The portrait lenses now. These are not a perfect match, the Oly being a 90mm equivalent, but I chose to leave the tripod where it was as I am comparing the specific lenses head to head, not their effective magnifications.
Colours are consistent again. Not sure I love the G9II with these lenses, but that is the camera (settings), not the glass.
The difference in the effective focal lengths is evident, the depth of field still stronger in effect on the shorter full frame, but once again, I am responding positively to the less dramatic drop off of the MFT lens, its ability to invisibly transition and a less flat look.
I guess what I am discovering personally is, f1.8 on a full frame lens has its uses, but at some time in the past, I just grew tired of the look and if I do want that look, I probably want it even more powerfully, like a 150 at f2.8 maximising compression and shallow depth.
This one is interesting. At the same aperture, I assumed there would be a massive difference as before, but the 45mm still has enough of the good stuff, plenty of gorgeous blurring, again with that harmonious transition.
Photography means a lot of different things to different people.
Tests like this help us understand not only a pair of similar but different lens trios in a (semi) controlled space, but also shines a light on our own likes and awarenesses.
My tolerance for gimmicks, forced looks based on exaggerated lens perspective, compression or shallow depth of field is waning, it probably came to a head some time around 2000 to be honest. My need these days is for the process to become invisible, for it to be a supporting of the way I see life, not the excuse to take the image, or the sole creative driver.
I would once take images driven purely by the excitement of learning new gear and techniques, but now I just need it to be my eyes and my memory without an obvious opinion added. I will admit video is for me more in that past space, which may explain why I keep going with it.
I have three excellent full frame primes that do several jobs more than well enough, but their main trick, using their format and maximum lens aperture are rarely appealing.
They are problem solvers, they can remove ugly backgrounds, shoot in the scarcest of light, separate a nearly impossible to separate subject from it’s surrounds. Sometimes they are even exemplars of their craft.
The Olympus lenses like most lenses in the MFT format, are more than that. They are always useable without panicky mental DOF math, always harmonious with my way of seeing and photographing the world (and the same with video capture?), but also fully capable of providing depth control.
I find myself less impressed with super fast aperture lenses these days, unless they have the benefit of the MFT or APS-c format and I find myself suspicious of the compromises made to achieve them. In video in particular, I find f4 on a full frame (2.8 APS-c/Super 35 or f2 MFT) is about perfect, but I will give it to the Olympus designers, these super fast primes are more than “just” fast glass.
MFT to me is not a choice driven by size or price as much as a preference for it’s way of seeing. It throws few moments of technical fear in my face while I work and just gets the job done without tell tale signs of the process.
For fun I did a couple of closeups below, the Magenta adjusted Oly file on the left.
