Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 50 of 50

Thread: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    on dpreview.
    http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...ic_45_2p8_o20/

    I've been hedging on this one. I'm not a macro shooter too often and not sure if the lens suits my needs otherwise. I'd love to have something in a fast 40-45. The review is interesting nonetheless.

    Diane

  2. #2
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    the pricing seems to be utterly outrageous ( 900 dollars) for what it is and the bodies it can be used on.

    It reads to me like it is a bastard child of some long forgotten alternative universe where Leica were going to do a micro four thirds camera

    as far as i can see its only real advantage is size - other wise if you want a macro in that region seems like the Zuiko 50 is the way to go

    just my thoughts

    K

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Kevin,
    I've been trying to figure what to do for macro for a year now. The Zuiko 50 may seem obvious to you but it

    a)doesn't AF on Panny
    b) AF is awful on 4/3 and even worse on the E-P1

    So, last October when I got the G1 I considered the 50 and held off, then again I thought about it when the Pen was released and by that time this lens was announced. I thought the samples so far looked pretty good and will probably get it.

  4. #4
    Senior Member JBurnett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bridgewater, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Not really compelling at that price. There are much cheaper alternatives for macro in that range, and it seems to fall a bit short on the "portrait" duty. I agree with Diane -- while there are many great options for fast manual lenses in this range, a fast "native m4/3" 40-45mm would be welcome (auto-focus, stabilization, f/1.4 - 2).
    Best regards,
    John.
    http://jburnett.ca

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    the pricing seems to be utterly outrageous ( 900 dollars) for what it is and the bodies it can be used on.

    It reads to me like it is a bastard child of some long forgotten alternative universe where Leica were going to do a micro four thirds camera

    as far as i can see its only real advantage is size - other wise if you want a macro in that region seems like the Zuiko 50 is the way to go

    just my thoughts

    K
    I am perfectly happy with my (real) pen F Zuiko Macro 38/3.5 and that is going stay. It is tiny and performs beautifully.

    The two lens examples (sites) that were linked so far are negative adverts for this overpriced lens.

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I can vouch for the 38/3.5 Pen F. After trying all the Pen lenses it's the only one I kept, and the others were pretty much all excellent.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Hmmm. well, I took the 14-140 back, and I was going to get this with the proceeds, but it seems I'd be better to stick with the old Zuiko 50 and do something else with the proceeds . . . thoughts turn to that 85 f1.4 zeiss that I keep not quite buying

    Just this guy you know

  8. #8
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Pretty disapointing all the way around, especially with the price point Panasonic has put on this lens. If it was a 4-500 lens, it may have been a different story, but, i pass on this one.

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Perhaps they should have kept Leica out of this one. If nothing more it would have a lower price. The "Pure" Panasonic brand 14-45, 45-200, and the more recent 20 are all stellar performers.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I predict extremely low sales on this lens...way too much money. The upside is that if no one buys it they may come to their senses and drop the price.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles CA
    Posts
    262
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I cannot add too much to what others have already written. $900 for a lens with a dpreview review in which they had too stretch and call barely highly recommended. An adapter is needed with my m4/3 G1. Panny hit a home run with the 20 1.7 and it appears as if they missed the mark the 45 2.8.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I am sorry if I offend but anything published by dpreview gets my take it with a grain of salt concern. When I read that they were going to start reviewing lenses my first reaction was, and they do this based on what expertise? For me, even their camera reviews have to be taken with a grain of salt. I think I will wait and see what actually develops and see what real world output looks like before passing judgment. In the mean time my trusty Nikon 60mm afd works wonders for macro on the G1. :sleep006:

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard View Post
    I cannot add too much to what others have already written. $900 for a lens with a dpreview review in which they had too stretch and call barely highly recommended. An adapter is needed with my m4/3 G1. Panny hit a home run with the 20 1.7 and it appears as if they missed the mark the 45 2.8.
    There might be a misunderstanding. The Oly 50 f/2 macro needs an adaptor, but the 45 f/2.8 is a 'native' m4/3rds mount.

    It isn't even the price for it but whether there's the need. Reading Andy Westlake's comments, it appears that it is a very good macro lens and some would be interested in that--but for many of us, the preference would be for a non-macro faster native lens in that range. I, for one, will stick with my MF lenses for now and wait to see what else will come in the next year since macro really isn't my interest..

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    As a macro lens this seems overpriced and for that underperforming. I have a last version 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor and an MF 200/4 Micro Nikkor, with the latter working wonderfully on the G1. For higher mags and super quality I have some Leica M bellows and a range of Photars that can't be beat. I've had the 200/4 since it came out, but the others items I've bought in total for a lot less than the 45/2.8 costs.

