Olympus 45mm f1.2 PRO comparisons with FF professional portrait lenses?

Wolv3rine said:

photofan1986 said:

You must have been using it wrong or on an old camera. On my A7IV, the lens is quick to focus as it gets, and I get accuracy I could not even dream of with any m43 camera I've used on a moving subject. Other than that, I have never seen any issue with bokeh quality on this lens. Nothing special, but not nervous either.

Click to expand...

Yes, that must be it - I was using it wrong on my A1 and my A7R5, both of which must have inferior autofocus relative to the A7IV...

The Batis did not have issues, nor did the GM.

Click to expand...

Then what are you shooting? Small birds in flight coming to you at great speed and low range? Because I can get a burst of perfectly sharp eyes of my kids riding their bike fill speed towards me almost to minimum focus distance. I could not dream of that with another system. Yes ,there are lenses with faster autofocus motor, but I cannot imagine a use where the 85 1.8 wouldn't be fast enough. Ps: I only use c-af with Sony cameras.

Wolv3rine said:

Wolv3rine said:

edit: that being said, I would be surprised if the Olympus 45 1.2 didn't have a much smoother bokeh. That is the raison d'être of that lens.

Click to expand...

Yes very smooth - love it.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

nunyab said:

The bokeh balls look to be cats eye on the Sony 85/1.8. Do you have the 85/1.4 GM? How would that compare?

IIRC, the 45/1.2 Pro is round. The 1.2 Oly Pro lenses are quite nice in that regard, even better than the PL Nocticron. The "feathery bokeh", IMO, is really good on those lenses. I don't know what they did to improve that, but it seems nice. I think there are some YouTube reviews on the lens that really digs into the bokeh on that lens.

Click to expand...

The light on the first shot is not round that is an actual light not a bokeh ball.

Click to expand...

No, you can see them in both images, not just the light. Pretty much everywhere in the background. Have to zoom in to see it, though.

I'd still say the Oly 1.2 Pro does that better.

Not a knock on the Sony lens, it's fine, I wouldn't turn it down based on those images and would get it based solely on those 2 images as it fits my needs. But, the Oly does look better in terms of the shape. I think all the YouTube reviews look similar.

Interceptor121 said:

All lenses have vignetting at the edges wide open and the Olympus 45/1.2 is not exception in the edges the balls are not round you can see it at edges of your own image example

Click to expand...

Yeah, understood, but that's not what I'm pointing out.

Interceptor121 said:

Sigma 56 has some edges not onion rings

Click to expand...

I have the Sigma 56/1.4 MFT, and was just using Gerald Undone's review of that lens where he stated some minor onion ringing. I don't use the lens too often, TBH, only do a handful of portraits here and there.

Wolv3rine said:

photofan1986 said:

You must have been using it wrong or on an old camera. On my A7IV, the lens is quick to focus as it gets, and I get accuracy I could not even dream of with any m43 camera I've used on a moving subject. Other than that, I have never seen any issue with bokeh quality on this lens. Nothing special, but not nervous either.

Click to expand...

Yes, that must be it - I was using it wrong on my A1 and my A7R5, both of which must have inferior autofocus relative to the A7IV...

The Batis did not have issues, nor did the GM.

Wolv3rine said:

edit: that being said, I would be surprised if the Olympus 45 1.2 didn't have a much smoother bokeh. That is the raison d'être of that lens.

Click to expand...

Yes very smooth - love it.

Click to expand...

I would like to see some examples to back up your points

so far you have done pretty bad with any factual claim on age of the models

in your gear kit you have the olympus 45-150 that is well known to produce one of the most nasty niseh on the market in certain cases so I would like to understand what you shoot

photofan1986 said:

Then what are you shooting?

Click to expand...

Boudoir and weddings.

photofan1986 said:

Small birds in flight coming to you at great speed and low range? Because I can get a burst of perfectly sharp eyes of my kids riding their bike fill speed towards me almost to minimum focus distance.

Click to expand...

I use the om5 for that. Easy.

photofan1986 said:

I could not dream of that with another system.

Click to expand...

