kkdanamatt
Well-known
I've been shooting pictures for more than 50 years, but I just got my first digital camera, an Epson RD-1 from a fellow RFF'r across the pond. Oh, I've taken thousands of digital pictures before this RD-1, but this is the first real digital camera that I can truly call my own. So I'm only a newbie to the RD-1. OK, got that out of the way.
I wanted to test some lenses for vignetting on the RD-1 as a comparison with shooting full frame film, because the frame edges are important to me, since I mainly shoot Tri-X with a 28mm lens (a Zeiss Biogon, BTW) on a Contax G-1.
I'm not Sean Reid or Erwin Puts, so please be kind to my primitive methodology. This is how I did it. I found a evenly illuminated off-white wall and shot from a distance of four feet with the 15 Heliar, the 21 Color-Skopar, the 40 Summicron-C, and the 50 Summicron-M. I shot all four lenses wide open, then at f/8, and then at the smallest aperture. Each photo is labeled with focal length and aperture.
Here is the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32030324@N06/
As you can see, the Leica 40 and 50 Summicrons show almost zero vignetting, while the C/V lenses vignette quite a bit. When I get some Zeiss and Leica extreme wide-angle lenses to try, I will repeat the same test. I also tested the C/V with Tri-X and they seem to be less prone to vignetting with film. I can't show the results from these tests because the negative scans are not visually accurate.
I would appreciate comments from those of you who have shot the C/V wides both on film and on the RD-1. Thanks.
I wanted to test some lenses for vignetting on the RD-1 as a comparison with shooting full frame film, because the frame edges are important to me, since I mainly shoot Tri-X with a 28mm lens (a Zeiss Biogon, BTW) on a Contax G-1.
I'm not Sean Reid or Erwin Puts, so please be kind to my primitive methodology. This is how I did it. I found a evenly illuminated off-white wall and shot from a distance of four feet with the 15 Heliar, the 21 Color-Skopar, the 40 Summicron-C, and the 50 Summicron-M. I shot all four lenses wide open, then at f/8, and then at the smallest aperture. Each photo is labeled with focal length and aperture.
Here is the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32030324@N06/
As you can see, the Leica 40 and 50 Summicrons show almost zero vignetting, while the C/V lenses vignette quite a bit. When I get some Zeiss and Leica extreme wide-angle lenses to try, I will repeat the same test. I also tested the C/V with Tri-X and they seem to be less prone to vignetting with film. I can't show the results from these tests because the negative scans are not visually accurate.
I would appreciate comments from those of you who have shot the C/V wides both on film and on the RD-1. Thanks.
gliderbee
Well-known
I think your testprocedure is ok, but IMHO, it makes no sense comparing vignetting on wide-angle lenses (15-28mm) with near "normal" lenses (40mm and above). Wide-angles will almost always show more vignetting.
I think your conclusion up till now should be "wide-angles vignette more then normal lenses"; as you phrased it now, it sounds like there's a difference between brands. Maybe there indeed is, but your test doesn't show this, while your conclusion more or less implies it (or I'm too sensitive
).
Stefan.
I think your conclusion up till now should be "wide-angles vignette more then normal lenses"; as you phrased it now, it sounds like there's a difference between brands. Maybe there indeed is, but your test doesn't show this, while your conclusion more or less implies it (or I'm too sensitive
Stefan.
I've been shooting pictures for more than 50 years, but I just got my first digital camera, an Epson RD-1 from a fellow RFF'r across the pond. Oh, I've taken thousands of digital pictures before this RD-1, but this is the first real digital camera that I can truly call my own. So I'm only a newbie to the RD-1. OK, got that out of the way.
I wanted to test some lenses for vignetting on the RD-1 as a comparison with shooting full frame film, because the frame edges are important to me, since I mainly shoot Tri-X with a 28mm lens (a Zeiss Biogon, BTW) on a Contax G-1.
I'm not Sean Reid or Erwin Puts, so please be kind to my primitive methodology. This is how I did it. I found a evenly illuminated off-white wall and shot from a distance of four feet with the 15 Heliar, the 21 Color-Skopar, the 40 Summicron-C, and the 50 Summicron-M. I shot all four lenses wide open, then at f/8, and then at the smallest aperture. Each photo is labeled with focal length and aperture.
Here is the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32030324@N06/
As you can see, the Leica 40 and 50 Summicrons show almost zero vignetting, while the C/V lenses vignette quite a bit. When I get some Zeiss and Leica extreme wide-angle lenses to try, I will repeat the same test. I also tested the C/V with Tri-X and they seem to be less prone to vignetting with film. I can't show the results from these tests because the negative scans are not visually accurate.
I would appreciate comments from those of you who have shot the C/V wides both on film and on the RD-1. Thanks.
Last edited:
LCT
ex-newbie
CV 15 and 21 vignette a lot on the R-D1.
kkdanamatt
Well-known
I think your testprocedure is ok, but IMHO, it makes no sense comparing vignetting on wide-angle lenses (15-28mm) with near "normal" lenses (40mm and above). Wide-angles will almost always show more vignetting.
I think your conclusion up till now should be "wide-angles vignette more then normal lenses"; as you phrased it now, it sounds like there's a difference between brands. Maybe there indeed is, but your test doesn't show this, while your conclusion more or less implies it (or I'm too sensitive).
Stefan.
Yes, Stefan. That's why I stated in my OP that I will repeat the test when I get some Zeiss and Leitz wide angles. What concerns and bothers me is that the C/V lenses vignette more on the reduced-sized sensor of the RD-1 than they do with 35mm full frame film.
Share: