Oly 45mm 1.8 vs Nocticron vs Sigma 56mm vs Olympus 75mm

Just fetched some shots off the 4 lenses I have gone through (3 I still have)

Oly 45mm 1.8 my first MFT portrait lens: Color tones not particularly nice for my own taste and the highlights always blow more than with other lenses but this happens with most Olympus lenses

Nocticron 42.5mm 1.2 this lens not only looks great but blends the backgrounds as my eyes see it and the tones are well controlled in the highlights.

Sigma 56mm 1.4 very sharp and good background colors are a tad flat but still great

Olympus 75mm 1.8 here shot at f/4 in my opinion 2nd best in my set it does look more like a sigma lens than Olympus

The above are camera jpegs of casual photos not prepared all in ambient light all Panasonic G9 except the first which I think was a GH5

I have to say what triggered the quest was the fact that the Olympus 45mm 1.8 developed condensation in the rear element despite being kept always in a storage bag when not used and not been subject to particular thermal stress. The lens ended up in the bin. I did not have major complaints with the lens except at time would miss focus and I thought it was due to depth of field however the other 3 lenses here never miss a shot with the same camera and they have shallower depth of field so something goes on with that lens.

I think the subject of which lens you like is highly subjective and resolution charts and tests are not a comparison to actual use of the lens over a prolonged period of time.

Few additional points:

1. Lumix 42.5: I did not consider this lens ever after the Olympus 45mm experience perhaps wrongly it does seem to produce good shots but I think the rendering of the background looking at other people images is worse than the Oly 45mm while the foreground seems better

2. Olympus pro 45mm 1.2: I currently own 3 Olympus lenses and this includes the 17mm 1.2. While this lens is highly praised and is definitely sharp I definitely find that the material I shoot with it looks pretty anonymous and in backlit scenes this lens really does not work well. So after careful consideration I have avoided this lens as it seems similar in that respect. Looking at images here I can see the 45mn is definitely very sharp but I really don't like how it renders the background even at f/2. Compared to the 75mm seems to be faring worse

Now before you reply to this thread please leave your weapons at home those are casual snaps and are not meant to go in an exhibition or be sold. They are just here to give a non scientific idea from someone who has gone through all those lenses with shots taken with almost always the same camera in casual situation

C Sean wrote:

I really liked the Leica image. I don't know it's the combination of the lighting, the composition and the shallower field of view.

That’s the point the shot is not well lit subject is standing in the shade and there is an highlight on the left

however the image still has a natural look

Very difficult to explain but is the reason to use the lens you can even see the vignette but so what?

Henry Richardson wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

I have to say what triggered the quest was the fact that the Olympus 45mm 1.8 developed condensation in the rear element despite being kept always in a storage bag when not used and not been subject to particular thermal stress. The lens ended up in the bin. I did not have major complaints with the lens except at time would miss focus and I thought it was due to depth of field however the other 3 lenses here never miss a shot with the same camera and they have shallower depth of field so something goes on with that lens.

See this:

Olympus 45mm f1.8 AF problems

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63779720

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64833265

Thank you I sold the lens in 2019 and am not planning to ever buy it again. For me the focus issues were mostly happening when the subject was not flat front but they were never systemic. Ultimately when the lens build quality showed up I decided not to get any zuiko lens not weather sealed. I own a panasonic 14-42mm zoom uber cheap and it works since now years and was not even taken care properly as I use in diving trips.

I trust the Sigma designed 75mm 1.8 will not give me issues and the 60mm macro is weather sealed and so is the 17mm 1.2 that I would like to sell actually

I have a couple of Oly 45 1.8's, no problems with either

Peter Del

I don't have a problem with the background blur on my Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7. But perhaps I'm just not that picky or using it in circumstances where its defects come readily to view?

Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7 @ f2.0

At any rate, you've got an amazing lens selection and are spoiled for choice. Enjoy!

They look like you have applied gaussian blur in photoshop not like your eyes see it in those examples as far as I am concerned

but my comment was more about what happens when you close the aperture which is shown in your own lens review

all those things are subjective obviously

no issues on this shot and all those I have seen look good I was just being picky. The problems seem to occur when the background is closer and there are some white objects or highlights but if you are happy and have not noticed it is not a case to go on a quest

As I said it was more a reaction after I had build quality issues with the Olympus but perhaps wrongly as the lumix is a solid metal build.

i bought one used in fact but condition was poor so I sent it back. At the end I had a massive discount on the Nocticron so I got that one. I have already the sigma in the lightweight camp and it is useful to have all different focals at times

Out of the four lenses the Noctiron shows the best balance between sharpness, color reproduction a d general character.

For me it is the best out of the bunch.

The Sigma 56 is the absolute winner i terms of what you get for what you pay.

I still have the 45/1.8. it has 8 years now and doesn't show any sign of use not deterioration whatsoever.

All in all a little gem given size and cost. But i have been preferring the sigma 30/1.4 for heads and shoulder as well well as candids, for the past couple of years..

The 75 was never in my list. I had it and sold it. Great lens but the FoV never really got along with me.

