sharpness (and bokeh) of the 45mm is very nice although I still find the kit lens to be perfectly usable. I also still use my original Four-Thirds Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro (with an electronic lens adapter) with really fantastic results in still photography so that's another option if you can find one in good shape. Keep the great videos coming.
Thanks. 45mm is not an ideal focal length for video anyway, I should have mentioned that. Interesting - a 50mm f/2.0? Might look for that if they are cheap enough.
@@RobTrek The Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro is one of the sharpest, most aberration - free lenses I've ever owned. Optically this lens is a pure gem. They're fairly rare because no one really wants to let go of it once you've seen it in action. Here's a link to a typical review of it. www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/olympus/50mm-f2-zuiko-digital-macro/review/
Really appreciate these practical comparisons. It makes total sense to know what the extra money is paying for. On the same subject, do you happen to have an opinion concerning the differences between kit lenses? I know this question is peculiar but I still have the 14-42mm IIR from my dead EM-D 10. Then, when I bought EM-D 10 Mark II, I decided to get a refurb that included the EZ "pizza" kit lens (as opposed to body-only) because Olympus talked a big deal about the pizza lens. At the time, I thought the operations would be identical except size. But the EZ lens is missing the zoom ring, relying totally on electronics. Obviously the optics of the two are also different. Which type would you keep/carry?
Thanks. I prefer the IIR. Optically I have not found any differences. I don't like the power zoom for photography, just prefer to manually zoom in and out. The EZ lens is certainly easier to pack. I have one, but it stopped working. Apparently some are having problems with the zoom motors. I don't think it's a widespread problem, but it happened to me. So when it broke, I got the IIR for $90 refurb!
It's a very underappreciated lens.SurprisinglyThe lens I use the most is the old Mark 5 kit The 12 to 50 with auto zoom. The image quality is quite good And the auto zoom is very handy for video work. A side note is its water resistant as well. Which makes it a great all-around lens
Many thanks again for a great,very helpful test video....you must be telepathic too as I had also just ordered this prime lens too, together with the Panasonic you tested, this week! Once again I am very reassured that I will be very happy when they both arrive!
I use the 14-42mm f/3.5 to f/5.6 zoom lens as a backup to the following prime lenses for my micro 4/3 body: 45mm f/1.8 20mm f/1.7 17mm f/2.8 14mm f/2.5
Thanks for another very informative - thus helpful - video! Frankly I was stunned at how slowly the 45mm focused in video in comparison to the kit lens. I wonder why that is, as many reviewers say the 45 is lightning fast for stills. Would the camera play a role in that speed (as opposed to M5ii and M1ii models)? Interesting and enjoyable stuff you give us!
It's not the ideal focal length for video. I think the face detect was having a hard time because of the shallow dof. I kept pumping to try to get the entire face in focus.
You can specify the speed by which a lens focuses in video mode. It can be as quick as you want, or as slow. However, setting quick makes it wobble a lot, which isn't a problem with say a 17 or 25 mm.
Rob, don't forget beginners. I am a pensioner and like many other people I want get on with tech. I would like you to mention the omd e10 mk1 now and again and perhaps a comparison of more kit lenses for financially challenged,love yor tutorials.
One really important distinction between the kit zoom lens and prime lens is the situation the photographer finds himself in. If you go afield strictly to take the photograph, as if you are in the business of creating photographs, then you might be remiss if you did not take along a bag of prime lenses to address the range of photo scenes you must address. If you are traveling for pleasure and wish to make photographs primarily to preserve your memories then carrying a camera plus a heavy bag of prime lenses and taking the trouble of changing out the lens on your camera to suite the scene may be too cumbersome. Sometimes the cost is not the issue. Likewise if you are usually taking photographs in bright daylight the difference between a slow zoom lens and a very fast prime lens is reduced unless you need to intentionally blur the background as much as possible. If none of this matters to you then perhaps you are just pixel peeping and seeking bragging rights for your gear.
