Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 30 mm f/3.5 Macro review - Vignetting

Have you rated your lenses yet?

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 30 mm f/3.5 Macro

18 December 2016

Arkadiusz Olech

8. Vignetting

Let’s see how the tested lens performs in this category both for JPEG and RAW files developed by independent software.

E-PL1, JPEG, f/3.5	E-PL1, RAW, f/3.5

E-PL1, JPEG, f/4.0	E-PL1, RAW, f/4.0

E-PL1, JPEG, f/5.6	E-PL1, RAW, f/5.6

For JPEG files at the maximum relative aperture the vignetting reaches 29% (−0.98 EV) and is just 1% higher (−1.03 EV) for RAW files. When you close the aperture to f/4.0 the vignetting level decreases to 21% (−0.67 EV) for JPEG files and to 23% (−0.77 EV) for RAWs. Problems with that aberration end by f/5.6 where for JPEGs you still have to take into account a brightness loss of 10% (−0.30 EV), and for the RAW files that value is a bit higher, amounting to 12% (−0.39 EV).

Please Support Us

If 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.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - advertisement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We also checked the vignetting performance with the help of the Olympus O-MD E-M5 Mark II. In the case of that camera the results were by 1-3 % higher than those we got with the lens attached to the E-PL1. On the one hand the difference might be due to different build of pixels and “microlenses” of particular camera sensors. On the other hand those 1-3% of discrepancies are the border value of our margin of error.