    Now a nice 45 or 50/2 or 1.4 portrait lens with IS would be tempting...

  15. #15
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I too was disapointed in the lenses performance. I guess the Lieca name on it doesn't guarantee stellar performance only stellar price. I was really considering this lens but now I will pass. The X1 better have some stellar glass at its stellar price.
    V/r John

  16. #16
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    the pricing seems to be utterly outrageous ( 900 dollars) for what it is and the bodies it can be used on.
    err ... like any of the Leica M lenses could have been used on much else before the m4/3 came along either ... seen their prices lately?

  17. #17
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Hi

    perhaps I'm reading about a different lens ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard View Post
    An adapter is needed with my m4/3 G1.
    and why would that be?

    perhaps also everyone has missed some points:

    The first thing you'll notice on picking up the 45mm F2.8 macro is just how tiny it is. The lens is little bigger than Panasonic's 14-45mm kit zoom, remarkable for a 1:1 macro with image stabilization
    when I try to use my Oly 50mm I am typically in low light where needing a tripod for macro is often required ... this lens would allow more in close than this:



    as I didn't have any extension tubes and I doubt I could have hand held it more if I'd needed to be stopped down more.

    Since it focuses to 1:1 it thus needs to move that element a long way to go from infinity to 1:1 ... or don't people know that?

    also, a comparable lens might be a Canon EF 100 Macro with IS, selling for about US$1000 at B&H
    ... at 625g (vs 225g for the Leica / Panny) I think I know which one I'd prefer to use
    Last edited by pellicle; 21st October 2009 at 09:50.

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I'd like to see another review besides dpreview before coming to any conclusion on this lens.

  19. #19
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    The other thing which he stated in the review is how the stabilization unit seemed to really rattle around in the lens. I have tested my 45-200, and i can barely feel or hear this in the lens. If i did not know this about this lens, i would have never felt this. DP makes it sound likes its ready to fall out of the back of the lens.

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    I'd like to see another review besides dpreview before coming to any conclusion on this lens.
    HI There
    I quite agree - my gut reaction is negative, but me second thought is just that.

    Actually, much better, I'd like to take some shots with one before coming to a conclusion.

    Previous panaleica lenses have all been pretty well received, I'd be surprise if this was not a winner.

    In the UK (warehouseexpress prices) the Olympus 50 f2 is 446, and the panaleica 45 f2.8 is 589 sure, it's a difference, but not that much difference (and it has IS and fast focusing and 1:1).

    Size?
    Olympus 50 f2: 300gm 71mm x 61.5mm (446) (weathersealed)
    PanaLeica 50 f2.8: 225 gm 63mm x 62.5mm (589)
    Olympus 35 f3.5 165 gm 71mm x 53mm (197)

    Just this guy you know

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I'm with Jono here and still plan to order this lens. I think people have overreacted. One of the great things for me between the Panny bodies and these lenses is to be able to AF with a very small AF point (remember you can make the focus box very small) and move that point.

    There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:

    "OK this is getting a bit silly now. The 45/2.8 isn't mediocre optically - it may not be sharpest in class but it's far from the worst we've seen, and it has no distortion, minimal CA, insignficant vignetting and really pleasant bokeh. There's a lot more to a lens than just sharpness.
    Anyway I'm willing to be refuted on this, so here's a challenge. There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."


    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=33440226

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:
    Thanks for the link Terry; it's lovely to see one of the dpreview reviewers actually chipping in positively and not simply making sarcastic remarks.

    If it really has lovely bokeh, and fast autofocus, and it's tiny, then that's three things it's got over the 50 f2.

    I'll keep my order on, and see what comes of it.

    Just this guy you know

  23. #23
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    I trust Andy Westlake's judgement, but was hoping to see more examples of portraits - I would have sold my 50mm f2 for the Leica 45mm f2.8 if it had been typical Leica quality... it looks like that won't be necessary - at least not until Jono starts posting Leica samples

    Cheers

    Brian

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Mosley View Post
    I trust Andy Westlake's judgement, but was hoping to see more examples of portraits - I would have sold my 50mm f2 for the Leica 45mm f2.8 if it had been typical Leica quality... it looks like that won't be necessary - at least not until Jono starts posting Leica samples

    Cheers

    Brian
    I've just spent half an hour looking through Andy's samples. I think they look rather lovely - really nice bokeh, crisp and 3d.