Hi Rob Are you also going to do advisary videos on the f1.2 olympus lenses that came out later,though very expensive.Enjoy every video as I also owns the EM10 mk2.
Another very helpful comparison 🙂 Would hope someone would do a similar series for Panasonic lenses against the 12-60mm f3.5 to 5.6. Sadly I don't have the money to buy the lenses to do just that 😅 Cheers from Germany 🙂
The 1.8 is not only sharper, resolution/micro contrast seems to be higher too at 5.6 - something that you would not be able to get out of the kit lens with sharpening. Well, it would look like being able to sharpen the kit lens image so that it resembles, but if it is about details, then it would still not keep up (say, with landscape). I think this was what made me dismiss the kit lens. Not as apparent at 25 or 14 mm - it looks as if the long end of this lens is not it's sweet spot. The ISO calculation would've been really easy in this case: 1/80 to 1/800 is factor 10, so ISO would have to be factor 10 too - ISO 2000. Okay, not that easy most of the time. ;-) In general, 40 or 45 mm is not the focal length for video. Both lenses had some (minor) issues with focusing, and the 45 mm lens was visibly pumping (especially at 1.8). Your 25 mm examples were much better (with a slight advantage for the 1.8 prime). It seems that a small DOF increases the problems in C-AF video, or makes them at least more visible (thinking about it - seems logical, or we might not notice the pumping going on with a larger DOF, even though the contrast AF should have a harder time to work on it). For close focusing with the 45mm F1.8 I have one or two old 49 mm Minolta close-up lenses (should be achromats) with me and a step-up ring. They do a good job with the 25mm F1.8 too.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts here. Am I overthinking the ISO calculations? I'll have to think about that. Yes, the 45mm is not a typical focal length for video. I should have mentioned that. I think the pumping is partially the shallower dof. I wonder if the face detect is trying to get the whole face in focus but can't. Good old Minolta. I have a few bodies and lenses from my college days.
@@RobTrek A Minolta X300 was my first "serious" camera (later an X700; tried an SR-T model, but had no luck at that time; today I might know how to fix it, or who can fix it ;-)). Very good lenses, but the cameras lacked some important features (mainly mirror lock-up resp. pre-release; I think some old models had it, but not in the X series).
@@RobTrek What I forgot to mention, but you covered it in the video: The 45mm F1.8 is a real bargain! Or: Dirt cheap for this quality! Or: A no-brainer. The only "real" contender is the 45mm F1.2, but this one is in a completely different league, including price point … ;-)
From the video, the kit lens actually comes closer to what some high-end phone cameras can achieve, This is clear when you zoomed in to your face and hair, and there were not good details there, But the 45mm sure had those good details while blurring more the BG, Can this 45 mm work for street camera or only and mainly for Boket effect Thanks
Hi Rob! That 45mm 1.8 is amazing! I have the sigma 30mm f1.4 for general fotography, but do you think it can match the Oly 45mm f1.8 for portraits? Would be nice to see a comparison between the Oly 75mm f1.8 and the 45mm F1.8. Cheers!
I think 30mm is not quite long enough for that portrait look. If doing paid work, I'd get the 45mm. For personal stuff, the 30mm will do a good job. Will be happy to talk about my experience using the 75 & 45 in portrait work and general photography. See what I can fit in this week or next.
I have both: the 75 is monstrously sharp and has better build quality, but is very large and almost 5 times the weight end 3 times the size of the 45mm. it also has problems because it really is more of a telephoto then a portrait lens: it can do portraits but in normal condition is rare to get more then the face of the subject in frame. Think of the Prime lens line in this way: in a standard situation about 3 meters away you get a full body picture on the 25mm, a half body portrait on the 45mm and a face portrait on the 75mm. The only thing the 45mm can't archive as much as the 75mm is subject separation: if you can get away enough from the subject, shooting a half body portrait on the 75mm will separate it more from the background, but it will also give you the "telephoto" effect, flattening out the features of the subject. Since you usually excessive sharpness on portraits is not required, I think the 45mm is a better tool.
