Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-23-2021, 08:12 AM - 1 Like   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 432
FOV K1 verses Film camera

First a little background.

Years ago I bought a Russian fisheye, I think it is a 16mm lens(?), anyway it was an M42 lens and came with a Nikon adapter. I replaced the M42 with a Pentax K T mount and it seemed to work fine. I used it most likely on my SuperProgram or LX a few times, no issue with vignetting. But as a nature photographer it was never really my go-to lens; heavy and I wasn't taken by the distortion. It sat unloved in the back of one of my camera stash boxes for years. I recently pulled it out to play around with and realized it has terrible vignetting on the K1. What gives? I would have thought the K1 and a 35mm (135mm) film field of view would be the same. Are they not?

03-23-2021, 08:54 AM - 9 Likes   #2
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,593
The FOVs of the K1 and LX are virtually the same* but the photosensitive surfaces are not. Film and silicon sensors have very different optical properties that affect performance in the corners.

For film, the matte surface of emulsion can readily absorb light coming from all angles.

For digital, the microlens-studded surface of a silicon sensor cannot readily absorb light coming from all angles. The microlenses int he corners are optimized for certain angles that assume the exit pupil of the lens is a certain distance from the film plane. Older ultra-wide angle lenses may have exit pupil distances that are too close to the film plane and that cause vignetting.

*The exception to this occurs when shake reduction, composition adjustment, or astrotracer are used. These features shift the sensor up to 1.5mm in both directions which puts one or two of the sensor corners further into the extremities of the lens's image circle.

P.S. This fact about silicon sensors is one of the reasons that the short mount distance of MILC cameras doesn't really enable lenses as small as proponents of MILC might think. MILC still require retrofocus designs (or heavy vignette correction) with wider lenses.
03-23-2021, 09:56 AM   #3
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,687
I have a Zenitar 16mm f2.8 fisheye (probably the same one, though mine is native K-mount).

It does vignette on the K1, but it isnít horrible. It also seems to be dependent on focus distance, with closeup subjects causing more noticeable vignetting. Though that could also be changes in lighting at distance, depending on what Iím shooting...

Iíll give it a go this weekend and see what I get...

-Eric
03-23-2021, 10:32 AM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,237
Shake reduction is one of the key reasons as the image circle needs to extend beyond the borders of the film cameras. As the sensor moves around the center of the image will move towards one side or another - it should be slightly asymmetrical if this is the cause.

The micro lenses mentioned earlier are also a possible factor.

03-23-2021, 11:00 AM   #5
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
The frame size for 35mm film is 24 x 36mm* and that for the K-1 is 24 x 35.9mm. As a result, the FOV for the captured image will be the essentially the same.


Steve

* 24 x 36mm is the nominal size. Actual size between camera makes and models may vary.
03-23-2021, 11:03 AM   #6
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
QuoteOriginally posted by stemked Quote
I recently pulled it out to play around with and realized it has terrible vignetting on the K1. What gives?
It probably vignettes on film too. What fisheye are you using? From your description (heavy with T-mount), it is not the Zenitar 16/2.8.


Steve
03-23-2021, 11:19 AM   #7
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Older ultra-wide angle lenses may have exit pupil distances that are too close to the film plane and that cause vignetting.
Are you sure? This is an issue with rangefinder lenses, but retrofocus designs required for almost* all SLR wide angle lenses result in exit pupil locations significantly forward of the rear principal plane and fairly close to that of the entrance pupil.


Steve

* Exceptions being lenses designed for use with the mirror locked up for clearance.
03-23-2021, 11:39 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MossyRocks's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Minnesota
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,987
I'm thinking the microlenses that photoptimist mentioned are the cause. On bright sunny days with a nice blue sky I've taken some shots with my old S-M-C 17/4 fisheye takumar and in the corners with the blue sky it almost looks like shots I had taken years ago with a polarizer on my 28/3.5. It is only noticeable some times, sun to my back, so on a lot of shots I pay no attention. it is easy to correct in post processing with the vignetting correction for that lens and for what may be in the corners it isn't a concern since they are pretty distorted anyway.