    I'll work on it

    Just this guy you know

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    "There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."
    Why would he "review" it and try to defend it with the samples he showed?

    Shooting a portrait under the light he did @ ISO800 and the way he processed it to show a sample with quarter of the frame badly smudged...

    Why can't these folks learn to do make photos before reviewing a new photography product?

  26. #26
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    err ... like any of the Leica M lenses could have been used on much else before the m4/3 came along either ... seen their prices lately?
    even leica tend to generally price their lenses lower than the cost of the body :-)

  27. #27
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    Hi



    as I didn't have any extension tubes and I doubt I could have hand held it more if I'd needed to be stopped down more.

    Since it focuses to 1:1 it thus needs to move that element a long way to go from infinity to 1:1 ... or don't people know that?

    also, a comparable lens might be a Canon EF 100 Macro with IS, selling for about US$1000 at B&H
    ... at 625g (vs 225g for the Leica / Panny) I think I know which one I'd prefer to use
    are we all on the same page here... your photo isn't a macro photo... unless that is a incredibly small flower

    the oly 50mm we are referencing here is the Zuiko D 50/2 not the old OM zuiko 50... which i am sure would still focus closer than your picture

    think there are crossed wires here

    K

  28. #28
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    That shot reminds me of this one, taken with the E-P1 + mZD 14-42, not a macro lens at all but focuses pretty close.

    E-P1 + mZD 14-42
    1/100s f/5.6 at 42.0mm iso500


    Cheers

    Brian

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    I'm with Jono here and still plan to order this lens. I think people have overreacted. One of the great things for me between the Panny bodies and these lenses is to be able to AF with a very small AF point (remember you can make the focus box very small) and move that point.

    There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:

    "OK this is getting a bit silly now. The 45/2.8 isn't mediocre optically - it may not be sharpest in class but it's far from the worst we've seen, and it has no distortion, minimal CA, insignficant vignetting and really pleasant bokeh. There's a lot more to a lens than just sharpness.
    Anyway I'm willing to be refuted on this, so here's a challenge. There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."


    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=33440226
    I've been out of the loop most of the day so haven't seen too much of the hoo-hah on dpreview, but it was starting last I read.

    I'm not disappointed--just in the same place I was to begin with. I want a 40-45 but don't do portraits and not sure how this fits into my lens lineup yet. I'm still on the fence--but spending time looking at the samples it could fit--I like my Tammy 90 f/2.8 macro which is 1:1--and this would be quite similar. I often carried it instead of my 85 f/1.8 because I could do macro if I chose. So--its not a no or yes yet. I've saved my pennies for it or something else down the road and I'll just have to think about it and see how others like it in 'real life'.

    Diane

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    even leica tend to generally price their lenses lower than the cost of the body :-)
    Sony have the right idea. Their 30mm f/2.8 macro for 1.5X crop sensor bodies is US $199/-.

    http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...87604#features

    I am eagerly looking forward to Sony entering the mirror less cam arena.

  31. #31
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Morning Kevin
    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    are we all on the same page here... your photo isn't a macro photo... unless that is a incredibly small flower
    that's correct, and I even said that its only close focus if you read my post:

    {the Leica} lens would allow more in close than this:

    insert example image

    as I didn't have any extension tubes and I doubt I could have hand held it more if I'd needed to be stopped down more.
    [QUOTE]

    the oly 50mm we are referencing here is the Zuiko D 50/2 not the old OM zuiko 50... which i am sure would still focus closer than your picture
    nope ... as that was set at its lockstop minimum and focus was by moving camera back and forth. It was all hand held as on the day I hadn't taken my tripod cos I was just out for a walk in the arboretum with my wife.

    I was just reacting to all the jump on the negative sayers who seemed to be basing what a 1:1 macro with IS should cost on the prices of different products. I notice noone commented on my reference to a comparable lens in the Canon range.

    :-)

  32. #32
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Reading the conclusions of Andy's review on dpreview I'm left wondering if Andy has any experience ... for example:

    Perhaps the most interesting comparison to be made is with the Olympus ZD 50mm F2 Macro.
    right ... lets compare a lens which isn't a micro4/3 lens ...

    This lens works on Micro Four Thirds bodies using an adapter,
    has a stop faster maximum aperture, and gives 1:2 magnification with exceptional image quality - and the combination may well cost less than the Panasonic 45mm.
    lovely it won't even allow you to get as close as the Leica does, with 1:1 magnification ... so what's the price difference gap for this inferior legacy lens then?