Thanks for a very informative video. Now I want that lens! :) Have a great 2019! PD. When I checked Amazon link I spotted the 1.2 Pro. Any thoughts on that one?
I really enjoyed this comparison. There is something that I would like to see tested and that is the dynamic range of 200 ISO vs low ISO. I have heard that the low ISO setting is not a true 100 ISO and may not have the same dynamic range as 200. Thanks for another above average video.
I've heard the same things about iso100. Basically you gain a bit in the shadows and lose some in the highlights. I read some thread recently where they compared pics and the differences were small. I'll do some testing and see if it's something I can add value too.
@@RobTrek indeed! I love the dials and all the manual controls on Fuji bodies. I was tempted to go Fuji before choosing Oly, but what held me back was the lenses sizes...and prices. I would love to have a xt-3, but I can't afford it right now, and I invested hard on Oly glass (got 7 lenses, including 2 pro ones), so for now I just hold on Oly system, which I love.
Hello, I was toying with the camera with the kit lens that are the zoom ones and after a while the diaphragm ring started to wiggle a bit like ~1 mm when i'm rotating it but not all the time. Did i broke them or is normal? also great channel, great tutorials and content.
Yes, it's partially broken. There are tiny plastic washers inside that hold the barrel tight. If there is any wiggle, your corners might be out of focus.
Hi Rob, I love the 45mm f1.8, it is great for portrait and the bokeh is so smooth. The kit lens is still pretty good though. This is a great series of comparisons. Just one thing, the music is distracting
@@RobTrek Fair enough. I always look forward to your videos, you and Gavin Hoey. Have you tried the Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II ED. I think this is an underrated lens for the reach it gives and compares surprisingly well with the 300mm f4
can you PLEASE help me? i had an OM-D E-M5 years ago, had to sell, and i JUST bought one back again, but i can't remember what lens i had on it, whether it was 25mm or 45mm... the lens i had brought mountains closer, and when sitting across a small restaurant table, the picture of my husband was just his head in the frame... i don't know where to find this info... this is a really good video, and your selfie is nice, by you don't mention how far away from the camera you are when it's just your head in the frame... Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays etc... please hep me! :)
I have this lens and this camera. How do you shoot video at a specific aperture (e.g., the f1.8 you shoot at at the 5 minute mark)? It's obvious with stills, but when I've tried to specify aperture or shutter speed when shooting video, I'm missing some obvious setting, and it doesn't work. Thanks.
You should set the mode dial to movie mode, then you can change the movie setting to aperture priority using the menu. I will do a video on basic video settings soon.
Olympus 45mm f/1.8 Lens:
USA - amzn.to/2VuuOuD
UK - amzn.to/2AthCxb
My Amazon Storefront:
www.amazon.com/shop/robtrek
Social:
Instagram: instagram.com/robtreklens/
Facebook: facebook.com/RobTrekLens/
My Blog: robtrek.com
Thanks for all your support!
*We are a participant in the Ebay and Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Ebay.com Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Does the 45mm f1.8 fit Olympus PL7? I couldn't find any info anywhere. Mostly the info is about the EPL 7
Thanks
@@MegaAluchi Yes, perfectly!
Awesome review. Comparing it to a known standard (the kit lens) that everybody has is a great way to rate this lens.
It made sense to me. Thanks!
Thanks Rob. A very good point about the way you compare the kit lens with the prime lens. So you are the best for that.
Thanks, Chris.
You are the only one to do this comparison between the kit and prime because that's what most prime buyers are looking for.
Thanks. I thought so too.
Thanks Rob. I really like my 45mm f/1.8 but shown the minor difference between the kit and the prime, if the 45 prime was $500, I would have stayed with the kit since I don't shoot photos for profit and I don't care to spend more than necessary. I'll also add, when I first got my OMD's I was swayed like most that the KIT lenses were not worth a hoot and I needed to have better lenses if I was going to be happy with my photos. However, the more I use them the more I realize... for us 'regular, not for profit' folks, the kit lenses are just fine.
They are great lenses, particularly the zooms. They are superior to the zooms of yesteryear.
It would be interesting to see the difference between the 14-42mm and the 12-50mm. I have the 12-50mm and love it, especially the macro ability, it’s slightly wider and longer and is weather sealed.
Thanks for these comparisons Rob! Very informative and useful!
Watching the trio of these videos. So helpful. I really liked the fact you used the tape measure which provides a concrete visual
Glad it was helpful!
Your comparison videos are a joy to watch and very well prepared, really appreciate your effort, thanks Rob~
Thanks.
So very right, comparing the prime with the "basic", i.e. the all-timer kit lens is the key
Made sense to me at the time.
The 45 1.8 is absoluten amazing. My favourite lens so far!!
I love it too!
Great video, the 45 1.8 is one of my favorite lenses!
Thanks. Yes, mine too!
Just what I was looking for. Thanks a ton, Rob! While f1.8 is bound to give blurred background, the sharpness and colors of 45mm are excellent. I've the 12-40 & 40-150 kit lenses, your video has convinced me to buy 45mm to add into bag.
Thanks. You won't regret it!
Another informative walk-through! How about the 17mm f/1.8?
Thank you! I thought I did one on the 17, but will make one if not.
Rob Trek Yes, you did! I found it - ruclips.net/video/2NAfyV7UcPQ/видео.html
Really like all of your very informative videos... thanks!
Very good video: it also indirectly shows as the Kit lens performances get worse as the focal length of the zoom increase. A zoom lens is always a short quilt that cannot cover well every part of the focal range and has a sweet spot focal length were it outperforms every possible others. This is not the case for Prime lenses that are designed and built to perform as good as it gets at their fixed focal and where the only variable is the aperture.
This being said I think the 12-40 is a more realistic comparison with a bunch of fixed focal lenses like a selection of 12mm 2.0, 17mm 1.8, 25mm 1.8 and the 45mm 1.8: the 12mm is a bit more expensive then the other primes, but all together have a price tag in the same ballpark of the 12-40 Pro and it makes sense for someone willing to get something better then the kit lens to give a thought about which path to follow: primes or pro zoom. What you are actually trading is about 1 stop of light and size/weight for the convenience to be able to snap that shot at the exact focal length you deem appropriate when occasion presents, and this is really a difficult dilemma to solve unless you are lucky and have both options in your camera bag. I'm still not sure keeping the 12mm 2.0 is worth considering that the 12-40 2.8 is so much close and has its sweet spot right at the minimum focal and maximum aperture.
I thought I replied to this earlier, but it's gone now. So sorry if you're seeing this again. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. You are spot on here. Right now I'm just establishing a baseline and will continue with the next logical comparison as you have outlined. I like my 12mm f/2.0 for night vlogging and astrophotography. That extra stop can be a big deal.
i have the 45mm f1.8 on my pen-f at this moment. I love this lens... for portraits. Not really for anything else. But it delivers every time.
It does an awesome job! Thanks.
Hi Rob another good video thanks.One aspect I like is that you don’t bother to show lens spec charts but actually what we want to know ie how the lens performs in the real life situation.
Thanks. I have a few more ideas on using lenses that I'll add in new videos that might be helpful.
Great video and a very real world comparison between the two lenses. The Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is indeed..."next" on my list. Thank you very much for your time and effort. We really appreciate it.
Thanks for watching!
....and please, make a video about pen-f with 12-100 pro lens. How does them match each other? 17 and 45mm are bit inconvenient for travel.