You need bigger dreams!

photofan1986 said:

Yes ,there are lenses with faster autofocus motor, but I cannot imagine a use where the 85 1.8 wouldn't be fast enough. Ps: I only use c-af with Sony cameras.

Click to expand...

What might be acceptable for you, is unacceptable for others. The 45/1.2 runs circles around the Sony 85/1.8 in focus accommodation. Chalk and cheese really.

Wolv3rine said:

photofan1986 said:

Then what are you shooting?

Click to expand...

Boudoir and weddings.

Click to expand...

Interesting so you use your 45-150 for weddings instead of a Sony 70-200 GMII that shows as previous gear.

Now that Olympus lens in addtion to have too much depth of field has one of the worst rendering of out of focus area on the market. In addition you have no shorter zoom other than the 12-100 that at f/4 seems wildly inadequate to the task of providing background separation

Wolv3rine said:

Wolv3rine said:

Small birds in flight coming to you at great speed and low range? Because I can get a burst of perfectly sharp eyes of my kids riding their bike fill speed towards me almost to minimum focus distance.

Click to expand...

I use the om5 for that. Easy.

Click to expand...

This is a terrible joke

Wolv3rine said:

Wolv3rine said:

I could not dream of that with another system.

Click to expand...

You need bigger dreams!

Wolv3rine said:

Yes ,there are lenses with faster autofocus motor, but I cannot imagine a use where the 85 1.8 wouldn't be fast enough. Ps: I only use c-af with Sony cameras.

Click to expand...

What might be acceptable for you, is unacceptable for others. The 45/1.2 runs circles around the Sony 85/1.8 in focus accommodation. Chalk and cheese really.

Click to expand...

This is another unsubstantiated assertion that nobody will bother checking

I think the pattern is clear here

--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
Deer Photography workshops https://interceptor121.com/2021/09/26/2021-22-deer-photography-workshops-in-woburn/
If you want to get in touch don't send me a PM rather contact me directly at my website/social media

Captive18 said:

Has anyone compared the Olympus 45mm f1.2 PRO with Fullframe portrait lenses like the RF 85mm f1.2 L? I’m just curious how the “feathered bokeh” compares to the bokeh quality of fullframe portrait lenses

Click to expand...

The vast majority by a long shot working photographers use full frame and defend their work and photographic abilities here people defend the gear they buy

Don't underestimate the 45's little brother the 45/1.8! Has lovely rendering and is so small you can toss in your bag and forget that it's even there.

zurag said:

Captive18 said:

Has anyone compared the Olympus 45mm f1.2 PRO with Fullframe portrait lenses like the RF 85mm f1.2 L? I’m just curious how the “feathered bokeh” compares to the bokeh quality of fullframe portrait lenses

Click to expand...

The vast majority by a long shot working photographers use full frame and defend their work and photographic abilities here people defend the gear they buy

Click to expand...

Professional influencers make WAY more than professional photographers and they use camera phones not FF.

zurag said:

Captive18 said:

Has anyone compared the Olympus 45mm f1.2 PRO with Fullframe portrait lenses like the RF 85mm f1.2 L? I’m just curious how the “feathered bokeh” compares to the bokeh quality of fullframe portrait lenses

Click to expand...

The vast majority by a long shot working photographers use full frame and defend their work and photographic abilities here people defend the gear they buy

Click to expand...

The reason why you use a full frame set for situation that involve shooting people is that you can use two zooms 24-70 and 70-200 at f/2.8 and have adequate shots for all practical situations.

This is far more important than having feathered bokeh and swapping 5-6 prime lenses as you had too much background with a 2.8 MFT zoom

If there were equivalent f/1.4 zooms for MFT perhaps this would be a contender but due to the short focal lenght those lenses are practically impossible to make they become too heavy.

The second reason is resolution you have more pixels you can crop more and the images are sharp full stop.

It is not that complicated. There are many other use cases where the benefits are not apparent or actually a cropped format gives you more chance to get the shot. Shooting people is not one of those

I believe you will find the answer to your question in some of these posts. Sorry you have to endure the sony promo spamming this thread. There are many helpful users on this site but also a few worth ignoring. Best of luck with your search.