    I bought an adaptor recently for using a 9-18mm ... cost US$139 plus shipping, but they are about 199 euro around here ... at US$399 (or 499 euro) for the ZD that's 698 euro... I'm not reaching out for my wallet yet ...

    what other great things exist about this "compared to" alternative ...

    Autofocus is this lens's weak point - it works only hesitantly on the E-P1, and not at all on Panasonic bodies - but if you're planning on doing slow, considered macro work on a tripod, that isn't much of a problem.
    lovely ... so with AF not working on the G1 I'd be just as well served by getting some other legacy lens (since the 4/3 is legacy on the micro 4/3 like a FD 50 macro or such like) for much less than the ZD compared by this bright spark ... not much of a comparison if you ask me, and if I was wanting to take advantage of all the benefits of micro 4/3 why not get the lens with AF and image stabilisation so you can hand hold it?

    seems like a flaccid review if you ask me ... where can I get a job like that?

    Ahh ... I know ... Leica hasn't paid for kickbacks probably
    Last edited by pellicle; 22nd October 2009 at 01:34.

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    I was just reacting to all the jump on the negative sayers who seemed to be basing what a 1:1 macro with IS should cost on the prices of different products. I notice noone commented on my reference to a comparable lens in the Canon range.

    :-)
    Canon have many full frame cameras on which that 100/2.8 would work.

    Nikon have a few macro lenses that reach 1:1 (105, 60). You can also compare the prices.

    Sony have a 30mm/2.8 for $199.

    IS isn't useful for "macro" distances. Canon's superlative true macro 65mm MP-E, does not even have auto focus and for good reason.

    $900/- for a slow lens that will not offer movements, isn't that attractive, regardless of the name. Leica aren't exactly known for their macro lenses, are they?

    Your example of "forget me not" flower isn't a macro (it is more like 1:10 magnification or so) so is the dp rev gallery pics, though your sample is an infinitely better shot, shot under better light and nicely composed.

    Light and composition: who needs such trivia for "reviews"?
    Last edited by Vivek; 22nd October 2009 at 03:59.

  34. #34
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Vivek it was nice to see your example of the Sony lens being so well priced. I wonder how the build quality compares to the Canon EF50 f1.8 II?

    I have the series 1 of that (came on my EOS630, which still has it on at the moment) which was quite a reasonable device.

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hurst, Texas (DFW area)
    Posts
    179
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Could the sharpness issues be caused by sample variation? Most macro lens are exceptionally sharp in my limited experience, its rare to find one that isn't. Many feel that a macro is unsuitable as a portrait lens for that very reason. I wouldn't write this one off so quickly.

    Paul

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul_Kerfoot View Post
    Many feel that a macro is unsuitable as a portrait lens for that very reason.
    Yes, many who can photograph, perhaps, know that.

    Reason: high contrast.

    However, that isn't true nowadays. There are macro lenses with superb micro contrast and fantastic OOF renditions.

    The PC-Micro nikkor 85/2.8, for example, is a superb portrait lens.

    There are many beautiful portrait samples shown here that were taken with the superb Olympus 50/2.

    The lens may be sharp, etc but when you use it on a high pixel density body with limited DR and high noise ... (edited).

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    Vivek it was nice to see your example of the Sony lens being so well priced. I wonder how the build quality compares to the Canon EF50 f1.8 II?

    I have the series 1 of that (came on my EOS630, which still has it on at the moment) which was quite a reasonable device.

    Pellicle, It looks like it has a plastic mount. It appears to be a rehoused Vectis macro lens.

    Any bets that the Pany 45/2.8 (in certain hands) would outperform this 30/2.8?

  38. #38
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Pellicle, It looks like it has a plastic mount. It appears to be a rehoused Vectis macro lens.
    reuse of an existing design would help save money ... and I'm not sure that I have any real significant problems with plastic mounts on AF cameras anyway.


    Any bets that the Pany 45/2.8 (in certain hands) would outperform this 30/2.8?
    likely ... all I need to do is win the lottery to justify buying that pany 45 and I'll report the results myself!


  39. #39
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    No need to win the lottery, Jono and Helen will surely lead the charge!

    Can't wait to see some portrait samples

    Cheers

    Brian

  40. #40
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Mosley View Post
    No need to win the lottery, Jono and Helen will surely lead the charge!
    well ... if they're buying I'll go grab a place to sit!

    reckon they'll grab some potato wedges with some tomato sauce too

    :-)

  41. #41
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Whoops, meant Terry not Helen! (maybe Helen too?)

    Cheers

    Brian

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Canon have many full frame cameras on which that 100/2.8 would work.

