legacy vs oly 45 - maybe I'm crazy

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by goodsonr, Feb 9, 2013.

  1. goodsonr

    goodsonr Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 7, 2011
    I have the oly 45mm and a smc pentax-m f2 85mm .. but I lust after the oly 75mm and I haven't used the 45 that much (I use the 85mm more).

    Well .. while browsing Kijiji spied a smc pentax-m f1.7 50mm for the grand-price of $35.00. Since I already had the adapter I couldn't pass it up for comparison to the Oly 45mm

    Soooo .. after a few shots around the house at f2.8 ... its not that far off the oly 45 to my eyes (except when shooting into bright light when the whole picture takes on that blue-haze that I know so well from the 85mm).

    Since I haven't been using the 45 much .. and when I do use it autofocus is not that important ... I've decided to try and sell the 45mm.

    Also looking for feelers locally for the 85mm. If I can sell both, then oly 75mm here I come.

    I feel a bit strange selling the well-regarded Oly 45mm for a $35.00 ancient lens. I guess I need all you good folks to convince me there is nothing strange at all ......
  2. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 2, 2012
    I traded out of the 45mm for a Rokkor 1.4. I like how it renders portraits. The thinking at the time was; too many lenses to constantly change, so sell some native primes and get a 12-35. Ultimately, I didn't think it was worth the $. The only native I have now is a 20mm and 40-150. I'm trying the 14-54MKII right now as a walk around. Mostly, I'm happy with it except when it misses focus on occasion. I've got a few longer legacies that will probably go away soon. But I think a legacy 50mm is a no brainer. Almost all are good.
  3. RichDesmond

    RichDesmond Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 18, 2011
    Nothing odd at all. While I'd like to have the Oly 45, I've got the Konica 40mm pancake that does basically the same job, and I only paid $40 for it. If you can live without the AF at that focal length then selling it to fund the 75mm makes perfect sense to me.
  4. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    I can't speak to your specific 50, but I sold the 45 and carry legacy instead. I have a Canon FD50mm 1.4 and 3.5 macro. Something like $120 for both lenses. I find the 50/1.4 is very nice at 2.0 and beyond (it can be a bit soft and ghosty at 1.4), and I always had AF troubles with the O45, so manual focus proves actually easier to work with. I also have a legacy CV 40/1.4 that also is quite nice at 1.8 or 2.0 and beyond.
  5. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Real Name:
    I too sold the Oly 45mm and decided to just use my Zuiko and SuperTak 50mms at f2. In my opinion it wasn't the AF I didn't like, but the rendering of the 45mm. I wanted the lens for portraiture but the images were very clinical and sharp in a way I found unkind to the subjects.

    BAXTING Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 5, 2012
    Los Angeles SFV, CA
    Real Name:
    Also sold the Oly 45 and replaced with a 55mm and 58mm for $100. Very happy too. The 45 is an awesome lens and I have some great images. I suppose I sort of felt the same way as mentioned above (ean10775). I should mention that I have a PL45, but I only use this for macro specific purposes. I guess there is something to be said about the natural softness these legacy lenses are able to produce when it is desired to do so.
  7. apicius9

    apicius9 Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 1, 2010
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    I was on the edge of buying the Oly 45 several times, but then went for the 75mm and it's a great lens. I like doing people shots while staying a little more in the background, and it's perfect for that. Knowing that, my lust for the 45 has decreased considerably. I have a few 50mm and 58mm lenses - and a Leica Summicron just has such a nice handling that I can live with a few missed shots and still have fun.

  8. Ramsey

    Ramsey Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 9, 2013
    Zagreb, Croatia
    I have legacy 50mm 1,8 (and 58mm 2,0 on the way). I guess that in the future, i'd like to try the 45mm. The only question is, whether the af (and the few seconds it brings) is worth the extra $.

    I don't mind the actual focusing on legacy glass but your subjects become more aware of the camera if you are pointing it at them so long... And portraits are (imo) way better if the subject is occupied with sth else/looking to the side...
  9. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I have a slight 50mm-ish addiction (see sig file, actually have one more than is listed there), including a variety of manual lenses. But for now, I'm keeping the 45 simply because autofocus is very handy, and it really is ridiculously TINY and LIGHT, and it is very, very sharp, though not the most exciting (in terms of rendering) of the 50's I have.

    I still want the 75, mostly because I love 50mm FOV on full frame, but 85-100...not so much. 135-150 I get along with just fine, though. That has to do with taste rather than any perceived lack of quality in the lens.
  10. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Real Name:
    Sean Rastsmith
    There was a thread here from spatulaboy where he did a shootout comparing the Panasonic, Oly and Minolta 45's. Only Gary could accurately spot the differences.
  11. datagov

    datagov Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 2, 2012
    New York
    I just bought the O45 and have been comparing it to my Pentax-a 50mm f1.7 and the Sigma 30mm 2.8. Honestly I can take great photos with all three and the differences are modest to the Pentax, and quite subtle with the Sigma. The O45 is sharper than all three but there are three things that make it a keeper for me. Autofocus is not just fast but accurate. Indoors it is hard to focus the Pentax and achieve consistent results at all apertures. It is sharp from f1.8, and this is wonderful. It is also sharpening the corners from f4, making it useful for landscapes and panoramas. The Pentax has wonderful colors and a different Bokeh that I like. I use it for some portraits. The Sigma is a wonderful lens that is maybe 97% as good as the O45 and half the price. I like the Sigma field field of view for portraits and the sharp center and soft corners at f2.8, and the close focus makes it a wonderful macro lens with a Raynox. Lucky we all are to have so many wonderful choices to create with.
  12. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Real Name:
    It comes down to what works for you. I love the 45 - it's small, light and beautifully sharp. For the type of shots that I use it for I prefer the autofocus - I just don't have the luxury of trying to manual focus and risk missing shots. When doing candid shots during social functions people tend to ignore my camera with the 45 attached, mistaking it for a P&S and dismissing it. Legacy lenses look more like SLR lenses and grab attention. :cool:
    • Like Like x 2
  13. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Real Name:
    I definitely agree with this since they require that you hold the camera like an slr to focus and control aperture. With the Oly45 you can definitely point and shoot if you so desire.
  14. TDP

    TDP Guest

    Which 50 is your favorite?
  15. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Real Name:
    Legacy lenses were/are fine lenses. They are cheap these days because they are old and won't do things automatically. Almost any of the old Pentax 50s are equal or better than the 45, but I use the 45 since it will AF.
  16. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    It's not crazy. There are a lot of nice legacy lenses and some are quite good. I myself prefer both my Minolta MC 50/1.4 and Pen-F 38/1.8 to the Olympus 45/1.8. I think the Olympus 45 is a great lens but (very sharp) but there are a lot of things that make a lens appealing and I can certainly see a legacy lens being more appealing.