Panasonic DG Leica Nocticron Bokeh/Vignette vs Sigma 56/1.4 vs Olympus 75/1.8

For pure fun and enjoyment and having all those lenses I have asked my wife to stand in the front of a Christmas tree and then I have taken a few shots to prove a few points

1. The lens has a lot of vignetting wide open that is true but this is gone by f/1.8

2. When you shoot at the same aperture vs other lenses it matches or is better than the other two lenses in the out of focus rendering.

Vignetting test

This compares the Nocticron at 1.2 with itself at 1.4 and 1.8. Although the camera exposure is exactly as it has to be the top crop shows increasing brightness as you go from 1.2 to 1.8 because vignetting is reduced. The bokeh balls go from ellipse to almost round

1.2 vs 1.4

1.2 vs 1.8

If vignetting is your concern you should shoot this lens at 1.4

Lens Comparison

Vs Sigma 56/1.4

Sigma vs Nocticron

When you compare with the sigma at 1.4 two things are apparent

1. The bokeh balls have the same shape

2. the Sigma have a little rim around the edge that is greenish the Nocticron has a little rim inside the edge transparent personally I like the Nocticron best

Conclusion: The Nocticron is marginally better than the Sigma and does not produce the green circles.

Vs Olympus 75/1.8

When you compare with the other Sigma..erm Olympus lens you see that:

1. The Olympus has exactly the same green circles of the sigma 56 and this is not a surprise as this is sigma design however considering the lens has no aspherical elements this may have to do with other aberrations

2. The balls of the Nocticron are practically round while the olympus show some vignetting

Conclusion: The nocticron is better than the Olympus at 1.8

So in summary to who thinks you are going to get better rendering out of the other lenses think twice your decisions have to be driven by focal length not by other factors and of course how deep is your wallet.

If you are a Nocticron owner do take into account that closing down the lens to 1.8 achieves almost complete elimination of vignetting and yet the rendering is still great. If you want to have good enough result without elliptical balls shoot at 1.4.

Shooting the lens wide open will show the ellipse shape and the edges will be considerably darker this may or not be a problem. However consider that as shown on lenstip the Olympus 45mm 1.2 is not producing round balls at 1.2 either and both lenses achieve this fully by 2.5 and give acceptable results by 1.8.

I think so. I did not want to go into details of which lens is sharper etc but after reading all the non sense that this lens had all sort of defect one has to put things in check

It definitely shows Noctirons' value.

Personally, if I wanted to choose a lens offering perhaps not the best IQ but best compromise, the 56/1.4 would be my pick as it appears to be the sharper of the bunch.

We have all different objectives, afterall.

F

Felice62 wrote:

It definitely shows Noctirons' value.

Personally, if I wanted to choose a lens offering perhaps not the best IQ but best compromise, the 56/1.4 would be my pick as it appears to be the sharper of the bunch.

We have all different objectives, afterall.

F

That was also my conclusion, the Olympus 75mm 1.8 is a nice lens but is not cheap and this comparison puts it in perspective

The sigma is much more affordable and that may be the key point here. The other consideration is that with the sigma  you need 6.5 meters to capture a 2 meters frame

With the Nocticron you are under 5 meters which makes it a better indoor lens

I would say if you shoot predominantly indoor and don't have big rooms the Olympus 45/1.8 is probably a good option

I am not convinced the Sigma is sharper than the Nocticron at 1.4 actually

Interceptor121 wrote:

The sigma is much more affordable and that may be the key point here. The other consideration is that with the sigma you need 6.5 meters to capture a 2 meters frame

With the Nocticron you are under 5 meters which makes it a better indoor lens

That is a huge understatement 

I would say if you shoot predominantly i

ndoor and don't have big rooms the Olympus 45/1.8 is probably a good option

and the Nocticron ?

No the Nocticron is the best option of all for indoors , then the Lumix , then the 2 olympus 45mm

Harold66 wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

The sigma is much more affordable and that may be the key point here. The other consideration is that with the sigma you need 6.5 meters to capture a 2 meters frame

With the Nocticron you are under 5 meters which makes it a better indoor lens

That is a huge understatement

I would say if you shoot predominantly i

ndoor and don't have big rooms the Olympus 45/1.8 is probably a good option

and the Nocticron ?

He already said he does not want to spend the money so that is the suggestions for those whose budget is limited

No the Nocticron is the best option of all for indoors , then the Lumix , then the 2 olympus 45mm

Gnine wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

The sigma is much more affordable and that may be the key point here. The other consideration is that with the sigma you need 6.5 meters to capture a 2 meters frame

With the Nocticron you are under 5 meters which makes it a better indoor lens

That is a huge understatement

Only if you're the type that makes mountains out of mole hills. If taking a step back is beyond your capabilities, then perhaps prime photography is not for you.

Gosh another useless reply 😳

when i am in a room I cannot move walls or stepping back through them but you with your huge ego maybe you can 😉😂😉😂

Why no comparison to the Olympus 150-400?

DH007 wrote:

Why no comparison to the Olympus 150-400?

Is is supposed to be some kind of ironic reply ? or maybe intended for someone else ?

No idea what this means

DH007 wrote:

Why no comparison to the Olympus 150-400?

What does an f4.5 long lens have to do with fast primes?

Well, if you divide 4.5 by 3 you get 1.5, which is almost equal to 1.4...

😂

I appreciate the comparison of these even if I feel like they're kind of different lenses for different purposes.

The Olympus 75mm is one of the older lenses from my understanding. If they ever remade that lens in a "PRO" with the same 1.8 or even bigger aperture (1.4/1.2) I'm sure it would sell and produce excellent results. The draw of this lens for me was always the size and the compression you get. 135mm f1.8 FF is one of my favorite lenses and this is the closest I can get without getting a huge zoom lens.

The Sigma 56 f1.4 is one that I hear many good things about, but never actually have tried out. To my understanding, this is the lens most people get if they're on a budget and want sharpness. Sharpness is just one small part of image rendering.

The Nocticron is an awesome lens, but was reaching the too big/heavy territory for m43. To each their own, but I never really used m43 for portraiture as I have other cameras for that. So the appeal of this lens wasn't quite there for me. I did however really like the build and the rendering. Also I got mine at a really great price.

Felice62 wrote:

Well, if you divide 4.5 by 3 you get 1.5, which is almost equal to 1.4...

😂

Lol for a minute I thought you were serious hahaha

Of course but this post is a response to the nonsense of another thread about the vignette or bokeh of this lens compares to others