Venus Optics LAOWA Argus 25 mm f/0.95 MFT
7. Coma, astigmatism and bokeh
The fact that the performance of the Argus is much closer to the performance of the Olympus than that of the Voigtlander was a very pleasant surprise. Coma is perhaps not negligible, because slight deformations of a diode can be noticed, but definitely its level cannot be called high. It's rather on the borderline between low and medium values. Taking into account the aperture of the tested lens, it deserves to be praised.
| E-M5 II, f/0.95, center | E-M5 II, f/0.95, Corner |
|
|
| E-M5 II, f/1.4, center | E-M5 II, f/1.4, Corner |
|
|
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. |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Astigmatism, understood as an average difference between horizontal and vertical MTF50 function values, amounted here to 7.6%. It's a moderate value, the Argus fares here almost as well as the Nokton and noticeably better than the Olympus.
Appearance of out-of-focus images is very pleasing to the eye but not as nice as you should expect from an f/0.95 standard lens. Light spread in the circles is not perfectly even, with a slight trace of onion ring bokeh. What's more, mechanical vignetting makes itself felt even on stopping down the aperture to 2 EV – a rare thing for such a small sensor as the Micro 4/3.
| E-M5 II, f/0.95, center | E-M5 II, f/0.95, Corner |
|
|
| E-M5 II, f/1.4, center | E-M5 II, f/1.4, Corner |
|
|
| E-M5 II, f/2.0, center | E-M5 II, f/2.0, Corner |
|
|
