Vignetting?

P

pcfranchina

Well-known
Local time
2:44 PM
Joined
Oct 31, 2005
Messages
315
Location
NYC
View My Gallery
Last edited:
I have not seen vingetting with the 40 and a standard single filter (Hoya or Tiffen, the thread pitch on a B+W I tried was not correct for the lens). Light fall off is common with small rangfinder lenses at wide open apertures (does not appear you were shooting at f/1.4 though). May be an issue with the light on that day (angle of light source).


A good test is to shoot a featureless wall/sky with the filter on and off at a few different aperture settings. This would demonstrate any vignetting and also demonstrate the fall off effect at wide apertures.
 
I also remember the post about the defective lens but I do know that when checked for there will be some light falloff at wide apertures in these lenses, there basically has to be given the compactness of the lens and the likely size of it's image circle.

The fall off improves (less noticable ) at smaller apertures, should not be that evident at f/16. Images that have detail in the corners are harder to evaluate for fall off. Also images that have been optically printed (enlarger) have some degree of compensation for the fall off as the edges of the negative are thinner thanthe center and that tends to (in some images) counter some of the fall off effect. Scanned negatives will not "benefit" from this and will show the fall off in their prints a bit more.

Some wide angle lenses use a center filter to compensate for fall off. Some folks, myself included like the "edge burning" effect of a bit of fall off.

Your lens may not be up to speck, it may be the filter, I would still try the "wall/Sky" test.
 
My first thought as well was simply light fall-off at wide apertures. I get this on my Nikon 50mm 1.4 SLR lens, too. But you say these were at f16? Or only the last ones?

allan
 
I can really only see vignetting in the sky in these images. I can't see much evidence of it in the bottom of the frame. On the first image, the water darkens towards the edges of the frame as well.

In both shots you appear to be shooting directly into the light with the Sun high in the sky (and out of shot).

My guess is, this lens and filter combination may have a bit of natural polarization.
 
My bizarre and unlikely (I admit it) hypothesis in this would be variation in the tone of the sky (where was the sun?) emphasised by the yellow filter.

I have no idea if there is any scientific basis for this 😀
 
This is what I was thinking of...

http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/filters_uv_pol/#polq8

I'm wondering if either the filter or one of the lens elements has a little bit of natural polarization (more likely circular rather than linear), making the blue sky bluer at the edges. This would then be emphasized by the yellow filter. The effect would also show in the water due to reflection, but not in the sand due to light scatter.

If this was vignetting due to the filter rim, I would expect to see a more abrupt darkening in all four corners when the lens is set to f16. These photos display a gradual darkening.
 
Last edited:
I see a drop off in exposure on the left side of each image, a little darkening of the upper right corner, and nothing at the bottom corners. I wonder if this could be indicative of a shutter adjustment problem. Does it just appear at 1/500th and higher, or can the same thing be seen at lower shutter speeds?

Jim N.
 
In both shots the images are brightest in the centre, falling off towards the edges. However, the brightest point isn't in the exact centre, it slightly to the right of centre on the horizon. In both photos, judging by the shadows, the Sun is also slightly right of centre, out of frame.

If this is a polarization effect, the maximum effect would be at 90 degrees to the Sun, so it would be more evident on the left of the image.

Shutter faults are usually vertical or horizontal. To affect one corner, a shutter blade would have to twist during operation and I think that's unlikely.

The only way to tell is to shoot a sheet of white paper.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if I'm the person being referred to but yes, I did have a Nokton 40mm and there was some vignetting. (I posted about it I think.) I exchanged it for another and that action appears to have remedied the problem. The vignetting issue I had was most obvious at near wide open and diminished along with the aperture size. The examples you gave are consdierably less severe than those I experienced.
 
Last edited:
 
To me most of your shots don't look too bad. Actually most appear to have no vignetting, at least to me . I'd shoot a flat wall that's evenly lit. Try the full range of apertures and make a decision afterward. Good luck.
 
This is probably an insulting question, but I have to ask it...

Could it be caused by your fingers?

I say that because the effect only appears some of the time and tends towards one corner.

This shot look highly like a finger...

Most of the other shots look fine to me.

http://www.albumtown.com/showpic.ph...loadSlideShow=2

The lens is very short and finger can get in the way, especially if the lens is used without the hood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Could this lens hood cause vignetting?
Replies
2
Views
1K
panerai
P
chris00nj
Step Down Filter Rings & Vignetting?
Replies
0
Views
897
chris00nj
chris00nj
L
Lee RF75 Filter System - Review, First thoughts etc
Replies
4
Views
4K
noimmunity
N
L
VIgnetting and the 40mm Nokton 1.4
Replies
14
Views
3K
Doug
Doug
Back
Top Bottom