It has excellent sharpness and terrific bokeh. The images look good (albeit a bit clinical for my tastes). The AF is flakey bordering on terrible because at one moment it's lightning fast and then it can't focus at all on something easy. The FL is nice for portraits but the working distance feels like it's about fifty feet. The lens is wonderfully compact and light and I cringe whenever I attach it to my camera because the build quality very reminiscent of my old Fiat 128.

I know it is much loved and for the level of optical goodness it is quite a bargain but honestly...is this really the best Olympus could do? I look at my P14 and it is lovely to use and despite being barely larger than a lens cap it feels very well made (and wonder of wonders hit focus almost every time). I'm making a point to use it and I like what it can do but the experience leaves much to be desired.

Bhupinder is not going to like you talking to his baby like that.

__________________
Sarcasm is my default tone, so please consider that before taking offense to the preceding message.

Criticism (no matter how harsh) is welcomed of ANY and ALL images I post.

I know I'm in for it now. In all fairness it is an excellent lens optically. It really does remind me of my old Fiat sedan. When that thing was running it was just so fun to drive, but it was ugly as h*ll (looked like a yellow hat) and stuff would randomly stop working but when the planets aligned and everything worked it was great.

Maybe others could shed some light on this hit-and-miss focus issue. I am wondering if that happens only on Panasonic body. I only have Olympus camera bodies, and I don't think I have experienced much focus hunting with the 45/1.8. I did experience missing focus on small targets when the 45/1.8 was coupled with the E-PL3 because of the small LCD display and large focus box, but this was pretty much fixed with reducing focus box size.

As far as the FL is concerned, I much prefer the PL25 over the 45/1.8 as I often find the crop too tight for my liking, and having to back up to get the shot that I want, but for those occasions when the 45 FL is needed, the 45/1.8 usually delivers with flying colors...

I found the AF weirdness was at its worst on my E-P3 and slightly better on my Panasonic bodies. Sometimes it works like a charm but other times it really struggles and sometimes it simply will not AF at all (second copy of this lens to do this) The smaller focus box helps. Even my P20 had better AF. It was slower but almost always locked. The O45 is a lot quicker but seriously flakey sometimes. It very well may be the subject matter or I am asking it to do something that overtaxes the system but I can't imagine what. That said if you're patient you will be rewarded.

I have a PL25 on route.

I have yet to experience any serious AF issues with E-PM1 & Oly 45 after thousands of clicks made with this combo. In general, in low light AF is much worse on Oly bodies (perhaps except E-M5). Oly 45 is definitely much faster and more precise than my Panny 20mm in any light (as mounted on E-PM1). I also have PL25 and I really can't say it's faster than Oly 45. Also, Oly 45mm is faster during video in C-AF on E-PM1 body vs PL25 (much longer refocusing lag in C-AF) while Panny 20mm is totally useless for video (except MF).

Things I don't like about the 45/1.8

- It's weird looking on a black E-M5 or Panasonic G/GH body.
- The narrow barrel diameter still doesn't look quite right, although it does make it more compact.
- I could take or leave the trim ring. I usually leave it...
- Occasional mis-focus at or near the minimum focusing distance. Some of this could be attributed to me attempting to focus at what is probably less than minimum focusing distance
- Colour. I get what they are trying to achieve, but I'm still not totally sold on silver (see also No. 1 dislike). Not sure how well the finish will stand up to any possible jostling around in a camera bag.


Likes

- Optics. Just about everything really.
- Speed and accuracy of focus in every other set of conditions other than that mentioned in my dislikes. I haven't experienced any inconsistency as yet (E-M5, E-PM1, GH1. All using the smallest focus box).
- Size and weight.
- Looks great on an E-PM1 and pretty good on an E-Px

In summary: I bought it under the assumption that I wouldn't get a massive amount of use from it, but will now make a point of getting as much use out of it as possible as a faithful No. 2 lens to the PL25/1.4.

__________________
Nic
E-M5, GH1
Flickr Photostream
>> Insert quote here <<

I found if to technically be a great lens, but ugly and too long, yet too short for my tastes.

typed on my phone, sorry.

__________________
Photography isn't about the gear, but the ability to capture a moment

Micro Four Thirds Street Photography Group

I wonder if you have a bad copy?

I have noticed a few misses, more so on my E-M5 now that I have started using it more for non-portraits. That said, each time I have seen a miss, it has been when the focus box was at default. As soon as I bring the box down to the minimum size, it is very accurate.

No hunting at all on mine (nothing like the 20/1.7 does for me).

I can't argue with the build quality... the trim ring is cheesy and it is plastic. Of course, that also means it is very light.

I know what you are saying about clinical, but if you want softness or pixie dust, that is what PP and/or filters are for!

__________________
Kyle / E-M5 and E-PM2
Flickr Photostream

I don't have my P20 anymore to compare to but as I recall the P20 never was squirrely when it came to AF...but is was noisy and really slow (albeit a bit faster on my Panasonic bodies than my Olympus bodies). I think what I find annoying is that sometimes the 45 is fast and accurate and I love it then suddenly it loses it's mind and can't AF on the simplest thing. Today I couldn't get it to focus on a flower with not much behind it and it kept trying to focus on the background. I have to manually focus it first to get it going then it'll correct itself.