This blog is a user's perspective on the Micro Four Thirds camera system. Read more ...

Lens Buyer's Guide. Panasonic GH4 review.

My lens reviews: Olympus 9mm f/8 fisheye, Lumix G 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6, Leica 25mm f/1.4, Lumix X 12-35mm f/2.8, Lumix X 35-100mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm f/2.8, Sigma 19mm f/2.8, Lumix X PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6, Lumix X PZ 45-175mm f/4-5.6, Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8, Panasonic Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6, Panasonic Leica Lumix DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro, Panasonic Lumix G 45-200mm f/4-5.6, Panasonic Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 pancake, Panasonic Lumix G 14mm f/2.5 pancake, Panasonic Lumix G HD 14-140mm f/4-5.8, Panasonic Lumix G HD 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6, Panasonic Lumix G 8mm f/3.5 fisheye, Lumix G 7-14mm f/4, Samyang 7.5mm f/3.5 fisheye, Tokina 300mm f/6.3 mirror reflex tele, Lensbaby 5.8mm f/3.5 circular fisheye lens
The blog contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sunday 20 November 2011

Olympus 45mm f/1.8 review

The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm f/1.8 is a much anticipated lens. When it arrived, it closed one of the major gaps in the Micro Four Thirds lens lineup: The portrait prime lens.


The lens is fairly compact, with a 37mm front lens thread, and is significantly smaller than the other 45mm prime lens, the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 1:1 macro lens. They are shown below:

LensPanasonic 45mm f/2.8 macroOlympus 45mm f/1.8
AnnouncedSept 2nd, 2009June 30th, 2011
Lens elements/groups14/109/8
Minimum focus0.15m0.50m
Filter thread46mm37mm
Hood includedYesNo
Optical Image StabilizationYesNo

Sadly, the lens does not come with a hood. You can buy a hood from Olympus, which is rather expensive, and fits into the bayonet threads under the silver front ring. I chose to buy a collapsible rubber hood with a 37mm screw thread. It cost around US$12 including shipment from China. In the picture below, I have removed the silver ring, revealing the black bayonet mount, and mounted the third party hood:

As far as I can tell, the lens itself is constructed out of plastic materials, has a metal mount, and has polished metal exterior. I know this is a subjective thing, but my opinion is that the appearance is very cheesy. I would have preferred a matte black plastic exterior, which I think is better. I'm looking into ways of making the lens less obtrusive, perhaps using black electrical tape to cover the metal surfaces is a good idea?


Just like most Micro Four Thirds lenses, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 has internal focus. This means that there are no moving mechanisms on the outside, beyond the focus ring, and the lens feels solid. This is in contrary to the Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens, which has a traditional focus mechanism which moves the entire lens assembly back and forth, making the focus relatively noisy and slow.

The focus ring moves smoothly, and feels like good quality. I could have wished for a rubberized focus ring, though, as the metal is not as ergonomic to use. But I don't see myself using the focus ring a lot anyway, as the autofocus works well.

The autofocus is very fast, and virtually noiseless. I have compared the focus speed with the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 macro lens on a Panasonic GH2 camera, and found that in generous lightning, the Olympus lens focused a tad bit faster. In low light, though, the Panasonic lens focused faster, which surprised me.

The focus timings of the Olympus lens in good light are a little bit slower than the kit zoom lenses. See the comparison here for some reference numbers. However, keep in mind that the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 requires a lot more focus accuracy than a kit zoom lens at 42mm f/5.6, due to the much larger aperture. Considering this, I think the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 focus timings are very respectable.

When it comes to autofocus performance during video recording, I've found the lens to be comparable with the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8, which is to say, not very good. With a moving scene, it can take some seconds before the lens regains focus during video capture, which can be very annoying. But I suspect this is much due to the camera, and that future advances in CDAF and image processing will make continuous autofocus better in time.

The minimum focus distance is 0.5m. While this does not sound very impressive, when comparing with other portrait lenses, it is in fact rather good. The classic 85mm f/1.2-1.8 portrait lenses generally have a close focusing distance of 0.8-0.9m. If used for a headshot portrait, this makes sense, since around 1 meter is the distance needed to fill the head into the frame at this field of view. Nikon's newly released Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G portrait prime lens has a close focusing distance of 0.8m, which is not as good as the Olympus lens.

