Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 40-150 mm f/2.8 ED PRO
8. Vignetting
| E-PL1, JPEG, 40 mm, f/2.8 | E-PL1, JPEG, 40 mm, f/4.0 |
|
|
| E-PL1, JPEG, 90 mm, f/2.8 | E-PL1, JPEG, 90 mm, f/4.0 |
|
|
| E-PL1, JPEG, 150 mm, f/2.8 | E-PL1, JPEG, 3150 mm, f/4.0 |
|
|
| E-PL1, JPEG, 210 mm (TC), f/4.0 | E-PL1, JPEG, 210 mm (TC), f/5.6 |
|
|
At shorter focal lengths the tested lens has no vignetting-related problems whatsoever. The combination of 40 mm and the f/2.8 aperture means that you lose 19% (−0.62 EV) of brightness in the frame corners; that aberration becomes completely imperceptible on stopping down the aperture to f/4.0 where the value, measured by us, amounted to just 3% (−0.08 EV).
Please Support UsIf you enjoy our reviews and articles, and you want us to continue our work please, support our website by donating through PayPal. The funds are going to be used for paying our editorial team, renting servers, and equipping our testing studio; only that way we will be able to continue providing you interesting content for free. |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A very similar situation can be observed at 90 mm. At the maximum relative aperture you must take into account the vignetting of 17% (−0.54 EV) which decreases to just 2% (−0.07 EV) on stopping down the lens to f/4.0.
If you want to notice the vignetting you have to use the maximum focal length. In its case by f/2.8 the light fall-off in the corners amounts to 28% (−0.94 EV) and it decreases to 6% (−0.17 EV) if you employ the f/4.0 relative aperture.
After attaching the teleconverter the situation improves. At the maximum relative aperture which, in that case, amounts to f/4.0 the vignetting is just 14% (−0.44 EV) and then it decreases to a quite symbolic level of 1% (−0.02 EV) by f/5.6.
Values we got for RAW files were higher by just 1-3%; it was connected to a slight cropping of JPEG images as a way of distortion correction.
 |
 |
 |
 |
