Oly 45 PRO vs. PL 42.5 Noct - use on Panasonic bodies

[ralf-11]

I am curious about comparisons of these two lenses on a Panasonic body from people who have used them both.
Panasonic-Leica Nocticron DG 42.5mm f/1.2 ASPH Power OIS - gives you better IS on a Panny body
Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.2 PRO - gives you the feathered/smooth bokeh

I'm not concerned about the (minor) sharpness differences.

I am wondering if users of both lenses felt that the feathered bokeh outweighed the better IS (e.g. for handheld use in low light).

Thx.

 

[jayweh32]

Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.2 PRO - gives you the feathered/smooth bokeh

I'm not concerned about the (minor) sharpness differences.

I am wondering if users of both lenses felt that the feathered bokeh outweighed the better IS (e.g. for handheld use in low light).

Thx.

Olympus for the fact that image stabilisation wouldn't play a huge role in portraiture vs, what I would consider more important weather sealing, given you are using a weather sealed body. Plus manual focus clutch.

Haven't used the Olympus but have used the panaleica and am now searching to buy the Olympus 17mm and 45mm f1.2 specifically because of the weather sealing. I shoot in a lot of environments that can get the equipment wet though.

 

[t2490jh]

I have the Panasonic G9 and went through this very same dilemma this past month. I don't have the 42.5 Leica but recently purchased the Olympus 25mm and 45mm 1.2 pro lenses. Both are fantastic. Since your thread is about a comparison of portrait lenses I will tell you how I feel about the 45mm. It is incredibly sharp with very nice detail. The skin tones are fantastic and it has some of the best color contrast I seen in a lens. As far as stabilization goes - 90%+ of the pictures couldn't be any sharper.

I eliminated the 42.5mm Leica due to size, lack of weather sealing, and that ridiculous hood design. It was really down to the Olympus and the Panasonic 42.5 1.7. I know it's cheaper, put for a portrait lens the feathered bokeh on the Olympus is better (maybe much better). By the way, I really like what Olympus did with their manual clutch design.

Just for reference - my other three lenses are Leica. The 12mm 1.4, 12-60 2.8-4.0, and 50-200 2.8-4.0. So you can see that I like both Leica and Olympus pro lenses.

 

[Chris5107]

Sorry that I cannot answer the questions directly but I will add my 2 cents anyway. I have owned the PL42.5 and the Oly45/1.2 but I used them on Olympus bodies.

The feathered bokeh on the Olympus is nice but take a look at the bokeh on the PL42.5. IMO it is wonderful too. I would say the bokeh for both is a toss up.

Given that you are interested in IS, that would lead you to the PL42.5.

 

[wimg]

I am curious about comparisons of these two lenses on a Panasonic body from people who have used them both.
Panasonic-Leica Nocticron DG 42.5mm f/1.2 ASPH Power OIS - gives you better IS on a Panny body
Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.2 PRO - gives you the feathered/smooth bokeh

I'm not concerned about the (minor) sharpness differences.

I am wondering if users of both lenses felt that the feathered bokeh outweighed the better IS (e.g. for handheld use in low light).

Thx.

Having used and tested both for my own purposes, I ended up with the Oly .

My reason was indeed the feathered bokeh, especially in the foreground. The Oly has very smooth transitions from sharp to unsharp in both foreground and background, where the PL does so mostly in the background, and much less in the foreground.
I also prefer the rendering of the Oly over that of the PL, probably because I also shoot Canon FF - Canon and Oly look very similar in that regard, IMO anyway.

I do use the Oly on an Oly body, however, so if the IS and weatherproofing on the G9 are more important to you, you should opt for the PL. If the foreground OOF areas are more important, and a slightly different look (probably due to difference in coatings mostly), I'd suggest the Oly.

The differences in OOF transitions is the main reason I did not add the PL 12 to my collection yet, and was hoping for an Oly equivalent rather than the 17 they presented us with.
The PL 12 has that same type of foreground OOF rendering as the PL 42.5, and a fairly busy background rendering (unlike my Canon 24L II). I may still end up adding it to my bag, because 12, 25, 45-50 is my preferred trifecta .

Kind regards, Wim

 

[MMouse]

Hello,

I tried briefly the PL 42,5mm f/1,2 but when I had to choose, I ended up with the Olympus 45mm f/1,2 because it feels more solid.

Optically, the lens is perfect. Tack sharp from edge to edge with the best creamy bokeh I've seen on micro 4/3. It's not cheap, it's a bit heavy but it's one of the best micro 4/3 lens one can afford.
The weather sealing makes me feeling confident about it's durability. I've owned my previous 45mm f/1,8 for years and even if not weather sealed, the optics looked like new then I sold it.
On the other hand, I had several severe dust issues with the PL 15 so I was reluctant to spend so much money for another PL lens.

The only thing I don't like when shooting with the 45mm f/1,2 is my old sensor's quality which is fine but not up to a lens this standard.

 

[Mike Peters]

Ok, so I haven't used the Oly 45 1.2 aside from a few test frames at Photo Expo, but I do have the PL 42.5. Most of my lenses are P or PL and I find that in general the PL lenses render details differently than the Oly Pro lenses. The difference being that the newer of the Oly Pro lenses (not the 75) have a more blocky appearance to fine details, as where the PL lenses have a more delicate look and a feeling of greater tonal range in the highlights. Reminds me of the difference that I used to see between Leica R lenses as compared to their Zeiss alternatives on Contax cameras back in the days of yore. Both are fine and wonderful on their own, but they are different. I find mixing and matching can be problematic if you're looking to have a matched set of lenses with a consistent look, which I am. But not everyone cares about such things.

I don't think you could go wrong with either one.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[ralf-11]

Thanks everyone!

Has anyone noticed focussing speed differences? Depth from De-Focus doesn't work with the Oly lens AFAIK...

 

[wimg]

Thanks everyone!

Has anyone noticed focussing speed differences? Depth from De-Focus doesn't work with the Oly lens AFAIK...

Hmmm. It focused just fine with the E-M5 II I had at the time.
The Oly 45 Pro I only got much, much later, and it surely focuses fast, but then, I never timed either of the two when it comes to AF.

When I tried out the PL 42.5, I ended up buying the Oly 25 Pro, actually . I had already tried a few fast Voightländers, but didn't like them because of the way the edges and corners were rendered, and then had a choice between PL 42.5 and Oly 25 Pro, oh, and the PL 12 F/1.4. Basically these are my three preferred FLs for my style of shooting, and I always look for such a setup.

Of these, the last lens I tested was the 25 Pro, and basically the way it rendered OOF areas, and the very smooth transitions, apart from it being sharp from corner to center, is what clinched the deal for me. Neither the PL 42.5 nor the PL 12 rendered this beautifully IMO, so I went with the 25.

And after the Oly Pro 45 was launched, I tested that, and found that it rendered very much like the 25 Pro, but was a bit sharper as well, so the choice again was easy.
I now just miss a fast 12, but for the time being the Oly 12 F/2 will do just fine .

Kind regards, Wim

 

[saladin]

I went with the PL , largely because A) the aperture ring works on panny bodies and I like to shoot that way and B) I found a great deal.

It's a magnificent lens for monochrome on the G9. I've no doubt the Oly pro would be just as lovely.