Nikon D3 & D700; what's up with all the vignetting?

[Methanol]

Hi all,

Not to start a Canon v Nikon war.

I'm a Canon user and of recent, have started to look at Nikon a bit more seriously. I had the pleasure of trying out a friend’s D700 and found it a very nice camera to the extent that I'm thinking of buying one myself. However, I found the vignetting was so profound, that it rendered some images unusable, especially when wide open. I've tried it with the 14-24mm, 24-70mm and the prime 85mm 1.4. I've also manipulated the in camera vignetting control from off to high.

I subsequently took a trip down to my local camera shop and tried another D700 and a D3 but all had the same results.

My question to you guys is: Am I missing something, could I have been unfortunate to have come across three different cameras all exhibiting the same issue and if this is the case with these FF cameras, how are you guys dealing with it. It seems from what I've read; I'm only seeing reports that there are issues with the 70-200.

If anyone can shed some light on this, it’ll be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Methanol

[Stigmundfreud]

you are finding serious vignetting at 85mm?

you sure about that?

[RobDickinson]

Have you only ever used canon crop sensor cameras?

Crop sensor cameras + FF lenses = very little vignetting.

Full frame cameras + fast lenses open wide often vignettes.

But I think theres something in the sensor microlens design too, I dont think nikon has prehaps angled the outer microlenses as canon does and that eccentuatates the light dropoff in the corners.

[Stigmundfreud]

not nikon but canon, FF 5d shot at 1.8 on an 85mm prime



I'd be amazed if you are getting serious vignetting to the point you are suggesting on the 700 or 3

[fergusd]

I have some vignetting on my 80-200/2.8, sometimes quite pronounced however I also use 17-35/2.8(fave), 16mm fish, 28-70/2.8 and big bertha 300/2.8 and they really don't show any vignetting to speak of.

I shoot quite a lot of wide aperture stuff also . . .

The cameras are telling you to stay a canon person I think . . . Nikon is not for you . . . move along . . . there is nothing to see here . . .

Fd

[Stigmundfreud]

do you have any filters on the lens or hoods?

[fergusd]

Stigmundfreud said:

do you have any filters on the lens or hoods?

I don't . . . just the lens hoods . . .

Fd

[beano500]

I'd really like to hear more details of your real-world experiences, and see some examples. Is that possible???

Methanol said:

If anyone can shed some light on this, it’ll be much appreciated.

(Apart from in the corners )

This seems to me like old news. Except, from the post you've made, this seems a different level to the known issues.

This seems a way, way different experience to thousands and millions of others. If you visit a site like Nikonians you will find a minority of people having any sort of difficulty with this issue. Although plenty will acknowledge it happens. Mostly, we're talking about 1/2 to one stop. Enough to be noticeable in critical situations, not enough to stop the use of the cameras though!

There are a few factors which come together here - including that of getting light to fall parallel to the outer photosites in the larger image area - the main reason why Nikon refused to follow and release FF for so long anyway.

What's worrying is that you've quoted a couple of lenses there that have had almost universal acclaim over the last 12 months - not ones which are readily associated with vignetting problems, even wide open. (In fact, not with any noticeable problems in any department, at all.)

I don't see a clamour that the use of D3 (and often the 70-200mm) at, say, the recent Olympics, received such a slating or that vast swathes of images were unusable. But from the tone of your message, they would be....

Hence my

Methanol said:

I've also manipulated the in camera vignetting control from off to high.

...and there you have it. As well as lens design (and remember Canon went through the process of chucking out one mount size in order to introduce AF many years back - Nikon philosophy remains that if it was made in the year dot it will (probably, there are some exceptions) mount on today's body) Nikon looked at other alternatives. Thinking laterally, they came up with a solution. Now it's not something, from what I gather that you need all the time, but (love it or hate it - and I hate it!) the Nikon software and firmware in the camera are reported to do a sublime job of sorting out any issues.