    Nikon have a few macro lenses that reach 1:1 (105, 60). You can also compare the prices.

    Sony have a 30mm/2.8 for $199.

    IS isn't useful for "macro" distances. Canon's superlative true macro 65mm MP-E, does not even have auto focus and for good reason.

    $900/- for a slow lens that will not offer movements, isn't that attractive, regardless of the name. Leica aren't exactly known for their macro lenses, are they?

    Your example of "forget me not" flower isn't a macro (it is more like 1:10 magnification or so) so is the dp rev gallery pics, though your sample is an infinitely better shot, shot under better light and nicely composed.

    Light and composition: who needs such trivia for "reviews"?
    Whoa!

    I agree with most of your points but "Leica isn't really known for their macro." Say what! The Leica Apo Macro 100 2.8 is generally acknowledged as perhaps the best macro ever for 35mm work!

    woody

  43. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Has anyone here tried the Pentax-DA Limited 35mm macro on the m4/3ds cameras?

  44. #44
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    The Leica Apo Macro 100 2.8 is generally acknowledged as perhaps the best macro ever for 35mm work!
    I'll second this...a fantastic lens. The 60mm Macro is also superb...

  45. #45
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    Whoa!

    I agree with most of your points but "Leica isn't really known for their macro." Say what! The Leica Apo Macro 100 2.8 is generally acknowledged as perhaps the best macro ever for 35mm work!

    woody
    That is a key, Woody. 35mm work. We are talking about 1/4th area sensor.

    It is a fabulous design. Very pricey but compared to the PanaLeica, looks like a bargain.

  46. #46
    gjhzyy
    Guest

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    The picture is beautiful.

  47. #47
    Coveted Pixel
    Guest

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    I'm with Jono here and still plan to order this lens. I think people have overreacted. One of the great things for me between the Panny bodies and these lenses is to be able to AF with a very small AF point (remember you can make the focus box very small) and move that point.

    There is a lot of noise and negativity on DPReview as well. Here is a post from Andy Westlake the reviewer:

    "OK this is getting a bit silly now. The 45/2.8 isn't mediocre optically - it may not be sharpest in class but it's far from the worst we've seen, and it has no distortion, minimal CA, insignficant vignetting and really pleasant bokeh. There's a lot more to a lens than just sharpness.
    Anyway I'm willing to be refuted on this, so here's a challenge. There are 30 full res samples in the gallery, and probably another 5 linked in the review text. Please tell me which of these are limited by the lens's optical mediocrity, and how. Thanks."


    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=33440226

    Thanks for the link, I read that post by Andy. That was very funny, I enjoyed that quite a bit. Strange that he got so defensive about all the "silly" replies about his review, when in his own words he was "underwhelmed" by the lens, and barely could muster up much enthusiasm for the lens.

    He says that the lens is not optically at the top of the class, but is competent. Then gets upset if people say "mediocre"? I'm sorry, I thought mediocre was an acceptable description of good, not great, so-so.

    He says that most people MF for macro anyway, but then the focus by wire of the lens was a complete letdown combined that there is no distance scale.

    Then he says it's not compelling enough to justify the price, (which MOST of the posts in that thread were referencing) Then he wonders where all the negativity came from?? Then to his defense, he points to an image gallery of, well, sloppy images, (I've seen infinitely better in this forum from you folks with the 14-45 kit and the new 20).

  48. #48
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    Coveted Pixel, The point is that you buy the lens, however good/bad it is.

    Plunk down the money..make the "review" worth the while.

  49. #49
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    It was a shame Andy had to go into defensive mode - but there are some very disappointed Leica fans in that thread... and his balanced review probably wasn't intended to fuel such rage

    At least those who do plonk down the cash are doing so from an informed position - no false expectations.

    Cheers

    Brian

  50. #50
    Member slau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AB, Canada
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Panny Leica 45 f/2.8 review up....

    The 45f2.8 is definitely light, small and AF very fast, especially for a marco lens. Can't comment on the IQ as I haven't done any real world shots with this lens, that was just acquired by my shooting buddy two days ago.

    If you are considering just the functionality of the 45f2.8, it is miles ahead of the Olympus 50f2 macro, which is relatively huge/heavy, needs an adapter and no AF. My friend probably will sell his Olympus 50f2 now after he uses his 45f2.8 a bit more. He is currently using the new lens on either his G1 or GF1.

    Is it expensive or is it worth the money? This is so different from person to person, and is highly personal.
    Stephen Lau
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    http://www.pbase.com/stephenl

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •