LensTip.com

Lens review

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO

29 January 2019
Arkadiusz Olech

8. Vignetting

Let’s glance at thumbnails below in order to assess the vignetting performance of the tested lens; they were obtained from JPEG files produced with the help of the Olympus O-MD E-M5 Mark II.

Olympus E-M5 II, JPEG, f/1.2 Olympus E-M5 II, JPEG, f/1.4
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting
Olympus E-M5 II, JPEG, f/2.0 Olympus E-M5 II, JPEG, f/2.8
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting


At the maximum relative aperture the vignetting reaches 33% (−1.14 EV). For this angle of view and aperture fastness, it is not a result you should criticize, especially that by f/1.4 and f/2.0 the aberration decreases to 28% (−0.93 EV) and 19% (−0.60 EV) respectively. By f/2.8 and f/4.0 apertures the problem disappears practically completely because we got the following light fall-off values: 13% (−0.42 EV) and 8% (−0.26 EV) respectively.


Please Support Us

The coronavirus crisis has been adversely affecting many businesses and, sad but true, ours is not an exception. Despite that difficult situation we would like to preserve continuity and high quality of publications available on all our websites. Still, we are now aware it might be impossible without additional financial help. That's why we would like to ask all those who visit, read, and care about Optyczne.pl, LensTip.com i Allbinos.com for support - it's enough you send us a small sum of money via PayPal. If a lot people decide to support our websites we think we'll stand a chance and survive next months without any lasting harm. We count on your support and understanding, stay safe and be healthy.

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

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

As the optics of the Olympus 1.2/17 is burdened with significant distortion that aberration is corrected by the software of the camera and then, while transforming images to JPEG format, they have to be cropped. The operation influences vignetting so it is worth checking how that aberration looks in non-modified RAW files – appropriate thumbnails can be found below.

Olympus E-M5 II, RAW, f/1.2 Olympus E-M5 II, RAW, f/1.4
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting
Olympus E-M5 II, RAW, f/2.0 Olympus E-M5 II, RAW, f/2.8
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting


In this case vignetting is a bit higher but still doesn’t deserve to be criticized, especially when you take into account the increased angle of view. By f/1.2 the brightness loss in frame corners amounts to 37% (−1.32 EV), by f/1.4 it decreases to 31% (−1.09 EV), and by f/2.0 it drops to 24% (−0.80 EV). Further stopping down the aperture makes vignetting completely harmless – by f/2.8 it is 21% (−0.67 EV), by f/4.0 it reaches 16% (−0.49 EV), and by f/5.6 it becomes practically imperceptible (10% and −0.32 EV).

It’s also worth adding that the results, described here, compare very favourably to the results of the rivals of the tested lens. For example the Canon EF 35 mm f/2 IS USM had 66% of vignetting, and in the case of the Fujinon XF 23 mm f/1.4 R the brightness loss amounted to 50%.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II, JPEG, f/1.2
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II, RAW, f/1.2
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 17 mm f/1.2 PRO - Vignetting