Dear reader, thank you for visiting our website. The article you are looking for – Comparing two M.Zuiko portrait lenses – Olympus 45mm f/1.8 vs. 75mm f/1.8 – is being transferred over to our new comparison website. We apologise for the inconvenience.
If you are looking for information about the 45mm and 75mm, you can check our individual reviews below:
- Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 Review: The best portrait lens for Micro Four Thirds
- Better late than never! – The Olympus M.Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 Review
Well-written article. “One of the biggest concerns of portrait photographers is the sharpness
of the lens. Thankfully, both the M.Zuiko 45mm and 75mm perform very
well even at their fastest aperture of f/1.8 and are therefore perfectly
suited to the genre.” — as a rather solitary voice, albeit not entirely alone, I’m not too keen on sharpness for peoples’ faces. Fast vintage lenses usually have lower contrast and spherical aberrations wide open and near that but I’d rather see glow than forehead lines or pores. As such I’m not a fan of the majority of portrait shots I see today. Welladay, to each their own after all : )
I don’t have either of these lenses, but I started with the 60mm f2.8 macro which is a stupendous lens for portraits and macro. I couldn’t justify buying either of these other lenses.
Very good point, Katarina. I suppose it all comes down to genres of photography you enjoy the most, and the amount of reach you need!
Thanks for sharing your experience, Gordks! I agree with you about the 25mm being a bit too wide but it can be good for very active subjects like toddlers whose movements are hard to predict!
Have tried the pro olympus zoom lenses ,i know there not primes so you do not have such large apertures at given range but they do have equal sharpness at same apertures as those pana leica ,its a shame that panasonic and olympus have not made some f2 zooms for better subject isolation you could almost do away with a selection primes something like the sigma 18-35 f1.8 for apsc for m43 .
Ok a zoom will probably never match the rendering of prime or low light advantages but it gives greater opportunities and more scope.
I have the 45mm and absolutely love it for living room, family photographs in natural light. It is perfect for unplanned, unposed photos. I also have the Lumix 25mm 1.4. It is another good lens but I use the 45mm more often since it allows a greater distance to the subject. With the 25mm you have to get so close when trying to fill the frame that distortion starts to show up, and you get in the way as well.
I have never had the opportunity to try the 75mm but could see it being better in a larger room or outdoors. I absolutely WILL have one in time. These fast lenses allow taking those photos I always wanted to take but couldn’t (when still using bridge cameras) because there was just too little light. I don’t like the look of flash. On the E-M5 II, with it’s great white balance and stabilization, I have never even thought to try it’s flash. I forgot I even had it until I found myself wondering what that little black felt package was that I found in my camera bag.
Go for the 45mm. You will never be sorry, and the price is very easy to handle. Get the 75mm if, and when, you need it. If, as good as it is, you decide you don’t need it, you have saved quite a lot.
I have both too and would agree with what you have written. One thing has always puzzled me though. The 75mm is so good, indeed one the sharpest lenses I have ever used, so how come Olympus have never matched it’s quality with other focal lengths?
Panasonic have three Leica badged lenses, the 15mm f/1.7, the 25mm f/f.4 and the 42.5mm f/1.2 that are simply stunning, but Olympus apart from the 75mm f/1.8 and to a certain extent the 45mm f/1.8 have a range of competent, but hardly outstanding lenses. And considering their pedigree with the 4/3 DSLR lenses that they made, that is somewhat strange. Maybe it’s the Leica input, maybe they prioritise size over ultimate quality, who knows. And their f/2.8 zooms, while very useful, are hardly stand out lenses optically.
Coming into m4/3 I would have expected Olympus to produce more great prime lenses than they actually have. And I really can’t think of a reason why this should be the case. Especially when you consider the prices of many of them. Odd.