Panasonic PL45, portrait lenses and time

So with the recent announcement from Olympus of superzooms I'm yet again left wondering just how long it will be before we see a fast portrait prime lens between 50 and 70mm.

Several times now I've been ready to click buy on Amazon for the Panasonic Macro 45mm (63,000 yen here in Japan), but always stopped at the last minute remembering the possibility of Olympus's 50mm f2 Macro being released for m43.

And then I remember that there isn't much difference between 50mm f2 and f2.8 and it's unlikely to give me the shallow DOF I want from a portrait lens. (I'm hoping for the equivalent of Nikon's 85mm f1.4).

What does everyone else think? I'm interested in doing macro photography, but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 very much? Would I be better nabbing the Panasonic macro now, enjoy shooting and wait for a true portrait lens much further in the future? Or would waiting for the Olympus (hopefully f2) macro be best..?

Yes, I know, another 'what should I buy??' thread. Sorry about that, but I thought it'd be nice to hear other people's thoughts.

Edit Just thought I'd mention, for me manual focus prime lenses are not the best option. I use an E-P1, so no viewfinder and I generally prefer autofocus anyway as I want to use it spontaneously outside for people shots.
--
http://gakuranman.com

Just get the 45mm f2.8. The 50mm f2 is still pretty far off, and since the 45mm has OIS and the 50mm f2 won't, the 45mm will probably hold resale value even after the 50mm f2 is released. Even if its value does drop after a future 50mm announcement, you'll lose at most a couple hundred dollars in exchange for months (or a year or more?) of happy shooting. It seems worth it to me (and hence, I'm a proud owner of one, albeit after much debate myself). f2.8 may not be perfect for portraits, but I've used it for many and been very happy with the results. Like you, I don't really like manual focus, so most likely, these photos would have been taken at f5.6 if I hadn't purchased the 45mm. Think about whether the possibility of a small financial loss of a few hundred dollars or less is worth the difference between f5.6 and f2.8 on the many photos you might take between now and when the 50mm comes out.

Thanks for the reply Woody . Interesting to hear from someone who has been in the same situation. I hear a lot about resale value but little about places to sell. Where do people usually sell lenses they wish to get rid of (other than ebay)?
--
http://gakuranman.com

If you can afford it, get one. Overall imaging is excellent, IMO. Some look at DOF, amount of blur, bokeh, bouquet, Boca, Bocanegra, Boca burger,... TI am terrible at describing these things. Here goes anyways. I like the way the lens renders portraits with really sharp eyes, good contrast, and a softened background (but not obliterated) at f2.8. It's good stuff!

I also debated the purchase for a while, and am glad I bought one finally last spring. I saved up after the announcement and waited several months. Looking back I have taken photos of my son and wife that I would not have gotten (at least in the way I envisioned them).

Is it perfect? No. I wish it was f2 for light gathering reasons. It would save us a stop of ISO. But whatever.

A Formula for M43 Portrait Good Times = M43 Body + 20mm + PL45 + FL36R

--
SLOtographer
Panasonic G1, Canon S90

Tremor16 said:

What does everyone else think? I'm interested in doing macro photography, but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 very much?
--
http://gakuranman.com

Click to expand...

This is about the difference between F2.0 and F2.8 (and there is nothing about macro photography).

2.8 / 2 = 1.4
1.4 x 1.4 = 2

F2 is 2 times "lighter" or "faster" or "stronger" and should be approximately 2 times more expensive and heavier
--
DSC-R1, DMC-G1(14-45)

Cheers for the reply . I see you mentioned the Olympus flash. I've been thinking about this for a future purchase too. What sort of distances can you reasonably illuminate with the FL36R? Does it work for macro too?
--
http://gakuranman.com

Thanks for clarifying that! In practical terms though, would the shallow DOF be affected much? In comparisons between the Olympus 50 f2 macro and the PL45 I've seen, it doesn't seem to be much. I do a lot of low light shooting though, so I was a little worried the lack of extra f-stop would mean having to shoot at much higher ISOs. Any idea of the relationship between f-stop and higher ISOs? Still not entirely clear in my mind...
--
http://gakuranman.com

Tremor16 said:

Thanks for clarifying that! In practical terms though, would the shallow DOF be affected much? In comparisons between the Olympus 50 f2 macro and the PL45 I've seen, it doesn't seem to be much. I do a lot of low light shooting though, so I was a little worried the lack of extra f-stop would mean having to shoot at much higher ISOs. Any idea of the relationship between f-stop and higher ISOs? Still not entirely clear in my mind...
--
http://gakuranman.com

Click to expand...

I'd buy Oly 50/2.0 - it has slightly longer F (50) and will give you better what you are looking for - shallow DOF - (BTW ir is cheaper too)

Been 2 times brighter this lens will allow you to use ISO100 when another lens needs ISO200 (2 times).
You may lose AF with your camera too.

Have a good night.
S.
--
DSC-R1, DMC-G1(14-45)

You can get the Nikon D3100 AND the 50/1.4G which will get you very close to the 85/1.4 on full frame. It will destroy the m43 and 45/2.8 in every single way you can imagine. That the appeal of other systems... TONS of lens options.

btw, i used to be an E1 shooter back in the day.. im still waiting for the rumoured 45/1.4 portrait lens from Oly... lol

Tremor16 said:

So with the recent announcement from Olympus of superzooms I'm yet again left wondering just how long it will be before we see a fast portrait prime lens between 50 and 70mm.

Several times now I've been ready to click buy on Amazon for the Panasonic Macro 45mm (63,000 yen here in Japan), but always stopped at the last minute remembering the possibility of Olympus's 50mm f2 Macro being released for m43.

And then I remember that there isn't much difference between 50mm f2 and f2.8 and it's unlikely to give me the shallow DOF I want from a portrait lens. (I'm hoping for the equivalent of Nikon's 85mm f1.4).

What does everyone else think? I'm interested in doing macro photography, but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 very much? Would I be better nabbing the Panasonic macro now, enjoy shooting and wait for a true portrait lens much further in the future? Or would waiting for the Olympus (hopefully f2) macro be best..?

Yes, I know, another 'what should I buy??' thread. Sorry about that, but I thought it'd be nice to hear other people's thoughts.

Edit Just thought I'd mention, for me manual focus prime lenses are not the best option. I use an E-P1, so no viewfinder and I generally prefer autofocus anyway as I want to use it spontaneously outside for people shots.
--
http://gakuranman.com

Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts outside the box! Really puts it into perspective considering what the money could buy. Unfortunately DSLRs are out of the question because they are too big for me (kit needs to be lightweight and compact for adventurous trips in the mountains ).
--
http://gakuranman.com

Tremor16 said:

... What does everyone else think? I'm interested in doing macro photography, but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 very much? Would I be better nabbing the Panasonic macro now, enjoy shooting and wait for a true portrait lens much further in the future? Or would waiting for the Olympus (hopefully f2) macro be best..? ...

Click to expand...

• The difference between f/2 and f/2.8, even f/1.4 and f/2.8, at 45-50 mm focal length, is relatively small and mostly insignificant. The Macro-Elmarit 45mm f/2.8 ASPH OIS is a superb lens. If you can afford one, buy it and spend your time making wonderful photographs rather than debating between equipment.

• If you can't afford it, buy yourself a Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8 and an adapter. Shoot with that until you can afford the Macro-Elmarit 45.

• If you want much shallower DoF, you need a longer focal length lens on FourThirds format. Something in the neighborhood of 70-75 mm and f/2-f/2.8 is about right, and produces a lovely shallow DoF portrait look. I use an Olympus Pen F G.Zuiko 70mm f/2 on the G1 and an Olympus ZD 50mm f/2 Macro coupled with EC-14 teleconverter for the SLRs to get focal length and lens opening:

Panasonic L1 + Olympus ZD 50mm f/2 + EC-14
ISO 100 @ f/2.8 @ 1/80 second

• Regards street shots, people, etc: I often find it MUCH easier to lock a focus zone with manual focus and a smallish aperture rather than try to capture quickly with autofocus. It's a matter of technique and practice. Too much reliance on automation does not a photographer make ... !

Panasonic G1 + Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8
ISO 100 @ f/4 @ 1/500 sec

That was manual focus because that was the lens I had, and manual exposure because the tricky light was throwing the meter into a tizzy. I had about a second to capture what I wanted, made four exposures: the third caught right what I wanted.

Photography is not easy. But it is wonderful and fun. ;-)
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

Thanks Godfrey, that's some terrific advice!

I remember eyeing up the Pen f2 70mm some time ago . I reckon you'd probably say that a viewfinder is essential for this sort of focal length though, right? Pity my E-P1 doesn't support one... It's funny, when first starting with m43 I was against needing a viewfinder, but having learnt a bit more since I've figured having the option might be nice at times. Maybe in the next round of PEN upgrades, eh..? Still a bit early for me to upgrade my E-P1.
--
http://gakuranman.com

Tremor16 said:

Thanks Godfrey, that's some terrific advice!

I remember eyeing up the Pen f2 70mm some time ago . I reckon you'd probably say that a viewfinder is essential for this sort of focal length though, right? Pity my E-P1 doesn't support one... It's funny, when first starting with m43 I was against needing a viewfinder, but having learnt a bit more since I've figured having the option might be nice at times. Maybe in the next round of PEN upgrades, eh..? Still a bit early for me to upgrade my E-P1.

Click to expand...

The longer the focal length, the more useful an eye level viewfinder OR a tripod becomes. 70mm on FourThirds is a fairly long focal length, I tend to use it on a tripod a good bit of the time at which point EVF or LCD becomes a moot point ... the LCD is actually easier to work with a good bit of the time. For 40mm, either works, but it's easier to be precise at large lens openings with an eye-level viewfinder hand-held.

The Pen 70/2 is a wonderful lens, but it's not the only game in town. They're become collectibles and are often quite pricey when you can find one. For a bit less, the Cosina/Voigtländer 75/2.5 Color-Heliar is a delightful performer. And there's a new 75 mm f/1.9 coming up soon too, although I expect that one will be in the neighborhood of $800.

Lots of people use manual lenses only on their E-P1 and GF1 without using the EVF. And get good results. So it is a matter of what you've got and what you want to do, and the motivation to work at it until you get it that counts. Equipment is never perfect...

--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

I have both and I would get the PL45mm just because of the slow AF on the 50mm f2 on my EPL1.

So it comes down to this, if you really want your images to be as razor sharp as possible and don't mind the slow AF (and is cheaper) get the 50mm f2. If you don't mind spending a bit more for the faster AF and the images taken being a tad less sharp (although it's also pretty sharp) get the PL45.

here is a portrait of my wife with 45 macro in a rather dark room
i love this lens and think it is good for portraits





hope this will help you in your choice
sorry for my poor photograph's abilities

Thanks for sharing . It's a nice shot!
--
http://gakuranman.com

Thanks for more of the lens recommendations Godfrey and to Phenic for the note about sharpness. I reckon I'd probably want the faster AF in this case .
--
http://gakuranman.com

Tremor16 said:

Cheers for the reply . I see you mentioned the Olympus flash. I've been thinking about this for a future purchase too. What sort of distances can you reasonably illuminate with the FL36R? Does it work for macro too?

Click to expand...

The FL36R isn't as powerful as a full-sized flash. I pretty much only use it for portrait distances, most often bounced to the side or backwards. Other posters have examples of the FL36R with an omnibounce for macro shots with good results. I have not tried that yet, but it's on the to do list.

One idea I've been tossing around in my head is to pick up an EPL1. With the R feature, it would allow for a mini strobist set up.

Cheers!
--
SLOtographer
Panasonic G1, Canon S90

Phenic said:

So it comes down to this, if you really want your images to be as razor sharp as possible and don't mind the slow AF (and is cheaper) get the 50mm f2. If you don't mind spending a bit more for the faster AF and the images taken being a tad less sharp (although it's also pretty sharp) get the PL45.

Click to expand...

This is like saying "razor blade A is slightly sharper than razor blade B".

The ZD 50 has a slight advantage in corner-edge sharpness wide open and down to about f/5. The ME45 has a larger advantage in zero chromatic aberration.

In practical terms, if you're shooting wide open for portraiture work, the corner edge resolution of either is irrelevant. If you're using them for macro work or other work where corner-edge sharpness matters, you're stopping both down to f/5-f/11 anyway, so the difference in sharpness is irrelevant.

One other minor area where the ME45 has an advantage is in the focusing servo when working macro work, focusing manually: it's smoother and has less latency than the ZD 50. Of course, the ME45 also focuses to 1:1 magnification, the ZD 50 to 1:2 magnification, and the ME45 is also an internal focusing lens which doesn't change length as you focus.

For a Micro-FourThirds camera, the ME 45 is a better lens IMO. And that opinion is formed from working with both.
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

Tremor16 said:

So with the recent announcement from Olympus of superzooms I'm yet again left wondering just how long it will be before we see a fast portrait prime lens between 50 and 70mm.

Click to expand...

I would love a fast portrait prime in this range, but honestly I'm not sure I would pay the premium to get autofocus and OIS when my $100 Nikon 50mm f/1.8 takes such wonderful portraits when used on my GF1. It's pretty quick and easy for me to manually focus as long as my subject is stationary. For action portraits autofocus will be essential, but you still might find yourself stopping down to f/2.8 when the subject is moving.

Gakuranman said:

Several times now I've been ready to click buy on Amazon for the Panasonic Macro 45mm (63,000 yen here in Japan), but always stopped at the last minute remembering the possibility of Olympus's 50mm f2 Macro being released for m43.

And then I remember that there isn't much difference between 50mm f2 and f2.8 and it's unlikely to give me the shallow DOF I want from a portrait lens. (I'm hoping for the equivalent of Nikon's 85mm f1.4).

Click to expand...

What does everyone else think? I'm interested in doing macro photography, but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 very much? Would I be better nabbing the Panasonic macro now, enjoy shooting and wait for a true portrait lens much further in the future? Or would waiting for the Olympus (hopefully f2) macro be best..?

Since you are interested in macro I would consider trying the 45mm f/2.8. It might give you the portrait look you are after. Yes a faster lens will give you a more defocused background and slightly less DOF, but the difference may not be that dramatic. Your mileage will vary with the distance to subject, distance of the background, etc.

Gakuranman said:

Yes, I know, another 'what should I buy??' thread. Sorry about that, but I thought it'd be nice to hear other people's thoughts.

Edit Just thought I'd mention, for me manual focus prime lenses are not the best option. I use an E-P1, so no viewfinder and I generally prefer autofocus anyway as I want to use it spontaneously outside for people shots.

Click to expand...

I can manually focus quite easily on my GF1 using only the LCD (haven't ordered the viewfinder yet), but of course autofocus will be better for spontaneous shots and candids unless the person is staying in one spot. Since you want the macro I would go ahead and get that. If it doesn't give you quite the shallow DOF you are after you could always try an f/1.4 legacy prime and adapter. Then you could stick with he macro for times when you want AF and use the legacy prime when you want the shallowest DOF possible.