Sorry, I don't have the 12-100. You might miss the f/1.8 by going to f/4, but the convenience of a zoom is hard to deny and the 12-100 has I.S. for the inevitable lower shutter speeds.
I'm a little surprised at the length of time the 45mm f/1.8 takes to "re-acquire" focus. It seems significant or at least noticeable. The 14-42mm kit lens did not appear noticeably slower which also surprised me (contrast detect AF I presume). I rarely shoot video so that part is not so important for me, but the sharpness (and bokeh) of the 45mm is very nice although I still find the kit lens to be perfectly usable. I also still use my original Four-Thirds Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro (with an electronic lens adapter) with really fantastic results in still photography so that's another option if you can find one in good shape. Keep the great videos coming.
Thanks. 45mm is not an ideal focal length for video anyway, I should have mentioned that. Interesting - a 50mm f/2.0? Might look for that if they are cheap enough.
@@RobTrek The Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 Macro is one of the sharpest, most aberration - free lenses I've ever owned. Optically this lens is a pure gem. They're fairly rare because no one really wants to let go of it once you've seen it in action. Here's a link to a typical review of it. www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/olympus/50mm-f2-zuiko-digital-macro/review/
Great review. I have this lens and it reminds me of my old Nikkor 105 f1.8 back in the film days. A lens I always reach for if I can.
I have the Nikkor 105 f/2.5. Love it!
Really appreciate these practical comparisons. It makes total sense to know what the extra money is paying for. On the same subject, do you happen to have an opinion concerning the differences between kit lenses? I know this question is peculiar but I still have the 14-42mm IIR from my dead EM-D 10. Then, when I bought EM-D 10 Mark II, I decided to get a refurb that included the EZ "pizza" kit lens (as opposed to body-only) because Olympus talked a big deal about the pizza lens. At the time, I thought the operations would be identical except size. But the EZ lens is missing the zoom ring, relying totally on electronics. Obviously the optics of the two are also different. Which type would you keep/carry?
Thanks. I prefer the IIR. Optically I have not found any differences. I don't like the power zoom for photography, just prefer to manually zoom in and out. The EZ lens is certainly easier to pack. I have one, but it stopped working. Apparently some are having problems with the zoom motors. I don't think it's a widespread problem, but it happened to me. So when it broke, I got the IIR for $90 refurb!
Just caught this video. The focusing was a little hit or miss sometimes. I think firmware v3 would perform a lot better. Good work.
Yes, it does much better!
It's a very underappreciated lens.SurprisinglyThe lens I use the most is the old Mark 5 kit The 12 to 50 with auto zoom. The image quality is quite good And the auto zoom is very handy for video work. A side note is its water resistant as well. Which makes it a great all-around lens
Thanks for sharing your experience.
Many thanks again for a great,very helpful test video....you must be telepathic too as I had also just ordered this prime lens too, together with the Panasonic you tested, this week! Once again I am very reassured that I will be very happy when they both arrive!
Thanks. Both great lenses for stills.
I use the 14-42mm f/3.5 to f/5.6 zoom lens as a backup to the following prime lenses for my micro 4/3 body:
45mm f/1.8
20mm f/1.7
17mm f/2.8
14mm f/2.5
That works! Nice kit.
Your cranking out the videos. Is the 75mm lens next? I heard that's one of the sharpest lens.
The weather has been above freezing, so trying to get some outdoor time! Will do the 75mm soon. Probably together with the 45mm again.
@@RobTrek would def. watch that. i'm thinking the 75 should be my next lens.
Thanks for another very informative - thus helpful - video! Frankly I was stunned at how slowly the 45mm focused in video in comparison to the kit lens. I wonder why that is, as many reviewers say the 45 is lightning fast for stills. Would the camera play a role in that speed (as opposed to M5ii and M1ii models)? Interesting and enjoyable stuff you give us!
It's not the ideal focal length for video. I think the face detect was having a hard time because of the shallow dof. I kept pumping to try to get the entire face in focus.