Wolv3rine said:

photofan1986 said:

Then what are you shooting?

Click to expand...

Boudoir and weddings.

Click to expand...

I can't see how those models can run fast enough for the 85 1.8 not being fast focusing enough. Though the idea of fast moving action boudoir shots is funny.

Wolv3rine said:

Wolv3rine said:

Small birds in flight coming to you at great speed and low range? Because I can get a burst of perfectly sharp eyes of my kids riding their bike fill speed towards me almost to minimum focus distance.

Click to expand...

I use the om5 for that. Easy.

Click to expand...

Wow, then the OM5 must be a huge upgrade over the E-M5.3.

Wolv3rine said:

Wolv3rine said:

I could not dream of that with another system.

Click to expand...

You need bigger dreams!

Wolv3rine said:

Yes ,there are lenses with faster autofocus motor, but I cannot imagine a use where the 85 1.8 wouldn't be fast enough. Ps: I only use c-af with Sony cameras.

Click to expand...

What might be acceptable for you, is unacceptable for others. The 45/1.2 runs circles around the Sony 85/1.8 in focus accommodation. Chalk and cheese really.

Click to expand...

Sure, I missed some shots when I was shooting a snail race once.

nunyab said:

Interceptor121 said:

nunyab said:

The bokeh balls look to be cats eye on the Sony 85/1.8. Do you have the 85/1.4 GM? How would that compare?

IIRC, the 45/1.2 Pro is round. The 1.2 Oly Pro lenses are quite nice in that regard, even better than the PL Nocticron. The "feathery bokeh", IMO, is really good on those lenses. I don't know what they did to improve that, but it seems nice. I think there are some YouTube reviews on the lens that really digs into the bokeh on that lens.

Click to expand...

The light on the first shot is not round that is an actual light not a bokeh ball.

Click to expand...

No, you can see them in both images, not just the light. Pretty much everywhere in the background. Have to zoom in to see it, though.

I'd still say the Oly 1.2 Pro does that better.

Click to expand...

Uhm no the Olympus 1.2 lens can't take those images because it is 1.2 which is 2.5 with this format.

This is an olympus marketing image at 1.2 with further away background


All the highlights are not round, the background even if much further away than my shots is more present simply because the lens has more depth of field

The olympus will render better against an f/2.5 full frame lens which typically is a super cheap pancake but ultimately a medium range f/1.8 lens will have simply more blur. There will also be many zoom lenses f/2.8 that will look good enough and they are not primes even

nunyab said:

Not a knock on the Sony lens, it's fine, I wouldn't turn it down based on those images and would get it based solely on those 2 images as it fits my needs. But, the Oly does look better in terms of the shape. I think all the YouTube reviews look similar.

Click to expand...

Where does it look better exactly and better of what?

nunyab said:

nunyab said:

All lenses have vignetting at the edges wide open and the Olympus 45/1.2 is not exception in the edges the balls are not round you can see it at edges of your own image example

Click to expand...

Yeah, understood, but that's not what I'm pointing out.

nunyab said:

Sigma 56 has some edges not onion rings

Click to expand...

I have the Sigma 56/1.4 MFT, and was just using Gerald Undone's review of that lens where he stated some minor onion ringing. I don't use the lens too often, TBH, only do a handful of portraits here and there.

Click to expand...

The sigma has no discernible onion rings however the balls may have a circle around them. I still have this lens and in practical terms is totally fine especially as it is not expensive and small

MEDISN said:

I have the 45/1.2 and have borrowed the RF 85/1.2 in the past (on my R5). Both are impressive. The AF on the Olympus is faster but the look of the Canon is unmatched in m43. My favorite portrait prime in that length is the Leica Summicron-SL APO. Love the way that lens renders.



Rendering is subjective of course. I think the Olympus 45/1.2 renders beautifully as does the Canon 85/1.2.

Click to expand...

I have shot with the 90/2 before on the SL. It is a stunning performer. A lot heavier than it looks too!