Now, unless there was something wrong in your application - and I think it's fair to say you haven't been in a position to learn all the intricacies of the new-to-you system in a couple of try-outs - it would be really interesting to see examples of the results and learn where in the process the theory goes wrong.

The reason I am interested is that I would otherwise be happy, one day, to become a second generation D3/700 user, when a secondhand one comes at the right price. At the moment, I add vignetting to a lot of images to produce a pleasing final image, too!!!


For the very top, professional line, they offer things like vignette control and AF fine tuning. (Ye cannae break the laws of physics, Jim) These are clearly not tools for the mere tool - i.e. occasional and amateurs.

But your real-world experiences, and not from some scaremongering amateurs, make me question again whether the manufacturers are getting this right.

[beano500]

Stigmundfreud said:

not nikon but canon, FF 5d shot at 1.8 on an 85mm prime

[pic]Nice pic[/pic]

I'd be amazed if you are getting serious vignetting to the point you are suggesting on the 700 or 3

I have to say, I've down loaded your image and tried to study it/measure it for levels, but I don't really follow your point in posting - it's not easy to tell just how much vignetting is present in any of the four corners!


Are you saying:

1} Look - no vignetting
2) Some vignetting but it's hardly noticeable and all SLRs at full frame would do similar
3) Here's an example of a shot that you couldn't use in critical situations - the client would never buy this.


I am sorry to be so thick (well it is early and I've not had caffeine yet) but I am just as to what the point is????

I really, really want to understand this issue again, now.

[Simpo Two]

FF cameras are much more demanding on lenses. I didn't notice a vignetting issue with the D700 although I may have been concentrating on other factors and not squinting into the corners looking for problems. I rarely use lens hoods, preferring to shade the lens with my hand for the odd time when I'm shooting close to the sun.

However both cameras have adjustable 'vignette control' - this applies to JPGs and also NEF if you use Capture NX (or is it NX2?) to process. Other RAW processors have vignette correction too I think.

Do you have any examples to post?

Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 15th October 09:46

[Stigmundfreud]

no vignetting, I'll find another shot to put up as the 5d has a reputation for vignetting which I only ever find at very wide angle and open lens. I asked about hoods/filters as I find with hoods that even if specifically designed to not cause vignetting that its worse with hoods than without

[beano500]

Methanol said:

It seems from what I've read; I'm only seeing reports that there are issues with the 70-200.

...and about the 70-200, which is otherwise given an excellent 5 out of 5 from Bjørn Rørslett

Bjorn Rorslett said:

"On the D3, however, issues occur with this lens. A certain amount of vignetting when the lens is set wide open is both to be expected and indeed readily visible. But stopping down one or two clicks resolves that issue nicely. The centre sharpness is excellent even on the D3, but the tendency for the corners lacking critical sharpness when the lens is focused towards infinity at its longer end is unexpected and troublesome. For landscapes at 200 mm, you need to stop down way too far to get the corners just barely acceptable, even to f/22 in some cases. I think the covering power of this slim design simply is not adequate for a good performance across the entire FX frame, at least towards the 200 mm setting. For PJ-style work or for studio and portraiture, this flaw is tolerable, but not for landscapes. Nikon really needs to come up with a Mk.II model of this general-purpose zoom lens."

I cannot find much similar that was really negative about other lenses.

For the 24-70mm, for example:

Bjorn Rorslett said:

"I have used several randomly acquired samples of this lens and they all have behaved in a very similar fashion. However, some users complain about severe light fall-off or field curvature. Since these reports are at variance with what I could observe, there is always the possibility of QC issues. But personally I consider the new 24-70/2.8 Nikkor to be the reference for all other midrange zoom lenses. There is absolutely no doubt that the new lens trounces the old favourite, the 28-70 AFS, in terms of sheer image quality."

