45 macro portrait shots

A few of us went out today to test out the 45 macro and generally just have some fun. A lot of people have been asking for portrait samples from this lens so here are some. First these are for the most part untouched (other than converting to B&W and adjusting the shadows highlights a teeny bit). That being said, please don't flame me for the skin tones etc. I would have posted all B&W but then people would ask for some color. These were all shot at f2.8 on a GH1 body.

My conclusions:

1. This lens is plenty sharp for me

2. The bokeh is very nice

3. Wide open you won't get the OOF rendition of a really fast lens but,

4. The subject isolation is there and is very pleasing

5. The macro performance for what I shoot is very nice (I don't do flat copy stand stuff - but that is not a comment of how it performs on that duty)

This lens has a permanent spot in my bag. I'm really loving my day to day kit right now 7-14, 14-140, 20, 45 macro. I have other lenses but I can pretty much do anything with this combo.

100% crop

bacrgound across the street

100% crop

background further away

background about 4 feet away

A friend of mine was on a business trip to Japan and brought it back for me.

Why don't you. It is a someone who is bound to post on this thread. You still have time to edit....hint.
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/

I like the first shot best

Glad your liking it Terry .. Leica did not put their name on the lens without some acceptable standard of their own.

Its a beautifully crafted lens compact and light

VERY nice shots Terry. In your portrait there is nice use of natural light (door or window?) that the photographer uses for catchlight.

Well done.....Richard

Clark666 wrote:

Are these handheld or did you support the camera in some way? ...
You need to tell this guy to trim his eyebrows!

LOL ... I am constantly trimming my eyebrows. They grow like weeds.

Everything we shot today was hand-held work.
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

Great stuff, Terry!

Twas a fun day's shooting: that 45mm is a delightful lens.

I'm processing a lot of stuff right now so it will be tomorrow before I'm ready to post anything from today's shooting. But my preliminary scan through the files shows me immediately that this is a lens worth its price.

I realized after we split up that I hadn't actually done any shooting other than in the coffee shop with the 7-14 ... I was enjoying the 45 too much. Next time!
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

mcspresso wrote:

VERY nice shots Terry. In your portrait there is nice use of natural light (door or window?) that the photographer uses for catchlight.

Well done.....Richard

This photographer thanks you for the compliment, Richard.

It was made in a coffee shop's upper story lounge, light coming in through a pretty big casement window behind me.
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

DPR reviewers often advertise their galleries in forum posts, but DPR, why was it so hard to make a good selection of head portraits with the PL 45? It's the closest µ43 has to a portrait lens currently (if you want fast AF).

The boke looks nice in the posted images.

As expected, for head portraits with the background several metres away, there is good isolation.

As I wrote in the thread where the review was discussed:

Actually, the sharpness in the widget looks pretty good to me. I doubt people would have much to object to WRT the resolution they get in real life use.

and

I think people will get great results in real life use. 1:1, OIS, fast flexible AF, compact, light, non-extending, low CA and distortion - a lot to like. I'm not seeing anyone pointing out a gallery sample that's ruined by insufficient MTF50.

But I also understand complaints about the price.

But probably not great.

For non macro work I think the lens is plenty good enough. Not sure how well it will hold up for shots where you want critical sharpness, but portraits generally don't fall into that category

I think the problem lies in the fact that it is a sort of jack of all trades, master of none type lens.

A bit slow for really good subject isolation and/or available light. Not really as sharp as it could be - see the Oly 50 macro for how I feel the Pannyleica should perform.

Then there is the cost, which is the biggest drawback for most people - certainly for me. I just can't afford one, so maybe that introduces some bias into my assessment of the lens

Thanks for posting these Terry,

Nick

Pixnat2 wrote:

My only gripe is the price : for 800$, one could expect better performance.

For $800 for a relative modest amount of optical glass, there would have to be something truly exceptional to justify it.

But when there is no competition, there is nothing to regulate the price.

If one compare it to the ZD 50mm - which is a better lens in terms of sharpness, bokeh and subject isolation - it's difficult to justify that price.

Is it better in terms of bokeh? Hard to assess such a complex matter without seeing many more shots or better shooting the lens oneself.

Jono Slack at getdpi forums seems to think it is better than the Zuiko in this respect.

Obviously, the 50/2 can produce more blurred backgrounds.

too realistic. ! I love it. but some people may not like it too real!

Ehrik wrote:

DPR reviewers often advertise their galleries in forum posts, but DPR, why was it so hard to make a good selection of head portraits with the PL 45? It's the closest µ43 has to a portrait lens currently (if you want fast AF).

The boke looks nice in the posted images.

As expected, for head portraits with the background several metres away, there is good isolation.

As I wrote in the thread where the review was discussed:

Actually, the sharpness in the widget looks pretty good to me. I doubt people would have much to object to WRT the resolution they get in real life use.

and

I think people will get great results in real life use. 1:1, OIS, fast flexible AF, compact, light, non-extending, low CA and distortion - a lot to like. I'm not seeing anyone pointing out a gallery sample that's ruined by insufficient MTF50.

But I also understand complaints about the price.

Erik,
I will go off your list. FOR ME it "checks all the boxes":

1:1 check
OIS check
fast flexible AF check
compact light check
non extending check
low CA (I haven't seen ANY) check
low distortion (I use LR so I don't see any) check

I do understand where people are coming from on the price. I'm my case there is nothing this lens is gong to produce that I will say gheez if only I was using a better lens my image would be amazing. I have a 50mm f1.4 Leica lens that I can just as easily use on the G cameras. However they don't focus as close oh and did I mention like double the price and manual focus. I don't usually buy a lens from the MTF charts. It is more of how does it perform in the field. Also, for portraits I also have the absolutely STELLAR Zeiss 135 f1.8 for my A900....but it is a beast. A portrait example can be found here:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=149181&postcount=171

The Oly 50 macro will work for a lot of people with a Pen. The Oly 35 macro will also be fine for a lot of people with a Pen. It doesn't AF on Panny which takes it out of contention since I already have a manual focus 40 f1.8 and 50 f1.4. I think in the macro threads we've shown that it has lovely bokeh better than the 50 macro. '

Here are most of the macro shots in one place:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11594