03-23-2021, 12:24 PM   #9
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
QuoteOriginally posted by MossyRocks Quote
On bright sunny days with a nice blue sky I've taken some shots with my old S-M-C 17/4 fisheye takumar and in the corners with the blue sky it almost looks like shots I had taken years ago with a polarizer on my 28/3.5.
The edges of the sky are usually not the same brightness as the sky overhead and can be relatively dim at opposition when the sun is low in the sky. That said, relative brightness across the field for fisheyes and other wide angles may also be due to optical vignette due to shading or scattering of light between lens elements. It is a complex subject.

I don't have a FF digital camera to test with, but my Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye is not particularly prone to vignette on 35mm film.







03-23-2021, 12:30 PM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,237
To eliminate shake reduction shoot on a tripod with 2 seconds self timer. If those shots still vignette s as bad then SR isnít the culprit.
03-23-2021, 12:38 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MossyRocks's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Minnesota
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,987
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I don't have a FF digital camera to test with, but my Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye is not particularly prone to vignette on 35mm film.
I've never noticed vignetting with the 17 fisheye takumar on film, but digital I have gotten darkening like what your 3rd picture with crater lake shows in the upper left. It has never really bothered me and I just treat it as a feature but just something that I have noticed.
03-23-2021, 01:03 PM   #12
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
QuoteOriginally posted by MossyRocks Quote
I've never noticed vignetting with the 17 fisheye takumar on film, but digital I have gotten darkening like what your 3rd picture with crater lake shows in the upper left. It has never really bothered me and I just treat it as a feature but just something that I have noticed.
In that photo, upper left was opposite the October morning sun. Photo was taken facing northeast from:

Google Maps


Steve
03-23-2021, 04:48 PM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,257
For a longer lens, the sky test is a good one for vignetting but for a wide angle or fisheye, sky brightness isn't that even so you need an alternate like a very uniformly illuminated surface or a translucent lens cap which is evenly illuminated in order to test a lens. photoptimist is correct, and the "lening" nature of sensor pixels makes them somewhat direction sensitive so light coming from an angle has less sensitivity than light direct-on. Longer lenses have a narrower cone of light whereas short FL lenses have a wide cone and edge rays hit the sensor at a considerably sharper angle that center rays so vignetting will be more pronounced.
03-23-2021, 05:55 PM   #14
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,245
QuoteOriginally posted by Bob 256 Quote
Longer lenses have a narrower cone of light whereas short FL lenses have a wide cone and edge rays hit the sensor at a considerably sharper angle that center rays so vignetting will be more pronounced.
Three words: Exit pupil location

This can be visually estimated by direct examination from the rear of the lens and for some short teles is sometimes closer to the sensor than the typical ultra wide. I just checked my Samyang 14/2.8* and it appears to be about 10mm beyond the lens flange towards the front of the lens. 10 + 45.46 = 55.46mm or about the same as for my ST 55/1.8. My Tamron 24mm is about 5mm forward of the lens flange. Shallow angle of incidence is likely to cause a problem due to optical vignette (huge issue with even moderate wide angles on view cameras) alone, even without consideration of sensor well depth/orientation.


Steve

* Recent purchase 3rd generation for that lens.

Last edited by stevebrot; 03-24-2021 at 09:47 AM.
03-23-2021, 06:06 PM - 1 Like   #15
GUB
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
GUB's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wanganui
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,305
M42 mount MC Zenitar -M 2.8 / 16mm @ f2.8 on the K-1
Southern hemisphere - that is Orion at the bottom.
For me - acceptable vignetting.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by GUB; 03-23-2021 at 06:12 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, camera, field of view, film, filter, full-frame, k1, lens, m42, pentax
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax verses Godox wooly11 Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 26 11-03-2019 03:07 AM
08 Zoom verses 01 Prime CWRailman Pentax Q 3 10-16-2014 12:44 PM
Pentax SMC P FA J - Telephoto zoom lens - 75 mm - 300 mm - f/4.5-5.8 AL verses Pentax SA Photo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 02-14-2009 02:27 PM
DA 55-300/F4-5.8 verses DA* 300mm F4 SA Photo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 02-02-2009 11:06 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top