45 vs 75

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by tol1l1yboy, Oct 2, 2013.

  1. tol1l1yboy

    tol1l1yboy Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 12, 2013
    I have searched and searched and cant find a thread dedicated to the similarities and differences between the lenses. Im trying to decide on which one to buy. First off, price doesnt matter to me. What does matter is the value of the lens. If the 75mm is that much better than Ill pay for it. Has anyone done any comparisons shooting the same images with both lenses? Id love to see some. If not for those of you that have shot both more than just one time can you tell me what you like about each?
  2. ntblowz

    ntblowz Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 13, 2011
    Auckland, New Zealand
    The 75mm is the ultimate bokeh lens if that's what you after, I know quite a few people dumped their 45mm after getting the 75mm.
  3. F/Stop

    F/Stop Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 9, 2013
    West Virginia
    Brian Y.
    well in terms of sharpness the 45 is close to the 75. in terms of bokeh the 75mm wins hands down. The physical size of the apeture for the 75 is 41.6mm and the 45 is 25mm.

    The 75mm is one of the sharpest lens' ever tested ( multiple sources )

    The focal length is totally subjective. For me, the 75mm is quite long and sometimes hard to work with depending on distance to subject.

    Recently i acquired the 50mm 1.8 OM lens and much prefer that FL for everyday portraits.

    IMHO pick whats best for you, if you prefer longer FL's and better background blur then the 75 is your answer. The 45mm is right behind the 25mm 1.4 pana-leica then of course the 75mm is king. but then again, that is my opinion
  4. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I have them both and they are both great lenses. The 75 is certainly sharper, has shallower DOF and is better built (by a mile). However, I doubt that most could tell the difference in IQ on even a very large print.

    Personally, I think the only way to make decision is either on focal length (which better suits what you want to shoot?), or if FL in itself isn't a factor, then it'll be the price/build quality trade off.
  5. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    The O75 IS one of the sharpest lenses in the market. not just in this format.

    the difference in between the two is personal i think. But of course it might be "harder" to get used to the 75 on top of the 45.

    I use the 75 and sold the 45. never looked back.
  6. Choose the one that fits your need focal length wise.....

    It doesn't matter which is "sharper" or "better". If its not the right focal length it still won't serve your purpose..

    Kinda like buying running shoes that are too small just because they are the best running shoe.... it will still not fit.

    The 75mm focal length cannot replace the 45mm focal length and vice versa. In reality, they are both good lenses.. .it boils down to the right tool for the right job.
    • Like Like x 7
  7. cdmicha

    cdmicha Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 28, 2012
    If you are looking for the better value, I think the 45mm wins hands down. It is smaller, lighter, nearly as sharp, and half the price. The 75mm is a great lens too- but it's larger, heavier, and twice the price. Based on my own experiences, the 45mm focuses considerably faster as well.

    With that said (I own both), I use the 75mm much more often. My style is much more portrait oriented, and for me the 75mm is just magic. Don't get me wrong, I still love and shoot with the 45mm, but since getting the 75mm, it's on my camera probably twice as much. Based on your signature, I think the better question to ask might be if you really want the 75mm over the 60mm- because the 60mm is a very similar lens, when used for non-macro subjects. Personally, now that I've got the 75mm and shoot with it a bunch, I'll probably sell my 60mm. Unless I start getting into macro photography soon... :)

    You really can't go wrong with either lens. I love them both.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Talanis

    Talanis Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 15, 2012
    Sherbrooke, Canada
    Eric Cote
    Both are great lens. Sharp as you can get. Bokeh is good on both. 75mm has a smaller death of field for the same composition. The build of the 75 mm is better (all metal) but it makes it a lot heavier. If you plan on using it inside, forget the 75mm because it's too long. For me, the 45mm is more useful but if I have room, I'll probably snap the 75. Love them both. If I could have only one, I'd go with the 45.



    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Mu-43 mobile app
    • Like Like x 9
  9. curtisls87

    curtisls87 Mu-43 Regular Subscribing Member

    Jan 7, 2010
    Los Gatos, CA, USA
    Curt Schimmels
    I agree with those that state what is obvious in that these are two different focal lengths and thus serve different purposes. I own both, and find that if I'm a home, I tend to use the 45 because the 75 is just too long. However, if I'm outside, or in a larger building (hall, church, etc) I use the 75 90% of the time I'm shooting portraiture.

    In truth, I really feel I couldn't choose one, I need both.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    Both are fabulous optically. The 45 is a better bargain but has more plastic parts - that is not a complaint. My 45 is actually sharper than my 75, but in real life no one would be likely to notice.
  11. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    Both are fantastic, you can't substitute one for the other. They compliment each other. I use both for portraiture, however the 45 is a bit more versatile. But for any portrait shoot I always bring the 75 along, always.

    Personally, I feel if you don't shoot portraits often, the 45 is a better buy. I almost never take out the 75 for general shooting. If money is not an issue like you say, then get both!
    • Like Like x 2
  12. noohoggin1

    noohoggin1 Instagram: @tomnguyenstudio

    May 21, 2012
    I own both; love them both. Sure for the same framing, the 75mm will give you a little less depth of field. But the 45 is no slouch at all, and is in my opinion the best bang for your buck m43 lens. I try to use the 75mm when possible (need a lot of space), but if I can't then I have no problem using the 45mm. If I had to pick just one, it'd be the 45. Tiny, light, and easily slips in my pocket. Love that lens.
  13. mister_roboto

    mister_roboto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 14, 2011
    Seattle, WA, USA
    I'm in the camp that says go with the focal length you'll use the most.