They are influencers not photographers but even then most of the top money making influencers use cameras and dedicated video gear with all the bells and whistles lighting, sound etc. It is pretty competitive and top notch visual presentation is paramount.

zurag said:

They are influencers not photographers but even then most of the top money making influencers use cameras and dedicated video gear with all the bells and whistles lighting, sound etc. It is pretty competitive and top notch visual presentation is paramount.

Click to expand...

The comment that was made is typical of the nowhere to go situation and find some diversion.

What you said is correct and influencers are not photographers it is a different job altogether

MBRA said:

I believe you will find the answer to your question in some of these posts. Sorry you have to endure the sony promo spamming this thread. There are many helpful users on this site but also a few worth ignoring. Best of luck with your search.

Click to expand...

In fairness the OP explicitly wanted to compare m43 lenses with FF alternatives . Allegedly "new" posters with all to familiar posting habits are a pet peeve or mine ;-)

Gearóid Ó Laoi said:

I don't have the 45 f1.2 but have the Sigma 56mm f1.4 and the 75mm Olympus F1.8. The bokeh effect is very much the same in all three, thickness wise. I also have a FF Canon system including 70-200 F2.8 L ii, 100mm Canon f2, Canon 50mm f1.4, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art and Sigma 135 f1.8 Art.

Click to expand...

Another vote for the Sigma 56, i had that lens when I had the OMD E-M10 II a while back, reason I went with that instead of other Olympus " pro " series lens when I want to take portrait with this MFT system ( which is not often at all) was i feel this lens is better fit for the MFT system, both in terms of image quality it produces and size of the lens and the price of the lens.

Dan_168 said:

Gearóid Ó Laoi said:

I don't have the 45 f1.2 but have the Sigma 56mm f1.4 and the 75mm Olympus F1.8. The bokeh effect is very much the same in all three, thickness wise. I also have a FF Canon system including 70-200 F2.8 L ii, 100mm Canon f2, Canon 50mm f1.4, Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art and Sigma 135 f1.8 Art.

Click to expand...

Another vote for the Sigma 56, i had that lens when I had the OMD E-M10 II a while back, reason I went with that instead of other Olympus " pro " series lens when I want to take portrait with this MFT system ( which is not often at all) was i feel this lens is better fit for the MFT system, both in terms of image quality it produces and size of the lens and the price of the lens.

Click to expand...

That was also my conclusion from running pro and nocticron in parallel and at the end I used more the sigma because it was less bulky

Bulk is indeed the issue of the Oly 1.2 pro and why I was shooting PL 15 25 and sigma 56 the IQ is very good and feathered bokeh and other marketig hype matter little at wide angle

sadly we have no idea what the actual differences are, since nobody posted comparison images. Still everyone is talking about (feathered) bokeh, how 5mm more equivalent FL is relevant (its not) and 2 stops DoF dis-/advantage is the most important thing...

judging from the sample galleries



I think its obvious the RF 85mmf1.2 lens is the vastly better lens, i mean its 3x the price and weight, its impossible for the 45mm1.2 to be comparable (for typical 85mm usecases).

What i think we would essentially see in comparison photos is:

- the shallower dof helps alot especially for full body/environmental portraits, where the Oly would show busier backgrounds due to it lacking bokeh quantity.

- being able to stop down to get rid of abberations and still being able to isolate subject is a big plus for FF, which is a big advantage considering how much CA the Oly shows wide open...

- you wont really care about shallow DoF in some cases like headshots, where f2.4 equivalent is plenty

- you wouldnt care much about the differences in couple/groupshots, because the FF lens would be stopped down to at least f2.8-4.

IMO the more interesting questions are:

- is the Oly overpriced considering its across system performance?

- Can a cheaper FF 85f1.8 or similarly expensive 85mm1.4 outperform it?

I think that thats probably the case for the f1.8 and definetly for f1.4 (like same priced Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 DG DN)

Possibly a FF 50mmf1.4/f1.2 cropped to 90mm on a hi-MP body (19MP left) gets close to the Olys performance, making it a much more versatile option (50f1.4-90f2.5 variable MP "zoom") than the Oly at a similar price point.

If m43 is your one for all system, it is no doubt one of the best option. It has pleasing bokeh, is very sharp, and fast to focus. Pretty flawless if you ask me.















--