Can you recommend the P 42.5 f1.7 over the Oly 45mm?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by manju69, Jun 10, 2015.

  1. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Pete
    Hi. I have been on the lookout for a native short tele and am thinking of either the Olympus 45mm (which i used to have and sold! - damn) and the newer Panasonic 42.5 f1.7. By all accounts the performance is similar but some of the samples of the 42.5 have a busier out of focus area - on the other had it focuses a lot closer and i love getting close!. Does anyone have both/used both or is happy with the newer P 42.5? Thanks
     
  2. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    42.5mm has stabilization, much closer focusing and noticeably sharper corners at large apertures. It is pretty clearly the better lens. The Olympus primarily has cost and very slightly smaller size going for it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  3. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Eric
    From everything I've seen, there isn't much in it with regard to IQ differences, at least not as a portrait lens where you're likely to have your subject near center and background defocused to some extent. As mentioned, the 42.5mm offers IS and a closer minimum focus distance. If neither of those things matter to you, I'd say save some money and get the Olympus. If, however, you shoot using a Panasonic body and want to use the lens for video in addition to stills, my opinion is that the IS offered by the 42.5mm would be worth it. If you want to use this in situations where the corners are going to matter, you may want to consider the 42.5mm as well from what people are saying. I would probably never notice.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2015
  4. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
  5. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sure, but I guess who is going to be using it to shoot flat fields and architecture at f1.8? Will you notice the corners? On what kinds of shots?
    And I could say it is not just more expensive than a used Olympus, it is WAY more expensive!
    Until this Panasonic was released, nobody had anything but praise to give the Olympus.

    I called the 42.5mm the better lens, but let's not get carried away with overstating the advantages.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  6. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
    A. No one has criticized the Olympus from what I can see.
    B. No one has overstated the advantages. They are what they are, but they are undeniable.
     
  7. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    Until I get one and test it side-by-side I am confident that the new Panasonic has a whole range of tiny advantages over the Olympus, if both lenses were an average sample : which they won't be.
    Lens variation being what it is, and recent quality control being abysmal, I won't count my chickens until they're both hatched.

    According to most amateur comparisons the Panasonic is slightly better, suck it and see.
     
  8. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I had an Oly 45 a couple of years ago and sold it. It was a fine lens and I enjoyed using it. I have a Pan 42.5 on it's way now, direct import. I'm getting a couple of things from the seller so the price is actually pretty good. If I were just using my E-M10 I probably would have gotten the Oly and saved some money. But for use on my GM5 and the close focus ability I decided on the Pan.
     
  9. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    773
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    I used to have the 45, just recently bought the Panasonic, as I now have Panasonic bodies. Since I often photograph fresco wall paintings and old altar paintings in churches, the corner sharpness of the Panasonic is noticeable and very useful to me.
     
  10. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 6, 2013
    Philly
    Steve
    The Panny is also massively bigger and heavier than the 45 F1.8 (if that matters to OP), though I've never used one. It seems about the same size/wt as the 75. I don't see the cost/quality equation being a worthwhile investment personally. I've shot landscapes with the 45 and I don't have any complaints about corners FWIW. I don't shoot charts or walls.
     
  11. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    So, nobody actually has one (new Panasonic), or taken any pictures with it. :rolleyes:
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. gravijaflare

    gravijaflare Mu-43 Veteran

    218
    Aug 28, 2014
    A planet called Gaia
  13. gravijaflare

    gravijaflare Mu-43 Veteran

    218
    Aug 28, 2014
    A planet called Gaia
    a side by side comparison photo of the 3 lenses, showing their size differences. we're talking about the f1.7 here, not the f1.2.. ;)

    P1060486.

    http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=pana42
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. Darren Bonner

    Darren Bonner Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 1, 2013
    Poole UK
    Are you getting the P42.5 f1.7 mixed up with the PL45?
    http://camerasize.com/compact/#570.93,570.458,570.28,570.346,ha,t
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
    "Massively bigger"? In a word: no.

    http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_G_42-5mm_f1-7_H_HS043E/index.shtml
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. manju69

    manju69 Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Jul 1, 2011
    Stroud, UK
    Pete
    I do often shoot flat fields so sharpness in the corners might make a difference. The deal breaker might closer minimum focusing distance... but also the quality of the bokeh. I'll either buy one and sell it or await more samples. I may get a EM1 so stabilisation would be good...
     
  17. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Well, I had the Nocticron 42.5 f1.2 for a few days and ended up returning it since the difference in real world use between it and the Oly 45 I already had just didn't justify the enormous price hike. I know the Pany 42.5 F1.7 is a lot cheaper than the Noct, but I'd still hesitate to upgrade from the Oly for it. The Oly is a very good lens. Having said that though, if I were looking anew for a reasonably-priced 40-odd mm lens, I'd probably go for the Pany rather than the Oly.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  18. xdayv

    xdayv Color Blind

    Aug 26, 2011
    Tacloban City, Philippines
    Dave
    I had a Oly 45 years back, optically good, and for the price, it's a good buy. I will try on the 42.5 this time, looks like a winner with close focusing abilities and OIS.
     
  19. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    贾一川
    no, I have the 42.5, and it's far far away from the size/weight of the 75
     
  20. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    My local store finally got a copy in, I'll hopefully be able to try it out this weekend and compare to my copy of the 45mm f/1.8.