You can specify the speed by which a lens focuses in video mode. It can be as quick as you want, or as slow. However, setting quick makes it wobble a lot, which isn't a problem with say a 17 or 25 mm.
Rob, don't forget beginners. I am a pensioner and like many other people I want get on with tech. I would like you to mention the omd e10 mk1 now and again and perhaps a comparison of more kit lenses for financially challenged,love yor tutorials.
I have the em10 mark ii, will try to do more with that camera again. I'm not familiar with the em10 mark i.
I have the Panasonic system and for travel the 14-42 does the business - small and light
That's what I enjoy most about m4/3. Small and light, gets the job done!
nice test, how to record sound
I use a wireless mic system with the in camera microphone jack.
One really important distinction between the kit zoom lens and prime lens is the situation the photographer finds himself in. If you go afield strictly to take the photograph, as if you are in the business of creating photographs, then you might be remiss if you did not take along a bag of prime lenses to address the range of photo scenes you must address. If you are traveling for pleasure and wish to make photographs primarily to preserve your memories then carrying a camera plus a heavy bag of prime lenses and taking the trouble of changing out the lens on your camera to suite the scene may be too cumbersome. Sometimes the cost is not the issue. Likewise if you are usually taking photographs in bright daylight the difference between a slow zoom lens and a very fast prime lens is reduced unless you need to intentionally blur the background as much as possible. If none of this matters to you then perhaps you are just pixel peeping and seeking bragging rights for your gear.
Thanks for sharing. Sound advice.
Hi Rob
Are you also going to do advisary videos on the f1.2 olympus lenses that came out later,though very expensive.Enjoy every video as I also owns the EM10 mk2.
Thanks. I don't have any f/1.2 lenses. If I ever do get a hold of one, I will post.
Educational and interesting. I have a olympus 14 ‐42mm and it's very good in opinion .
Thanks!
I bought the 45 used. What a bargain! Great lens at a great price.
Awesome lens! Enjoy!
Another very helpful comparison 🙂 Would hope someone would do a similar series for Panasonic lenses against the 12-60mm f3.5 to 5.6. Sadly I don't have the money to buy the lenses to do just that 😅
Cheers from Germany 🙂
Thanks. Seems logical to me to compare what you have to what you may get. Maybe James Popsys can do this on his channel.
@@RobTrek you're right. Maybe I'll ask him.
The 1.8 is not only sharper, resolution/micro contrast seems to be higher too at 5.6 - something that you would not be able to get out of the kit lens with sharpening. Well, it would look like being able to sharpen the kit lens image so that it resembles, but if it is about details, then it would still not keep up (say, with landscape). I think this was what made me dismiss the kit lens. Not as apparent at 25 or 14 mm - it looks as if the long end of this lens is not it's sweet spot.
The ISO calculation would've been really easy in this case: 1/80 to 1/800 is factor 10, so ISO would have to be factor 10 too - ISO 2000. Okay, not that easy most of the time. ;-)
In general, 40 or 45 mm is not the focal length for video. Both lenses had some (minor) issues with focusing, and the 45 mm lens was visibly pumping (especially at 1.8). Your 25 mm examples were much better (with a slight advantage for the 1.8 prime). It seems that a small DOF increases the problems in C-AF video, or makes them at least more visible (thinking about it - seems logical, or we might not notice the pumping going on with a larger DOF, even though the contrast AF should have a harder time to work on it).
For close focusing with the 45mm F1.8 I have one or two old 49 mm Minolta close-up lenses (should be achromats) with me and a step-up ring. They do a good job with the 25mm F1.8 too.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts here. Am I overthinking the ISO calculations? I'll have to think about that. Yes, the 45mm is not a typical focal length for video. I should have mentioned that. I think the pumping is partially the shallower dof. I wonder if the face detect is trying to get the whole face in focus but can't. Good old Minolta. I have a few bodies and lenses from my college days.
