Zuiko 45mm 1.8 or Lumix 42.5 1.7?

[Manu-4Vendetta]

Hello friends.

While I have the Zuiko 75mm 1.8 and is an extraordinary lens, I thought about buying a moderate telephoto for a job for BTS (behind the scene of a movie), where can be I dont need be far away occasionally and with the silent shutter of the GX7 I can be near the set.

With the cost of the Panasonic can acquire and the Zuiko 45 and the Zuiko 40-150 (used of course), but in good condition. My question is that there is much difference in quality? the Zuiko 45 is excellent, does the Lumix improvement beyond the better aperture?

I advance is not a closed decision, it may not buy it, but I am evaluating the idea.

Thanks.

 

[tkbslc]

The 42.5mm has sharper corners at wide apertures when looking closely at images. It also has stabilization. The 45mm f1.8 is a lot cheaper on the used market. Both are great, so I think it just comes down to that. For videos I think the corner sharpness difference would be negligible. The OIS might be handy if you don't use a stabilization rig already.

F1.7 vs f1.8 in terms of aperture is literally nothing. You won't notice it at all, not even a little.

 

[davidzvi]

I picked up the Panasonic 42.5 for 3 reasons:

1. OIS (Panasonic bodies)
   
2. Close focus
3. sharper corners wide open

 

[Klorenzo]

The Pana is better, but not that much, except at f2 and corners. Here's a review and comparison:

http://www.lenstip.com/440.4-Lens_r...1.7_ASPH._POWER_O.I.S.__Image_resolution.html

I think corner sharpness matters most for landscapes than for portraits where corners are usually out of focus.
Main difference is OIS, at 90mm equiv., but the GX7 should cover that.

 

[wjiang]

The Pana is better, but not that much, except at f2 and corners. Here's a review and comparison:

http://www.lenstip.com/440.4-Lens_r...1.7_ASPH._POWER_O.I.S.__Image_resolution.html

I think corner sharpness matters most for landscapes than for portraits where corners are usually out of focus.
Main difference is OIS, at 90mm equiv., but the GX7 should cover that.

The take away from lenstip is this:

It is also able to defeat the Olympus in the most important category, that of image resolution. In other testing areas once one lens is better, then the other but overall the Olympus seems to gather more points. The Panasonic deals with chromatic aberration and coma better but the Olympus prevails when it comes to spherical aberration, distortion, astigmatism, vignetting and flares.

Having compared them in person, I would agree with everything they've said. Basically, the most obvious improvement is across the frame sharpness and close focussing (and OIS I guess). But other, more subtle aspects are not necessarily better. Overall, the Olympus seems to lend itself better to portraits and the Panasonic to macro/landscape. After trying out both in my camera store, I kept my Olympus because I preferred the bokeh quality for portraits.

f/1.7 versus f/1.8 is meaningless... in practice the extra 0.1 in aperture is cancelled by the greater vignetting!

 

[ijm5012]

If you're shooting handheld and without IBIS, go with the Panasonic. If you want to get some pseudo-macro shots, go with the Panasonic. If neither of those matter much, go with the Olympus.

 

[Turbofrog]

A lot of people talk about corner/edge sharpness wide open being kind of pointless, since most people aren't likely to be trying to take a landscape or architectural photo with a lens wide open, unless you're doing something super niche like flat-field photos of painting in a dim art gallery.

However, I do think that this characteristic gives you a lot more flexibility in where you place your subject. I like off-center compositions, and so it's nice if your focal plane is still sharp even if it's nearer to an edge - it just gives you that much more room to be creative.

Just my thought, though. I'm not sure whether edge sharpness is more important than the smoother bokeh that tends to come with lenses that are a bit softer (like the Oly 45, or the Panaleica 45). The 42.5/1.2 is obviously the outlier in this case, since it's superb at absolutely everything.

If I were buying today, I'd be tempted by the 42.5/1.7 since I think it's a better choice, but I would never spend a huge amount more for it, and so I'd probably get the Olympus because the used market is so much softer for it. In a few years it might well be a different story, once some more Pannys are on the market.

 

[ijm5012]

If the OP is considering buying a used copy for say $225, I would just recommend buying some ebay giftcards when on sale, and buying a 42.5 f/1.7 from Japan. I did that with my PL15 & P42.5, and couldn't be happier. I ended up paying roughly 75% of the lens here in the US, got a brand new lens with all the accessories, and I had it in my hands by the end of the week (order on Sunday night, and I'd have it by Friday).

If that's the case, I'd look at getting the P42.5 if it'll only cost you an extra $75. Like others have said, the sharper focal plane allows for placing subjects near the edge of the frame while maintaining sharpness, plus the lens has OIS and a far better MFD.

 

[Manu-4Vendetta]

Thanks to everyone.

@wjiang, can you make some example with portraits and landscape, especially portraits with both lenses and the same model.

 

[wjiang]

Thanks to everyone.
@wjiang, can you make some example with portraits and landscape, especially portraits with both lenses and the same model.

Unfortunately not, as I don't actually own both. I tested them in store but didn't keep the RAW files... Gordon from CameraLabs has some samples that sort of show what I'm talking about though.
As far as corner to corner sharpness for framing, I'm not sure I buy that. The O45 isn't that bad... we also do not put our subject right at the edge or in the corner. Away from the extremes where the subject will actually be, the Oly performs just fine.

 

[Generationfourth]

I just got the P42.5 recently and I love it. In terms of IQ it's up there with the 20mm pancake. Except it AF much faster. Comes with a hood as well. And I like the ring that you can put on if you don't install the lens hood.

I went with with a japanese seller (like another poster mentioned) and got a pretty good deal on it. I specifically went for the panasonic because of the OIS.

I will post sample shots later.

 

[astrostl]

I picked up the Panasonic 42.5 for 3 reasons:

1. OIS (Panasonic bodies)
   
2. Close focus
3. sharper corners wide open

Exactly these. I've been an Oly guy for a while, but recently fell in love with the GM1 as a second body to my E-M1. Has made me rethink OIS.

Honestly, build is a big deal for me too, though. I hate the tapering effect on the Oly 45, and overall cheaper feel. The Panny is much sturdier.

 

[Manu-4Vendetta]

Thanks dear friends.

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

After seeing this review of cameralabs, I'm not so sure.

With the GX7 I do not notice much gain with the stabilizer, at least with the Zuiko 75mm I manage things based on my pulse rather than stabilizer

 

[astrostl]

Panasonic lenses are notorious for exhibiting purple fringing on Olympus bodies. Dunno about starburst quality variation, though.

 

[ashburtononline]

If you have a Panasonic body, get the Panasonic lens. If you have an Olympus body, get the Olympus lens ..... Simple!

 

[Aushiker]

If you have a Panasonic body, get the Panasonic lens. If you have an Olympus body, get the Olympus lens ..... Simple!

What do you do if you have both bodies?

Andrew

 

[astrostl]

Nocticron for E-M1, Panny 1.7 for GM1. Not cheap, but a solution!

 

[D MATIC]

What do you do if you have both bodies?

Andrew

Get one for each haha!

Well I would assume the Pana 1.7 would be better choice cause you get IS on both bodies. But then again Oly has better bokeh balls, if that's your thing. Pick your poison.

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