Need some fast stuff there.... You're stock full of slow zooms. Both the 45/2.8 and 45/1.8 are stellar lenses. The 45/1.8 is the better optic overall, IMO, but both do a great job.
I shoot with strobes or a tripod or broad daylight.
If I'm street shooting, I'll probably just use my NEX-7 and ZA 24 Zeiss F1.8.
I'm interested in the Panny 45mm F2.8 Leica simply because it's one of the least expensive almost devoid of any bokeh CA lenses out there. Its sharpness at least measured by Lenstip was also literally off their chart.
Honestly, the entire reason I got the E-M5 was for a compact wide angle that can take a filter. Also, I love the DRAMA filter. I used it a lot back in the day when I still shot MFT.
The Panny 14-45mm besides having a sterling reputation backed up by test charts on most sites, has a surprisingly high magnification ratio of 1:3. I may just stick with that and not pick up the Panny Leica if I find it sufficient for my needs.
20mm 1.7 is a good general use lens well worth $350ish and readily available. I'd add one of those as the first things I get.
Would fit nicely into a kit with a 9-18 and 45 2.8/1.8 for those times when you may not want to be stuck at f5.6 on the 9-18 and 40mm f4.5 is just way too tight/slow
Not sure what all your budgeting either but the 12mm f2.0 while perhaps overpriced at $799 is a fantastic lens for general photography as well. F2.0 paired with the IBIS really makes this an awesome combo for handheld night shots that would normally require a tripod. I cant wait to go back to downtown Charleston, SC with mine.
I would also suggest ordering a 25mm f1.4. B&H has them for $539 but like everywhere else are out of stock. Its a fantastic lens as well, and one that if you don't like can be sold for what, if not more than you paid for it.
EM-5, and m4/3 in general really needs good glass to show what it can do. It takes perfectly useful pics with slower zooms, but really shows its resolution with good prime lenses, not to mention letting you work at lower ISO settings, which again makes a pretty big difference in overall IQ,
I'm planning to run this concurrently with my NEX system. If there was a good 18-36mm equivalent lens on NEX, I probably would have not bought another MFT system.
On Nex, I have fast lenses with high ISO covered with my C3 and Nex-7. I have a Zeiss 24mm F1.8 and Contax G 45mm F2.
I may pick up a Oly 45mm F1.8 simply because it's so cheap and since selling my full frame Zeiss 85mm F1.4 ZA for my A850, I've had a hole there.
IMO, the Panny Leica 45mm F2.8 Macro is an optically superior lens but the Oly 45mm F1.8 has it's uses too.
FlyPenFly wrote:
If I'm street shooting, I'll probably just use my NEX-7 and ZA 24 Zeiss F1.8.
I'm going to be really interested to see if this statement holds. Not knocking the NEX7 at all, but just seems like so many people lately have all sold theirs since getting an EM-5, myself included.
The 45/2.8 does do nicely for watches. I know you've seen this before from the watch thread, but it bears repeating since that's what you want. This is with the GX1, though:
I recently acquired the E-M5, the 14/2.5 and the 25/1.4, but I've been undecided about the two 45mm lenses. I've been planning to wait for the upcoming 60/2.8 Macro before deciding...a bit longer, but weathersealed.
CVickery wrote:
I recently acquired the E-M5, the 14/2.5 and the 25/1.4, but I've been undecided about the two 45mm lenses. I've been planning to wait for the upcoming 60/2.8 Macro before deciding...a bit longer, but weathersealed.
Seems to be a simple question of if you need a macro lens or not. No point to pay $600+ for the 45mm f2.8 if you won't use its macro ability because otherwise its slower, slower to focus, not as sharp wide open and larger/heavier with an OIS system that will be of no use to use on the EM-5 than the tiny little $399 45mm 1.8 which is optically stellar and lightening fast in terms of AF.
What it is not however is a macro lens, so if you need a macro lens, then you can rule out the 45 1.8
What about IBIS to work in Video-Mode with adapted and non-native lenses??
IBIS works for Stills with adapted lenses.... why not video
Olympus needs to fix this issue first! There's many more people using and there are more adapted non-native lenses out there, than a single 20mm pancake.
And, native lens sales isn't the reason...since IBIS + Adapted lenses works with stills! And, this 20mm isn't even an Olympus lens! It's a Panasonic lens! So, I highly doubt Olympus' reason for not fixing IBIS-Video for adapted lenses isn't just to boost their native lens sales.
millsart wrote:
Seems to be a simple question of if you need a macro lens or not. No point to pay $600+ for the 45mm f2.8 if you won't use its macro ability because otherwise its slower, slower to focus, not as sharp wide open and larger/heavier with an OIS system that will be of no use to use on the EM-5 than the tiny little $399 45mm 1.8 which is optically stellar and lightening fast in terms of AF.
