I'm fussy, but I haven't noticed any vignetting at 16. If it's there, it's minimal.
Paul via phone On Jul 25, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Aahz Maruch <[email protected]> wrote: > Havne't done any post-processing yet to get a closer look, but the > 16-50's 16/2.8 vignetting was clearly visible on casual inspection (i.e. > I wasn't looking for it and was mildly surprised to see it) on a photo > with lots of sky, so I'd guess it closer to 0.5-1 EV. That seems large > enough for concern for at least some people and worth mentioning. > > Happy to send you the DNG if you want to look for yourself. ;-) > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013, Bruce Walker wrote: >> >> Given the state of lens-correction data these days (eg ACR, Lightroom) >> that small amount of vignetting (couple of tenths of a stop?) is a >> complete non-issue. Even minor barrel distortion isn't worth worrying >> about, but especially vignetting. >> >> Unless you just want something to whinge about. In which case, carry on ... >> :-) >> >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Aahz Maruch <[email protected]> wrote: >>> FYI, given your requirement for good wide performance, don't pine too >>> badly for the 16-50, I noticed a fair amount of vignetting at 16/2.8 >>> >>> Honestly, given how much you care about the difference between 16 and 17, >>> I think you might prefer something like the Tamron 10-24 or one of the >>> Sigma 10-20. Then either suck it up on swapping lenses or get a cheap >>> used body for the second lens. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013, Zos Xavius wrote: >>>> >>>> No use in even posting samples. I think my good copy is now bad. When >>>> I push the barrel up the upper half gets sharp again, so clearly the >>>> wobble is hurting sharpness. I think the build quality on this lens >>>> simply awful. I've tried very hard to baby this lens, but it should be >>>> able to withstand a knock or two. I guess I send in my bad copy and >>>> have CRIS tighten that and realign it. I hate spending anymore money >>>> on this stupid lens, but the range is nice and the rendering and >>>> sharpness are both superb when your copy is optically good. I dunno. I >>>> mean I can spend $180 or so at CRIS and have the same issue 6 months-1 >>>> year down the road. I need something between the 16-40 range and this >>>> lens was a seemingly perfect fit. The 17-70 isn't great at the wide >>>> end IMO and the 1mm makes a big difference. The 16-50/2.8 is just too >>>> much money and I don't need the speed enough to justify spending >>>> $1000. Not when I could buy a couple of limiteds for that....If this >>>> lens is this fragile, its gotta be the flimsiest zoom I have ever used >>>> and that's saying something. Even my el cheapo 28-80 is better built. >>>> I really don't know what to do. The 2nd copy was a LN- grade from KEH. >>>> It seemed ok optically at first, but seems worse now than before. I >>>> liked the lens enough that I needed another copy to replace the first >>>> while I decided what to do with it and didn't want it missing. My >>>> 18-55 mk1 just doesn't cut it really and isn't very usable at open >>>> apertures. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> LOL! It might not be that much, but it is noticable... >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> 1/4" of wobble? You must have the special LensBaby co-design version. >>>>>> Treasure it. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll take an f8 shot today and upload crops of the upper corners. You >>>>>>> tell me. My copy looks no better or worse than photozone's test >>>>>>> samples BTW. Their samples are quite soft in portrait. So is >>>>>>> dpreviews. My barrel probably has a 1/8-1/4" of wobble to the left and >>>>>>> right. vertically it feels tighter. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:39 AM, John Coyle <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Zos, you must have either two bad samples or very high standards! The >>>>>>>> 16-45 I got from another >>>>>>>> PDML-er (in, I think, 2007) was well used but still gives great >>>>>>>> images. I used it extensively on a >>>>>>>> number of overseas trips, and most of the images I got from it were >>>>>>>> sharp corner to corner: those >>>>>>>> that were not are probably due to being taken from a moving bus or >>>>>>>> from the hip... >>>>>>>> There is no barrel wobble either, so it might pay to have it tightened >>>>>>>> up after all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John Coyle >>>>>>>> Brisbane, Australia >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -bmw >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>> follow the directions. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 >>> http://rule6.info/ >>> <*> <*> <*> >>> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> -- >> -bmw >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