    I have both, and they're both excellent. The 45mm is sharp, but the 75mm is clearly sharper. I think where the 75mm really excels is in non-ideal lighting and conditions compared to the 45mm- it really does blow it away and the differences become VERY noticeable. The 45mm though- is possibly the best deal for lenses in price vs quality with µ4/3 (next to the panasonic 14mm). I use the 75mm more than the 45mm, but when I'm using something other than the 75mm- I'm always looking for a chance to use it.
  14. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Both are great. I find the 75mm optically a bit better and the blur a bit smoother. But it's negligible in real world shooting. Personally i get on better with the 75mm, which is bizarre because the 85-90mm is by far my preference over 135mm on film.

    Now i know this is going to start a fight and i apologise in advance, but.......

    The 75mm does NOT has less DOF with the same subject size in frame. The act of moving closer when shooting the 45mm balances out the longer focal length of the 75. At the same aperture, on the same sensor, with the same subject size and focus point, DOF will be the same.

    Lots of things will be different. Compression. Angle of view. Perspective. Just not DOF. A reference is here (with pics):


    • Like Like x 4
  15. darosk

    darosk Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 17, 2013
    Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
    After owning both for a while, I dumped the 75 for the 45. Simple real world shooting statistics showed me that I shot with the 45 far more often than with the 75 - I don't believe in keeping a lens in the bag just because it's nice. This is no comment on the optical qualities of the 75 - it is an extremely fine lens by any standard, not just m43.

    I managed to sell my 75 off at about 90-95% of what I paid for it because it was in mint condition and I threw in a hood - so it was a negligible loss in my opinion.

    If price really isn't an issue for you, I suggest just buying (or renting, or borrowing) both and shoot with them, making your own decisions based on your own real world experience. There is no substitute for your own hands-on experience. Sadly we cannot all afford to do that.
  16. Talanis

    Talanis Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 15, 2012
    Sherbrooke, Canada
    Eric Cote
    Thanks Gordon

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Mu-43 mobile app
  17. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011
    The 45 is cheap and very small. Around 300 bucks. It is not spectacular but it produces great shots most of the time. It is also much easier to work with than the 75mm.

    The 75mm is a spectacular lens IMO. It can produce spectacular shots but it is much heavier and you need some room to work with it (some distance between you and the subject). The 45 is already a 90mm in full frame which would be a mild telephoto. The 75 acts like a 150mm full frame lens for the field of view.

    Bottom line, I find a reason to keep both. I use the 75 every chance I get but the 45 is more appropriate and easier to use in many cases. Given how cheap and small the 45 is, it makes it easy to pick up and hold on to.

    Maybe get the 45 first. If you still feel the need for the 75, pick one of those up later.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. napilopez

    napilopez Contributing Editor

    Feb 21, 2012
    NYC Area
    Napier Lopez
    The 75mm is unquestionably the better lens in virtually every optical sense, and is built much better as well (I don't care about build too much, but it matters to some). I don't own the 75mm, but I've rented it many many times by now. I don't know what it is exactly; perhaps a little more microcontrast, some added sharpness wide open, and impeccable corner sharpness. Whatever it is(and it's not just the bokeh abilities), the 75mm always just feels like it's in a class of it's own on in the entire system. Mind you, I'm far from a pixel peeper, but there's something about the 75mm that makes the image feel as if it's totally untainted. It's possibly the most "transparent" lens I've tried. In a sense, devoid of "character", which, in another sense, is its own character.

    Then there is the issue of bokeh. The 45mm is usually enough for headshots, but if you're standing far enough from your subject to fill a full body(especially if using landscape orientation), you'll have to be a lot more selective about your background. Since most of my shoots are outdoors, the 75mm is preferred. Ironically, for me this means the 75mm is actually the more versatile lens, as I don't have to be as picky about my backgrounds.

    Like others have suggested, it depends on what focal length you prefer. But it also depends on what other lenses you have on the system - I felt the 20mm and 45mm were an absolutely perfect duo. Since replacing the 20mm for the 25mm, however, the Oly gets a lot less use. I feel like the 75 works a lot better with that lens, as it infringes less on its territory. Still, other have had no qualms using the 25mm and 45mm together; I just feel like if I'm shooting casually, I don't normally have a need to take off my 25mm for portraits like I did with the 20.

    You are completely right about this, but people generally think of DoF to be about the amount of background blur, not just the width of the in-focus area. Inaccurate, but alas. For the same composition, assuming your background is reasonably separated from your subject, the 75mm will appear to blur the background out more due to compression magnification. So yea. Same DoF, more bokeh.
    • Like Like x 3
  19. sdsyver

    sdsyver Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 14, 2012
    Northern Alberta
    I have both lenses and go for the 75mm all the time. I can't seem to get used to the 45mm. I like shooting candid shots and the 75 just gives me the extra room I like. Super sharp too.


    Picture of my daughter playing soccer. It's about 60% crop. Taken with the 75mm
    • Like Like x 1
  20. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    Two shots with similar framing. One with 45, one with 75.

    Oly 45:
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/9455091783/" title="Garden Girl by Vincent-F-Tsai, on Flickr"> 9455091783_73386c06ec_c.jpg "800" height="600" alt="Garden Girl"></a>

    Oly 75:
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/8547856118/" title="The Green Family by Vincent-F-Tsai, on Flickr"> 8547856118_cd43a2da6f_c.jpg "800" height="600" alt="The Green Family"></a>

    As Flash said, DOF is similar. The difference is in background blur. Also like Napier said, once your distance increases, the separation is much more significant with the 75 on full length portraits.
    • Like Like x 3