Image stabilization

The lens features no optical image stabilization at all, just like all other Olympus lenses. When used on an Olympus camera, you get the sensor shift image stabilization, which is effective for stills capture. During video capture, though, there is only digital image stabilization available, which I am told does not work too well.

On the other hand, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 camera, launched early 2012, does provide sensor shift image stabilization during video recording.  Using this technology, perhaps this lens can be useful for video on newer Olympus cameras.

On a Panasonic camera, there is no image stabilization at all. So for still images, you should try to use a shutter speed of 1/100s or faster to be fairly sure to avoid camera shake when handholding the camera. For video recording on Panasonic cameras, there is no image stabilization available, and it is quite simply difficult to handhold the camera stably during video capture.

In this example, I have recorded a video with the Panasonic GH2 and the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens. Believe it or not, but I am doing my best to hold the camera stably, holding the viewfinder towards my eye. To my defense, I can say that I had just gotten off my bicycle during my daily commute to work, which could explain my somewhat shaky hands:

Image Quality

I have made some image quality comparisons with the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 (PL45) here. It must be said that all the comparisons are not optimal, since the focus point is not always exactly the same. However, I think this shows that the Olympus lens does not have any significant vignetting.

The Olympus lens does, however, have some Chromatic Aberration (CA) artifacts when the aperture is larger than f/2.8. I also think that the PL45 performs better at f/2.8 in terms of image quality, although the differences are small.

I have tried to do another image quality comparison. To avoid the problem of different focus distances, I chose a subject that was fairly flat, a car registration plate. I focused on the "P" in both cases. The focus distance is about 1 meter, which corresponds to a headshot portrait distance for this focal length. Here is the whole scene, the images are rescaled and sharpened:

PL45 @ f/2.8
Olympus 45 @ f/1.8

Looking at 100% crops to better evaluate the sharpness, I find this:

From the left middle part:

From the right hand lower corner:

In this comparison, it looks like the sharpness is comparable in the centre of the image, while the PL45 performs somewhat worse in the corner. I would like to add that this comparison is not as challenging for the lenses as my previous one was. The examples with trees rendered against a bright sky are much more challenging for the lenses, due to the high contrast.

All in all, I think the image quality is quite good. There is little vignetting, some CAs at apertures larger than f/2.8, and the sharpness is quite respectable for a large aperture lens.


My sharpness comparison also included some bokeh examples. As far as I can see, the lens does not have any problems with the bokeh. It renders the background nicely blurred when it is out of focus, at all apertures. And out of focus highlights are even and rounded.

One thing to look out for, though, is that the aperture diaphragm blades are not as rounded as on the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 1:1 macro lens. This means that when stopped down, the out of focus highlights get a slightly more jagged edge.

Here is yet another bokeh study, compared with the Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 and Sigma 30mm f/2.8 lenses.

Example image

Here is an example image:

I used the Panasonic GH2, and the image parameters are: ISO 160, f/2, 1/10s. I focused on the front wheel. The camera was handhold, without any support. How come the image is sharp, with a shutter speed of 1/10s? Because I also used the onboard camera flash. The flash is very quick, and freezes all movement. However, it has a fairly short effective distance, so only the front part of the truck is lit by the flash. The rear part is lit by ambient light, and the tail lights from a passing car.

Since the rear part of the car is out of focus anyway, a bit of blurring due to camera shake during the 1/10s shutter time doesn't matter.

Compared with the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 1:1 macro

So, which 45mm prime lens should you get? The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm f/1.8 (MZD45) or the Panasonic-Leica 45mm f/2.8 1:1 macro (PL45)? If you want to take macro images, there is only one choice, the PL45. However, if you are on a tighter budget for a macro lens, you could also consider the Olympus 35mm f/3.5 1:1 macro lens (Four Thirds standard, not Micro Four Thirds). For this lens, you will also need an adapter, e.g., the Panasonic DMW-MA1 or the Olympus MMF1/MMF2. This combination will have poor autofocus performance on Micro Four Thirds cameras, but some people prefer manual focus for macro use anyway.

If you are looking for a traditional portrait prime lens capable of selective focus and good bokeh qualities, I think the MZD45 makes the most sense, since it has the largest aperture. However, I personally think that the f/2.8 aperture of the PL45 lens is sufficient for a portrait, given that you can plan the background a bit. So either lens should get the job done most of the time, in my opinion.

For video use, the Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) of the PL45 comes handy. Holding a 45mm lens stably while recording video is not easy, and the OIS does give some help. So if you intend to use the lens for video as well, you may want to consider buying the most expensive of the two, the PL45.


This lens comes with a fairly reasonable price tag, especially in Europe, which makes it a must buy lens for people interested in portrait photography and selective focus.

The image quality is good, and the focus speed is fast. The lens is not so well suited for video recording, due to the lack of optical image stabilization. Also, when recording videos, it can be a good idea to pre-focus, and then turn off autofocus before starting the recording. The continuous autofocus performance during video recording is not so good, especially in poor lightning.

Alternative lenses

A low cost alternative to the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is the Sigma 60mm f/2.8. It is considered a very sharp lens, and it has a nice, smooth bokeh. See my test of the lens here.

In the other end of the cost scale, you have the Olympus 75mm f/1.8, which is often considered one of the sharpest Micro Four Thirds lenses. For a portrait lens, it is quite long, meaning that you get a generous working distance of about 2 meters.

And if you want the very best, go for the Lumix-Leica 42.5mm f/1.2. It has an impressively large aperture of f/1.2, allowing for a very thin depth of focus (DoF), blurring the background effectively. Also, the lens features optical image stabilization, making it easier to hand hold, also while recording video.


  1. Really nice article!! Thank you, i upgraded my e-p3 with the 12mm 25mm and 45mm now i'm done!! Been shooting everywhere!! Here are some samples full size with all exif data on most of them.

    Greetz. Tim.

  2. I sent mine back. Great lens, but since I already have the Oly 50mm F2 macro and a legacy Nikkor 56mm F1.4 I decided I had most of my "bases covered" as we say in North America. I found in my own experiments the the new Oly 45 1.8 was equal to the old 50mm macro when shot at F2, F4 and F8. Center and corners seemed to be equal, even when viewed at 3:1. (The 45 year old Nikkor was definitely softer on the edges and very very slightly softer in center which is not noticable in prints except in corners but this makes it a good portrait or candid lens at 116mm-effective)

  3. I forgot to mention that I liked your review very much.

  4. This Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is a very, very nice lens. Small, lightweight and very sharp. Totally usable wide open at f/1.8 and excellent at f/2.8 and smaller. Great for isolating a subject. The autofocus is swift and silent. I really can't find anything wrong with this lens. And then there's the attractive price. A nice lens to have in your bag.

  5. Would you change your GH2 for OM-D E-M5?

    1. I don't think so. The GH2 has a better grip, and, generally better ergonomics. The video specs of the GH2 are also better.

      It would be interesting to have a camera with in-body image stabilization (IBIS), that also works during video. But for the moment, I am happy with the GH2.

  6. My priority is to have an excellent hybrid system.
    I don't want to have a separate camera and a camcorder.
    I'm shoot still and video with the same frequency.
    I'm really in doubt whether to continue with M43.
    I have a GH2 with: Lumix 14mm, 20mm, 14-140mm and some Canon FD.
    I do not like the quality of my photos, they are not sharp like those taken with the Canon and Nikon DSLR with the good lenses.
    Don't know if I invest more in better lenses M43, like: Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and 45mm f/2.8 Leica-Panasonic 1:1 macro lens, and 100-300mm or change everything for a Canon or Nikon and start lenses from scratch. Or maybe to wait for GH3.
    What do you think for me?

    1. For me personally, I think that my images became much sharper after I went to Micro Four Thirds. I came from Pentax, and har the K10D, which is considered a good camera. I also had some premium lenses.

      However, the Lumix G HD 14-140mm isn't really the most sharp lens. I know that this lens is generally considered very sharp, but I have been quite disappointed with the quality from it at 14mm (my study here), and in the longer end.

      Generally, I find the basic kit zoom (Lumix G 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6) to give better results in terms of sharpness.

      I don't think the GH3 will give you any sharper photos. This is mostly dependent on the lenses. Although you could consider to adjust the "sharpening" parameter in your GH2 camera, which could give the out of camera JPEGs a sharper appearance.

      Both 45mm lenses are good, but if you don't need macro or video, I would recommend that you go for the Olympus 45mm f/1.8.

      The Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6 is a very good tele zoom lens, in my opinion, and gives very good value for money. I doubt you would find an equally good lens with a comparable reach for Nikon or Canon at this price.

    2. I could keep my 14mm, 20mm, sell my 14-140mm and buy the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6 but while I also shoot video the MEGA O.I.S. is crucial for me and 100-300mm is to far for video.
      Also I tend to avoid shoot with lenses without I.S because I shoot mostly handheld and indoor, so the 14-140mm range with I.S is nice for me as range but not sharpness.

    3. The 14-140mm lens is still good for video. The sharpness is not always good enough for photos, but for videos, I don't see that as a problem. So if I were you, I would keep the 14-140mm for video use. The OIS makes it quite useful.

  7. Thank you for your comments. I think there is no better info about m43 than your blog. Olympus and Panasonic should pay for the work you do for m43.

  8. I was wondering: The leica macro costs $669.00 at BH and it has macro and I.S. The Zuiko costs $399.00 but not good for video and no macro.
    I could keep my 14mm, buy 100-300mm and Leica 45mm macro and sell my 14-140mm. So I could own a good line for video and still sharpness.
    What do you think?

    1. Well, with that setup, I think you may miss a "normal zoom". I still think you should keep the 14-140mm lens, as it is very useful for video, and a good lens to keep on the camera as a "walk around lens".

      The 45mm macro lens is expensive, and not that useful for "general photography".

      The 100-300mm lens is a good one, but keep in mind that it is a specialized very long tele zoom, only useful for special situations when you want to record something very far away, e.g., wildlife, birds, sports, and so on.

  9. That whitewall tire made me do a double take. Having grown up in the later stages of the whitewall tire era in the US - the 50s - I associate them with 'dressy' luxury sedans. There is nothing inherently wrong with dressing up a vintage American pick up with whitewalls - especially in a location where such a vehicle is an exotic import. But it sure got my attention! I'm pretty certain there would have been Americans who have put whitewalls on their pickups, but I don't think it is common! All of which brings me to say that the flash lighting on the wheel emphasizes the tire wonderfully.

    I've just paid my dues to join the m43 club by ordering an Olympus EPL1 with the VF2. I love my Canon 600D but I only have it with me when I purposely go out to take pictures, so I took the plunge and am trying m43. As an older photographer who shot mostly with the original Nikon F I always accepted that extra size and weight were the price paid for reflex viewing. I also accepted that I never would be able to combine the small size and handling of my Leica IIIC with a viewfinder that gave the feel of the composition the way a reflex camera does. So in my mind the Olympus 45mm f1.8 is like the old 90mm Leitz short telephotos with the possibility of reflex viewing. I think this is going to be fun!

    I think you strike a good balance between providing technical information and engaging writing as an enthusiast.

  10. Your comments on Image stabilisation are wrong. All Olympus Pen bodies have sensor-shift IS.

    You forget that the Panasonic is more expensive, at £550-£600, than the Olympus at £230-£250.

    Using any lens too close to the subject of a portrait shot is liable to distort the proportions and balance of the face. Shooting at 1 metre from the subject is irrelevant to portrait work.

  11. I think this comparison is quite lacking...try it on an EM5. The autofocus is blazing fast, smother, and better bokeh- besides much better color rendering than the Lumix. The video is quite amazing too- as fluid as a professional camera with 5 Axis stabilization. However, I do nto buy cameras for video- you guys wanna go ahead and burn out your sensors- by all means do so. I'll buy a $300 hd camcorder for that use.

  12. check this out with kit lens on an EM5..colors, sharpness, spectacular. I could never get the colors right on Nikon, Canon, or Sony. had an old E-500 and 520 and colors superb- ISO sucked- but this thing. Amazing.!i=1954172699&k=RrVt6XW

  13. Where did you get that rubber hood? And can you still equip it with the plastic ring on?

    1. You can buy the hood on Ebay. Just search for "37mm collapsible rubber hood".

      You can leave the front plastic ring on, I think. The rubber hood screws into the front lens threads.