Reading mode: Light Dark

Would you add the 45mm F1.8 to the 12-40 F2.8?

Go to last post
D

Dsyde

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
318
Solutions
2
Reaction score
109
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
 
Dsyde said:
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
You could ponder the same question of the 12mm f/2.0, 17mm f/1.8 or 25mm/f1.8

It comes down to what you want the new lens *for*. If it's to keep the whole package smaller and lighter for walking around with then yes. Or perhaps for shooting in darker conditions and gaining a bit of extra light. Or maybe for slightly better bokeh.

If you want to shoot portraits on a night out for example, the 45mm f/1.8 would be the lens to take.

But if you don't plan on doing much of the shooting the 45mm lens is best adapted for, then there's no point, is there.
 
Have been contemplating the same purchase. A refurbished 45mm is really a good price for a great lens. However, so far I have resisted clicking the buy button. I just cannot see myself carrying the 45 along with the 12-40 on my camera. Also, in most circumstances, cannot see changing the lens to get 1 additional stop of light.

I may consider the 75mm1.8 in the future as it is not only fast but gives a substantially longer focal length.

But thats just me.
 
I would buy it simply because I love that focal length. So if it was me, I would already have it :p

I would have both because the 12-40 seems great as an allround lens, but there are times where a prime gives a better perspective. That's how I feel.
 
Dsyde said:
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
and that 1.x stop difference DOES make a difference for head+shoulder portraits

in terms of travel carry i no longer use it unless specifically shooting portraits. personal thing - i do mostly landscapes , nature, cityscapes... 12-40 & 40-150 & TC will do for me
 
Precisely what I did. 12-40 lives on the camera most of the time, but when it's portraits I want, it's going to be the 45. To my eyes, it is noticeably sharper and the 2.8 to 1.8 dof control makes a difference too. Used/refurbed it's cheap enough to add to the bag. The cost of a mistake is very small and if you find you're not using it (doubtful) throw it up for auction and get back all or most of your investment.

The 45 is, in my view, THE Olympus prime everyone should own.

I'd throw up some examples but I'm on my phone right now.

Good luck!
--
www.turnabout.me
turnarounds, transformations, second chances and decreasing for good reason
 
Reybabes said:
Precisely what I did. 12-40 lives on the camera most of the time, but when it's portraits I want, it's going to be the 45. To my eyes, it is noticeably sharper and the 2.8 to 1.8 dof control makes a difference too. Used/refurbed it's cheap enough to add to the bag. The cost of a mistake is very small and if you find you're not using it (doubtful) throw it up for auction and get back all or most of your investment.

The 45 is, in my view, THE Olympus prime everyone should own.

I'd throw up some examples but I'm on my phone right now.

Good luck!
--
www.turnabout.me
turnarounds, transformations, second chances and decreasing for good reason
Click to expand...
Perhaps when you've finished the call :-D
 
Dsyde said:
Reybabes said:
Precisely what I did. 12-40 lives on the camera most of the time, but when it's portraits I want, it's going to be the 45. To my eyes, it is noticeably sharper and the 2.8 to 1.8 dof control makes a difference too. Used/refurbed it's cheap enough to add to the bag. The cost of a mistake is very small and if you find you're not using it (doubtful) throw it up for auction and get back all or most of your investment.

The 45 is, in my view, THE Olympus prime everyone should own.

I'd throw up some examples but I'm on my phone right now.

Good luck!
--
www.turnabout.me
turnarounds, transformations, second chances and decreasing for good reason
Click to expand...
Perhaps when you've finished the call :-D
Click to expand...
I make it a policy to never drive, eat a Big Mac, talk on the phone and reply to Dpreview posts at the same time. Good thing I'm done with the burger.
--
www.turnabout.me
turnarounds, transformations, second chances and decreasing for good reason
 
Dsyde said:
Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
If you are like me... Questioning the decision is the same as buying... :)

My 2 cents... If you are into single subject portraits, then buy it. Especially if you value bokeh. Otherwise it is G.A.S.

Hookum
 
Dsyde said:
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
The 45mm f/1.8 will give you
  • An excellent portrait lens at a classic rangefinder focal length.
  • A nice short range telephoto lens for some added reach over the 12-40mm f/2.8.
  • One and a third stop faster aperture for shallower DOF and better low light performance.
You could also look at the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 DN
  • Also an excellent portrait lens with wonderful image quality.
  • Closer to a mid-range telephoto lens for more reach than the 45mm.
  • Almost half the price of the 45mm f/1.8.
Then there's the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 or the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro
  • Either lens provided excellent image quality and offers any portrait focal length you might need or want.
  • Both lenses offer medium length telephoto focal lengths with the 40-150mm giving greater focal length plus being able to offer even more with its matched 1.4X teleconverter.
  • Both lenses are weather sealed to match the rest of your kit.
  • But both are a lot more expensive than the 45mm f/1.8 and for that matter, more than you paid for the 12-40mm f/2.8.
I own the 45mm, also, owned the 60mm which I gave to my son, and also owned the 35-100mm which I sold. In my case, I found that I rarely use any of these lenses; maybe 5% of the time. I have an E-M10, EPL-5, the 12-40mm f/2.8, the 12mm f/2.0, the 17mm f/1.8, and my new arrival, the Rokinon 7.5mm f/3.5. I only use the 12-40mm when I go on vacation or take some other out of town trip. Usually, I take one of my cameras with one of the primes and a spare battery in my pocket. I got the 45mm to carry in my pocket for those opportunities that might pop up to make use of it. So far, I think I've used it twice.

So you might want to think about what you shoot and how often you might need to go beyond 40mm before you buy.

--

Bill S.
“Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst.” Henri Cartier-Bresson
 
Dsyde said:
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
If you like doing portraits, then get the 45mm. The 12-40 is a terrific multi-purpose lens, but the 45mm is my absolute favorite for street portraits.

 

Attachments

  • 3146667.jpg
    3146667.jpg
    12 MB · Views: 0
I would add a 60mm f/2.8 Sigma instead :) Even cheaper + an excellent lens! And semi-telephoto focal length for pets, portraits, street photography, etc.
 
I could see adding a 15, 17 or 20 to the kit so you could go out light with just a small kit. But since the 45mm is long enough to be a semi-specialized lens, I'd say the odds of packing in the bag along with the 12-40 are pretty slim. Even if it is small and light, it's just likely wasted space.

Yes the 45mm is faster, but unless you shoot a LOT right around 40mm and are always wishing for more BG blur or shutter speed, I just don't see it being used often. 40mm f2.8 is still quite nice for portraiture.

I'd probably pair it with a 75mm or 60mm instead so the overlap is less.
 
Last edited:
Dsyde said:
I love the EM-5 ii and the 12-40 Pro combination.

Just through reading the forum and looking at Flickr, the 45mm F1.8 seems like a really nice lens at a ridiculously cheap price. Nothing however is cheap if you don't need it.

Do you think it is worth buying and carrying the 45mm in addition to the 12-40 or is it just too little to gain apart from the odd scenario?
Click to expand...
I would say no, unless you want to shoot portraits with 1.8

That's the only reason I can think of right now vs the 12-40.
 
In hindsight I would not have bought the 45 if the 12-40 had existed prior to my 45 purchase. But on the other hand I'm not ready to part with it either. It was not expensive and it does occasionally come in handy, for instance when traveling light, not wanting to take the 12-40, or when the extra stop (and a bit) helps to capture more light or get more shallow DoF (typically not my cup of cake though).

As usual Olympus overcharges for the lens hood. Just print http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:169195 for a reversible hood. Costs only a few cents to print (but of course you need access to a 3D printer).
 
Last edited:
The one from Amazon is screw in which means harder to combine with filters and not reversible. You want a hood that is reversible and works with the bayonet fitting of the lens. I believe there is a commercial after-market one for those who cannot print their own. (jjc probably makes one, didn't check)
 
Paul De Bra said:
The one from Amazon is screw in which means harder to combine with filters and not reversible. You want a hood that is reversible and works with the bayonet fitting of the lens. I believe there is a commercial after-market one for those who cannot print their own. (jjc probably makes one, didn't check)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top