And for the 14-24mm:

Bjorn Rorslett said:

"This is the new reference for wide-angle zoom lenses. Super sharp, only vestiges of corner fall-off at 14mm @ f/2.8, high contrast, vividly saturated colours, quite low propensity for flare and ghosting (as zoom lenses go), what more can you require? OK, some users find the lack of a filter feature a disadvantage and it's true the lens is quite heavy and not very small. But it handles so well you just go on shooting and never mind such nit-picks. A real work-horse and it balances so well to be a perfect match for the D3"

[beano500]

I've had coffee now!

Ah - I see

Stigmundfreud said:

no vignetting...

...the 5d has a reputation for vignetting...

I didn't know that (I thought it was just Nikon propaganda about Canons. I've witnessed their techie people at several shows.)

[CVP]

I have only seen a little bit of vignetting using the 20mm wide open. Even so this was nothing too much and did not really detract from the image.

Otherwise all my other Nikkors seem just fine with the D3.

Chris

Edited to add I have the vignette control set to off and do all my RAW processign using the latest Adobe Camera raw converter in PS3.

Edited by CVP on Thursday 16th October 13:20

[Methanol]

Please have a look at all the images I took here http://www.inspiredsolution.co.uk

All images were shot in highest quality RAW and just resized for the web, without any manipulation. The Vignette Control setting is displayed in the file name of the image at the bottom. e.g. nik14-24_LOW_9 ("LOW" denotes the Vignette Control was set to low)

A little more info regarding lens hoods and filters:

Nikon 14-24 - built-in lens hood but no filter

Nikon 24-70 - lens hood and UV filter

Nikon 85mm 1.4 - lens hood but no filter

Canon 16-35 - lens hood and UV filter

Canon 24-70 - lens hood and UV filter

Canon 50mm - no lens hood but had a UV filter

Thanks

Edited by Methanol on Thursday 16th October 01:45

Please note:

To save any confusion, please refer to the images by the big, two digit numbers in the top left-hand corner of the images on the index pages.

Edited by Methanol on Thursday 16th October 13:53

[beano500]

That is great - thank you so much!

(I haven't got the time I would like today, to study in detail, but I was pleased that it is nowhere near as bad as I feared - and especially for my beloved 85mm!!! At random, I took a pretty poor-looking example - #21 - and had it corrected in LR in two seconds)

None of these look unusable to me.

[_dobbo_]

I'm not sure I get what your test is supposed to show other than the fact that different settings/lenses produce different results?

For instance, #20 shows a pronounced vignette, but unless I'm mistaken you don't appear to have taken a shot with the Canon 1d that has the same settings or focal length, so how do you know it would be any better?

Shots 1-5 with the canon are at a longer focal length and slower shutter speed than shot 6 with the Nikon, so of course it's going to look worse. Why not test at 16mm and the same aperture/focal length on both cameras?

If you have done this I apologise - I didn't have time to go through all 80 images to find two with each camera that had the same settings.

[Simpo Two]

Two points spring to mind:

You're doing demanding lens tests with a UV filter attached.

What did the process the NEF files with? Non-Nikon processors won't use the vignette control data.



Actually, make that three points: The perfect lens doesn't exist

[Ledaig]

I think the OP is concerned with the level of vignette or light fall off at the corners on a full frame compared to a crop sensor, rather than a direct comparison of the two cameras abilities.

1D MKIII = APS-H sensor at 28.1mm x 18.7mm (Factor 1.3)

D700 = Full frame sensor at 36.0mm x 23.9mm

Even without doing the tests, the above info will tell you that there will be less of an issue with the Canon.

[_dobbo_]

Ledaig said:

1D MKIII = APS-H sensor at 28.1mm x 18.7mm (Factor 1.3)

D700 = Full frame sensor at 36.0mm x 23.9mm

Even without doing the tests, the above info will tell you that there will be less of an issue with the Canon.

Didn't spot that - I thought it was a 1Ds and so full frame.