@@RobTrek A Minolta X300 was my first "serious" camera (later an X700; tried an SR-T model, but had no luck at that time; today I might know how to fix it, or who can fix it ;-)). Very good lenses, but the cameras lacked some important features (mainly mirror lock-up resp. pre-release; I think some old models had it, but not in the X series).
@@RobTrek What I forgot to mention, but you covered it in the video: The 45mm F1.8 is a real bargain! Or: Dirt cheap for this quality! Or: A no-brainer. The only "real" contender is the 45mm F1.2, but this one is in a completely different league, including price point … ;-)
@Argentarii Homini Yeah, but who wants to carry a calculator around all the time, or go to search for one's smartphone? ;-)
Interesting perspective on the missing features. I never got into photography enough back in my college days to look for such things.
From the video, the kit lens actually comes closer to what some high-end phone cameras can achieve,
This is clear when you zoomed in to your face and hair, and there were not good details there,
But the 45mm sure had those good details while blurring more the BG,
Can this 45 mm work for street camera or only and mainly for Boket effect
Thanks
Yes, it's a great street lens. Let's you keep distance when you need it and bokeh when you can get closer.
@@RobTrek would this fit Olympus EP7?
Hi Rob!
That 45mm 1.8 is amazing!
I have the sigma 30mm f1.4 for general fotography, but do you think it can match the Oly 45mm f1.8 for portraits?
Would be nice to see a comparison between the Oly 75mm f1.8 and the 45mm F1.8.
Cheers!
I think 30mm is not quite long enough for that portrait look. If doing paid work, I'd get the 45mm. For personal stuff, the 30mm will do a good job. Will be happy to talk about my experience using the 75 & 45 in portrait work and general photography. See what I can fit in this week or next.
I have both: the 75 is monstrously sharp and has better build quality, but is very large and almost 5 times the weight end 3 times the size of the 45mm. it also has problems because it really is more of a telephoto then a portrait lens: it can do portraits but in normal condition is rare to get more then the face of the subject in frame. Think of the Prime lens line in this way: in a standard situation about 3 meters away you get a full body picture on the 25mm, a half body portrait on the 45mm and a face portrait on the 75mm. The only thing the 45mm can't archive as much as the 75mm is subject separation: if you can get away enough from the subject, shooting a half body portrait on the 75mm will separate it more from the background, but it will also give you the "telephoto" effect, flattening out the features of the subject. Since you usually excessive sharpness on portraits is not required, I think the 45mm is a better tool.
@@RobTrek I appreciate it. Thank you!
@@Leptospirosi thanks!
Thanks for a very informative video. Now I want that lens! :) Have a great 2019! PD. When I checked Amazon link I spotted the 1.2 Pro. Any thoughts on that one?
Not sure I'll ever get a hold of one. Bit pricey for me, as I don't need to shoot in low light nor can I vlog with it since it's too heavy.
@@RobTrek, yes it's pricey. Thanks for replying.
Love your vids. No recognition for the music in description?
Thanks. The music is just from the youtube library for "Silent Partner". No attribution was required.
This was an excellent review.
Excellent comparison. Informative. Kudos
Thank you!
This video was so helpful. Thanks Rob.
Glad to help. Thanks.
Rob, Can you please Made a review for the kit lens 14-42mm 3.5-5.6 ez ed MSC ?
Love your videos, continue like that!!
Thanks. I don't have the ez lens anymore. It was great while it worked, but I replaced it with the IIR version. Performance is virtually identical.
I really enjoyed this comparison. There is something that I would like to see tested and that is the dynamic range of 200 ISO vs low ISO. I have heard that the low ISO setting is not a true 100 ISO and may not have the same dynamic range as 200. Thanks for another above average video.
I've heard the same things about iso100. Basically you gain a bit in the shadows and lose some in the highlights. I read some thread recently where they compared pics and the differences were small. I'll do some testing and see if it's something I can add value too.
Thanks Rob that would be great @@RobTrek
We demand a Rob Trek for Fujifilm as well :-)
Haha! I love Fujifilm cameras. Just can't afford to add another system. Looking at a cheap used XT1 for $399. But then all the glass!
@@RobTrek indeed! I love the dials and all the manual controls on Fuji bodies. I was tempted to go Fuji before choosing Oly, but what held me back was the lenses sizes...and prices.
I would love to have a xt-3, but I can't afford it right now, and I invested hard on Oly glass (got 7 lenses, including 2 pro ones), so for now I just hold on Oly system, which I love.
Fuji, though a good camera, just can't compare with Olympus. I've owned both and still own an EM5
Thank you Rob for your work..
Thanks for watching!
Totally not sold on AF capability. But DOF is stellar - and so is IQ. I'd buy the 45mm F1.8 for bokeh and IQ alone . But then, I'm not a videographer.
The 45mm is great for stills.
Hello, I was toying with the camera with the kit lens that are the zoom ones and after a while the diaphragm ring started to wiggle a bit like ~1 mm when i'm rotating it but not all the time. Did i broke them or is normal? also great channel, great tutorials and content.
Yes, it's partially broken. There are tiny plastic washers inside that hold the barrel tight. If there is any wiggle, your corners might be out of focus.
Hi Rob,
I love the 45mm f1.8, it is great for portrait and the bokeh is so smooth. The kit lens is still pretty good though. This is a great series of comparisons. Just one thing, the music is distracting
Thanks. I kinda rushed the editing here and didn't turn the music down enough.
@@RobTrek Fair enough. I always look forward to your videos, you and Gavin Hoey. Have you tried the Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II ED. I think this is an underrated lens for the reach it gives and compares surprisingly well with the 300mm f4
Great comparison! Thank you.
Thank you!
can you PLEASE help me? i had an OM-D E-M5 years ago, had to sell, and i JUST bought one back again, but i can't remember what lens i had on it, whether it was 25mm or 45mm... the lens i had brought mountains closer, and when sitting across a small restaurant table, the picture of my husband was just his head in the frame... i don't know where to find this info... this is a really good video, and your selfie is nice, by you don't mention how far away from the camera you are when it's just your head in the frame... Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays etc... please hep me! :)
nevermind hehe, i found this comparison! samgoldphotos.blogspot.com/2014/03/comparison-between-olympus-mzd-25mm-f18.html
Great! Sorry I didn't see this sooner. Happy New Year!
@@RobTrek no worries lol the panic is over... Happy New Year to you toooo
Very good thanks 👍
Thank you too!
I have this lens and this camera. How do you shoot video at a specific aperture (e.g., the f1.8 you shoot at at the 5 minute mark)? It's obvious with stills, but when I've tried to specify aperture or shutter speed when shooting video, I'm missing some obvious setting, and it doesn't work. Thanks.
You should set the mode dial to movie mode, then you can change the movie setting to aperture priority using the menu. I will do a video on basic video settings soon.
@@RobTrek Thanks for replying Rob. I'll do a test tomorrow, and will look forward to that video.
Route 45 Peter 1.8 to the Panasonic at olympus 45 mm 1.2
Not sure I understand. ??
That 45mm is a sweet lens.
It's great!
45mm is slower in focus. Not for video at all.
45mm is not a typical focal length for video. I should have mentioned that. Thanks!
@@RobTrek yes, focal length is not that good for video. I complain on focusing speed. It is slow, very slow. Not suitable for small kid families :)
Buen video, gracias.
Thank you!
Kit lens makes you look younger.
I need all the help I can get!
It makes a nice bokeh
It's a great lens.
If you tried Panasonic 14-42mm kit lens you would have given up making the video.
I'll probably never know. Don't plan on buying that lens.