Cheers

Felice

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

Not really when you have an highlights taking the shape of a spike in the background is very nasty to fix

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

Not really when you have an highlights taking the shape of a spike in the background is very nasty to fix

That is not color cast, but a question of how lens handles highlightes and perhaps how well tuned sensor and lens ate together. ( It's well known that Panasonic and Olympus has different cut of in colors among other things.)

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

Not really when you have an highlights taking the shape of a spike in the background is very nasty to fix

That is not color cast, but a question of how lens handles highlightes and perhaps how well tuned sensor and lens ate together. ( It's well known that Panasonic and Olympus has different cut of in colors among other things.)

Olympus tweaks the highlight protection almost by camera model. My EM1MKII has 0.8 Ev but the EM1X has 0.3 Ev. This comes at expense of noise in the shadows though.

You need to consider that generally lens control of bright scenes depends on coating. So here where Leica makes the difference with their black box recipe. The flare control you get is superior to sigma and olympus lenses in all conditions so you get more details in the bright area. you can try to recover those details when they are off but the contrast and resolution is gone. This is not something you find shooting a test chart

The same performance happens on olympus body which I have so in general I prefer how the leica coating manage bright areas if that makes sense. Some sigma lenses are also good for example the 56mm works much better than the 30mm and also the 16mm is solid

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

Not really when you have an highlights taking the shape of a spike in the background is very nasty to fix

That is not color cast, but a question of how lens handles highlightes and perhaps how well tuned sensor and lens ate together. ( It's well known that Panasonic and Olympus has different cut of in colors among other things.)

Olympus tweaks the highlight protection almost by camera model. My EM1MKII has 0.8 Ev but the EM1X has 0.3 Ev. This comes at expense of noise in the shadows though.

You need to consider that generally lens control of bright scenes depends on coating. So here where Leica makes the difference with their black box recipe. The flare control you get is superior to sigma and olympus lenses in all conditions so you get more details in the bright area. you can try to recover those details when they are off but the contrast and resolution is gone. This is not something you find shooting a test chart

The same performance happens on olympus body which I have so in general I prefer how the leica coating manage bright areas if that makes sense. Some sigma lenses are also good for example the 56mm works much better than the 30mm and also the 16mm is solid

It's more to this than lens coating.

Even if it's the same basic sensor in many Olympus and Panasonic cameras there are differences in sensor cut of in the colour spectre. ( and probably also other differences. )  Remember the purple flare issue with Pana 7-14.?

In addition the lens coatings have changed over time, the Olympus 12 -45 has a newer coating than the 12-40 with better flare control. I can imagine that this also will influence the rendering of bright highlights.

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

TorsteinH wrote:

I find it strange that highligtes can be more overblown with one lens versus the others as in your sample with 45 f/1.8. How can that be?

Regarding skin tones, I consider that more a matter of what you do when prosessing your photos...

They are not processed at all they are shot using the same profile for all shots so if the colours are different it depends on the lens and the situation ambient light.

Different lenses react different to flare and highlights mostly depending on how coating and antireflection is dealt with. Consider that the camera was also Panasonic in all shots with the same picture profile applied and none of those shots is clipping on black nor highlights on the histogram, despite what someone else may say the shots are all correctly exposed in camera with nothing blown out. What I can see is that as the brightness goes up some lenses keep more details than others.

There was a very interesting youtube video in Japanese talking about how lens and camera interact in the digital age most concepts are black box undisclosed so it is hard to know exactly what drives what.

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

I realise that I did express myself unclairly.

My intent was not to say that you had done any different processing of the photos to change color cast, but that it's something that is easy to fix when process your photos at the computer.

Not really when you have an highlights taking the shape of a spike in the background is very nasty to fix

That is not color cast, but a question of how lens handles highlightes and perhaps how well tuned sensor and lens ate together. ( It's well known that Panasonic and Olympus has different cut of in colors among other things.)

Olympus tweaks the highlight protection almost by camera model. My EM1MKII has 0.8 Ev but the EM1X has 0.3 Ev. This comes at expense of noise in the shadows though.

You need to consider that generally lens control of bright scenes depends on coating. So here where Leica makes the difference with their black box recipe. The flare control you get is superior to sigma and olympus lenses in all conditions so you get more details in the bright area. you can try to recover those details when they are off but the contrast and resolution is gone. This is not something you find shooting a test chart

The same performance happens on olympus body which I have so in general I prefer how the leica coating manage bright areas if that makes sense. Some sigma lenses are also good for example the 56mm works much better than the 30mm and also the 16mm is solid

It's more to this than lens coating.

Even if it's the same basic sensor in many Olympus and Panasonic cameras there are differences in sensor cut of in the colour spectre. ( and probably also other differences. ) Remember the purple flare issue with Pana 7-14.?

In addition the lens coatings have changed over time, the Olympus 12 -45 has a newer coating than the 12-40 with better flare control. I can imagine that this also will influence the rendering of bright highlights.

The UV filters have an impact on the backlit longitudinal CA but despite all you read since the EM1MKII there are no material differences between the two brands (I have tested it)

I have the 17mm 1.2 pro lens the best of the set together with the 45mm but even so I do not like how it renders certain scenes and I am planning to sell it if you are interested!