Leica Macro-Elmarit 45 mm F2.8 Macro: field trial

[photoSmart42]

And in the bokeh. The background on this shot is a bit on the jangly side.

Fair enough, but I'm personally still not convinced it's worth the price difference. Once the 45mm drops to about $450 I'll grab one for sure.

 

[Godfrey]

Fair enough, but I'm personally still not convinced it's worth the price difference. Once the 45mm drops to about $450 I'll grab one for sure.

LOL ... That'll never happen.

If the quality of your photograph isn't worth the money to you, be happy and stick with what you have.

The 14-45 is a fine lens, however I used it so infrequently I sold it. Haven't got the ME45 yet, for the moment I'm content with my Konica 40/1.8, but I'll get the 45 as soon as I can sensibly do it.

 

[iiiNelson]

nice ... if you don't mind a question, how well does the IOS work ... I mean when focused on something hand held at say 15cm ... your image looks lovely, I'm guessing it wasn't tripod based?

Sorry for the late reply.

Yes AF works but like mentioned it's nowhere as good or fast as the standard lenses. The shot of the camera case was handheld about 6 inches above the case at an angle (it took me 2 tries to get it right.) It was probably the first time I shot a Macro in probably 3 or 4 yrs and obviously on a different system. The macro shot of the 20mm lens in my gallery was taken on my kitchen counter. The only post processing done was changing the WB to flourescent light. Everything else is 100% out the camera and pretty damn close to accurate if you ask me.

 

[iiiNelson]

Well, my regular GF1 or G1 travel kit would be this:

7-14, 14-140, 20mm, 45mm

With this kit I get everything I need and the 45 macro gives me a faster lens for portraits and macro.

This kit very easily fits (along with mobile phone wallet etc) in a small bag or my North Face waist pack that also has a (detachable) shoulder strap.

Sounds like a great kit. The 7-14mm is next on my list. I've been putting it off for more than 6 months.

 

[pellicle]

I've seen you post "IOS" in several messages ... here and dpr.

so I have keyboard dyslexia ... (as you know) I've got the lens, but thanks again for correcting the trivial. Seems odd for someone who hates getting bogged down in the trivial.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

Sorry for the late reply.

no probs ... thanks

 

[Peter Leyenaar]

Some comparisons, 45 f2.8 and 14-45 at 45mm f5.6, no processing, only conversion to Jpeg in Cap1 V5
No 1 PL45 f2.8
No 2 P14-45
No 3 P14-45
No 4 PL45 f2.8
No 5 PL45 f2.8
No 6 P14-45

 

[Peter Leyenaar]

Same set, Some processing applied

 

[ggibson]

Interesting comparison, thank you!

It looks like the PL 45mm is slightly longer in all the shots.

 

[JBurnett]

When I first read the reviews of the 45mm, I thought "underwhelming at that price". After seeing some samples wide open, I began to reconsider, based on my photographic interests and working habits. Eventually, I ponied up the cash and purchased one.

One can certainly find a less-expensive macro lens that equals its performance. One can certainly find a less-expensive portrait alternative, although the fast ones are all manual-focus, and I would stop most down 1 or 2 stops anyway (f/2 or 2.8) for better sharpness and contrast. For general walkabout and travel, the 14-45 or 45-200 do very well indeed at 45mm, though they are slower (f/5.6 and f/4 respectively).

For me, the appeal of the 45mm is

• 45mm (90 equivalent): the 70-90mm range is one of my favourites for general walkabout, and for portraits. And for macro it provides a reasonably good working distance.
• 1:1 macro: I really like having closeup capability at hand at all times. I missed this when working with a Leica-mount 40mm and sometimes ended up packing two lenses (the 40 and Oly 35 Macro) instead of one.
• Auto-focus: I'm no stranger to MF and the G1 makes it easy, but there are certain situations in which AF is desirable.
• Acceptable speed: A bit of a compromise here, but one I'll live with. I still have a Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 which is quite good at f/2. To do better than f/2, I think there would be other compromises. For example, the wider the aperture, the more I tend to lean on "focus assist" to get critical focus.
• Reasonably good bokeh: Not stellar, but quite nice.
• Very small and light package. Doesn't extend to a great length when macro focusing.
• A single solution for a variety of tasks.

Expensive. Yes, enough to cause me to go back and forth on the decision several times. Nonetheless, the 45mm offers a blend of capabailities that are unique (right now) and of value to me. As always, YMMV.

 

[Peter Leyenaar]

Here is one for bokeh

 

[Rich M]

When I first read the reviews of the 45mm, I thought "underwhelming at that price". After seeing some samples wide open, I began to reconsider, based on my photographic interests and working habits. Eventually, I ponied up the cash and purchased one.

I was an early adopter who went ahead and purchased the lens because of the potential versatility. It was in transit from Japan when Andy published his review on the other photo forum. I thought "Oh s**t!!!.....Why can't I embrace the TRAILING edge of technology?"

I have had the lens for several months now and find it almost never comes off the camera. It just fits my personal POV and shooting style. It is my walkaround lens.

Without it, I would miss shots like these at the Farmers Market.



I have never had a moments regret.

R

 

[Peter Leyenaar]

Here is a copy of a slide (diapositive) Velvia, taken with the Leica R8, 35-70 when I worked in Rabat, Morocco, duplicated with the Panasonic Leica 45 f2.8 with the camera mounted on a enlarger stand , the slide on a color calibrated (5000 K) light table.
The copy looks as good as the slide, the slide isn't that good to start with.

The Panasonic Leica is a very good and versatile lens and well worth the money.

Best Regards

Peter

 

[Diane B]

John,

Your points are probably the same ones I have made in favor. Like you, because of the cost and the fact I have several MF lenses in similar range--and faster--I've hesitated. I expect, though, that I will buy one when they become available more generally.

Diane

 

[Godfrey]

lol ... I knew it would be a great lens, I only read reviews for entertainment purposes. ;-)

My only issues are availability and the money to buy it...

 

[andrewteee]

I've been using the Olympus 50mm macro, and of course it's very good, but as in general in my experience with the 4/3 lenses on m4/3, it is clunky to use. The 90-100mm focal length is a perfect complement to the Panasonic 20mm lens I use most of the time, and shoot a lot of macro. So I'll probably get the Panasonic 45mm. Just wish it was less expensive (naturally). Taking the EP2, 20mm and 45mm around sounds like the perfect little kit.

 

[JBurnett]

Yeah, the 20 and 45 make a good pair. Just like the Leica CL, launched in 1973 with 40 and 90mm lenses. How I lusted after that camera at the time. But, young and perpetually broke it was just a dream.

 

[Rich M]

How I lusted after that camera at the time. But, young and perpetually broke it was just a dream.

And now I am just older......:ROTFL:

 

[ggibson]

I recall reading on dpreview that it's possible to "trick" this lens to take shots at a wider aperture than f2.8 (like f2.0 or so). I think it was possible because the mechanism opens the aperture wider than f2.8 to focus, so by unscrewing the lens slightly after focusing it keeps the lens from stopping down to capture. Anyone know what I'm talking about?

 

[tripper]

Here are two shots of my dogs taken with this lens.

45mm macro @ f/4 iso200

Harris (Labrador retriever)

45mm macro @ f3.5 iso100

Jess (working Cocker spaniel)

tripper