What it is not however is a macro lens, so if you need a macro lens, then you can rule out the 45 1.8...Show more →
I have MF macro lenses if I really want to get serious with macro, but an AF lens that can handle ~1:2 would be handy. I would prefer a bit of working distance so the 60/2.8 appeals. The lens also has a range limiter on the AF (plus over the 45/2.8 on AF speed).To top it off the rumours seem to be that the 60 will be priced more like the 45/1.8 than the premium lenses. We just need to actually have the lens available and see how the IQ works out
My guess is the Oly 60 weather sealed macro will be wonderful in sharpness and bokeh but I bet $20 it will have lots of LOCA Bokeh fringing just like the well regarded but flawed 100MP, Oly 50mm Macro, and just about any F2.8 or faster lens.
There are only a very few handful of close focus lenses that have very little or non-existant Loca: Leica 100mm F2.8 R APO Macro, Voigtlander 125mm APO, and the Panny Leica 45mm F2.8.
Loca matters a lot in product type macro photography where sometimes not all of the product might be in focus for stylistic reasons.
I agree the working distance of a 60mm lens would have been preferable. The Oly 45mm F1.8 is a very nice lens especially for the money but it doesn't play in the same league as the Panny Leica 45mm F2.8 ASPH.
Can you elaborate on this statement. I'm not disagreeing but still it would be nice if you could expand and perhaps show side by side images that illustrate. I realize that the peak resolution of the 45f2.8 is a bit higher but I've never seen very much Loca in images with the 45f1.8 (and I've looked for it) or is it something more abstract i.e, rendering or colour ?
FlyPenFly wrote:
I agree the working distance of a 60mm lens would have been preferable. The Oly 45mm F1.8 is a very nice lens especially for the money but it doesn't play in the same league as the Panny Leica 45mm F2.8 ASPH.
I think there are actually far more EM-5 users with the native 20mm f1.7, which is one of the most popular lenses for m4/3 due to its combination of compact size, affordable price, speed and the sheer fact its been out for several years. It is a lens that a good number of m4/3 users, especially EM-5 owners have in their kit (unless they instead prefer the 25mm 1.4)
Its a minority of users that 1) bought the EM-5 for the purpose of video and 2) of that minority bought it for the purpose of doing video with legacy lenses..
Now I agree it doesn't make sense why it works for stills but not video, and I do respect and and understand that this is an important feature for YOUR needs, but I simply don't think there are that many people out there that share your demands.
Look at this very thread for example, how much talk is there of using native lenses and still photography vs how many comments do you see talking about video work with legacy glass ??
You argument that there are far more m4/3 users shooting legacy glass than there are using the 20mm 1.7 I feel is just blatantly false. M4/3 probably has the highest percentage of native lenses users of any mirrorless format. There simply isn't that much gained by legacy glass on m4/3 due to limitations of the 2x crop factor and the fact the native glass selection is so good. Your going to find far more NEX owner shooting legacy glass.
I hope you get your wish and they give you (and others this feature) but be realistic and not surprised that they try to improve the performance of one of the single most popular native lenses in the entire m4/3 system first.
Edgar Maguyon wrote:
What about IBIS to work in Video-Mode with adapted and non-native lenses??
IBIS works for Stills with adapted lenses.... why not video
Olympus needs to fix this issue first! There's many more people using and there are more adapted non-native lenses out there, than a single 20mm pancake.
And, native lens sales isn't the reason...since IBIS + Adapted lenses works with stills! And, this 20mm isn't even an Olympus lens! It's a Panasonic lens! So, I highly doubt Olympus' reason for not fixing IBIS-Video for adapted lenses isn't just to boost their native lens sales.
I would like to know that too! I opted for the 45/1.8 over the 45/2.8. If you look at the PZ tests, there is really not a huge difference in the resolution (unless you compare it to the 25/1.4) and lateral CA is practically the same. What I like about the 45/1.8 is the extra speed and soft/creamy OOF/bokeh quality when shot wide open. Additionally the 9-bladed aperture gives you a very neutral and rounded blur circles. This is quite evident in Jordan's shot of his daughter here:
you2 wrote:
Can you elaborate on this statement. I'm not disagreeing but still it would be nice if you could expand and perhaps show side by side images that illustrate. I realize that the peak resolution of the 45f2.8 is a bit higher but I've never seen very much Loca in images with the 45f1.8 (and I've looked for it) or is it something more abstract i.e, rendering or colour ?
Both the 45/2.8 and 45/1.8 are stellar lenses. The 45/1.8 is the better optic overall, IMO, but both do a great job. 
??
