K-1 or 645n

**Jim P** · 10-04-2017, 12:29 AM

I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses.

I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point.

Any input?

Last edited by Jim P; 10-04-2017 at 12:44 AM.

**Digitalis** · 10-04-2017, 01:51 AM

considering it isn't the more current 645NII, I'd get the K1 instead. You already have the D-FA28-105mm lens. I'd make the most of it.

**Alex645** · 10-04-2017, 03:19 AM

Both are excellent cameras, but the decision is really more a digital vs. a film analysis, and what are you doing with your images. In wedding photography there is resurgence of interest in MF film, but for landscapes with a good tripod, FF digital is a joy.

With the K-1, you will have much better low light capability and pixel-shift...but will have to invest in decent FF lenses to get the most out of that 36.4MP sensor. Remember, the better the sensor, the more it will show the limitations of lenses that may have looked fine with a lesser sensor. Until you could afford good FF glass, you could shoot in crop mode with your current APS-C lenses.

The 645N with film is a whole different process. What you'll save in having the lenses, you'll spend on film, lab & scanning fees (or your own DIY with a decent medium format film scanner), etc. Instead of 24x36mm FF sensor, you'll be working with 42x56mm film, and with a good scanner at 4000 dpi produce a nearly 60MP TIFF file.

I own both a FF DSLR and a MF SLR and love both. I lean toward the digital for low light and portability due to size and weight but prefer film when I'm shooting black & white with plenty of light and love the more squarish aspect ratio. Of course you can crop either to any aspect ratio, but it does affect my compositions with what I'm seeing in the viewfinder. With digital FF, I find up to ISO 1600 acceptable, but with film rarely exceed 400 ISO.

I have both the 645 and 645N and love them both. I concur with Digitalis that the 645NII would be the ideal choice, but not having it hasn't prevented me from getting my shots and continuing a passion for using medium format film.

**NZ_Ross** · 10-04-2017, 04:08 AM

I just spent the money I had for a K-1 on a lens, so still shooting the K-3. I have recently purchased a nice Pentax 67 with 3 lenses.

I have been asking the same question as you since the K-1 was released. Where I have ended up is I needed to scratch the medium format film itch, which I am currently having a lot of fun with.

I am still planning to buy a K-1 at some stage in the future

pathdoc · 10-04-2017, 04:53 AM

Originally posted by Jim P

numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses.

Which A and M primes do you have, and why are they not high-quality full-frame lenses?

agp1337 · 10-04-2017, 05:39 AM

Originally posted by Jim P

I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses.

I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point.

Any input?

I have the K1 and the KP. The 28-105 is excellent on the K1, and being full-frame it gives you a wider view than it did on the KP, obviously. It does seem like a 'proper' wide-angle lens. I also have the 12-24, and that is good at longer focal lengths. In effect, with those two I've got 17 or 18-105. I've just tried the 55-300, and that seems fine, but I need to 'pixel-peep' to see how good it is on this camera. Only ones I've found which are useless are the 16-85 (my favourite lens, grrr!) at all focal lengths, even without the lens hood on, as is the 21mm. Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably?

**RKKS08** · 10-04-2017, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by agp1337

Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably?

Someone has compared the K-1 crop mode with the K-5 in one of the many early K-1 threads.
I can't find it right now, but as far as I remember, the difference was not a big one, and the K-1 was at least not a clear winner concerning IQ...

DeadJohn · 10-04-2017, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Jim P

I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses.

I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point.

Any input?

You can get good photos either way. I think the decision depends on what photographic process you prefer.

The K-1 with your existing 28-105 lens is a great setup for landscape photography. That is my preference, especially when hiking to landscape opportunities. The K-1 is very usable handheld if you don't feel like setting up a tripod. You get immediate feedback on the LCD. You get the astrotracer and good high ISO if you want to do night landscapes.

645 film will be a completely different experience. You'll have to mess with developing film and maybe with scanning. If that "mess" appeals to you then go with 645, because you can't replicate the process with digital.

bjolester · 10-04-2017, 08:16 AM

I have a very nice Pentax 67ii and some lenses, and also a K-5iis. I shoot mainly slide film and send off my films for processing in the UK (my lab here in Norway has abandoned E6 processing). I scan my medium format films on an Epson V750 flatbed and process the images in Apple Aperture. After having used the V750 for several years now I am quite content with the results. I enjoy shooting film, and I enjoy working with the digital scans on my Mac. Some people call this process for «hybrid-film-photography», I do not know if I like this term, only that this combination of film and digitalization appeals to me. I believe one has to value the whole process of shooting film, it takes time to rig the 67 on a tripod and prepare for a shot, it takes time to send the film for processing, it takes time to scan the films, and it takes maybe more time to process scanned film than the RAW files from a DSLR (spotting etc). So there are many things to consider when deciding between K-1 vs Pentax medium format film camera. I enjoy using the K-5iis for Northern Lights photography, landcape, and other kinds of photography, but nothing comes close to the medium format film experience IMHO.

**Jim P** · 10-04-2017, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

Which A and M primes do you have, and why are they not high-quality full-frame lenses?

I would include my A 50 1.4 and M 28 2.8 in the quality level that would work well with the K-1. My A 135 2.8 broke but replacing that would help at the longer end. So in reality I would only need a good wide angle. Hmmmm...

---------- Post added 10-04-17 at 09:08 AM ----------

Originally posted by NZ_Ross

Where I have ended up is I needed to scratch the medium format film itch, which I am currently having a lot of fun with.

I am still planning to buy a K-1 at some stage in the future

I do think both the K1 (or K1-ii &#128513

and a 645_ are in my future. The itch for medium format grew after taking an MX with me to Spain in the summer and shooting some BW film.

So I will reduce the issue to one of sequencing rather than an A or B decision. If my wife likesbthe results of the first, the second may be easier to bear. And maybe not...

ronniemac · 10-04-2017, 11:13 AM

I exchanged my 645N plus A35, FA45, FA75, FA120, FA150, FA200, and FA80-160, + $1,500 for all new K-1, DFA15-30, DFA28-105 and DFA150-450. Made a nice profit on the deal so then added three new FA Limiteds (31, 43, & 77).

Never looked back since. For me it made sense to stick with just K mount which works directly on both K-3ii and K-1. Like you, I also have some old Pentax K-mount manual and autofocus lenses, and they now have a new lease of life.

The LX and MZ-S film bodies also benefit from the new FA Limiteds and some recently acquired used FA lenses. For MF film fun I did buy a very affordable TLR Ricoh Diacord. - but seem to have difficulty putting the digital cameras down to go buy some film again. Maybe that will be my retirement project!

Guess that says all that needs to be said about me and film.

CDW · 10-04-2017, 11:43 AM

Over the last 30 years I've shot 4x5 large format, 6x7 and 645 MF film, APS-C digital bodies and now m4/3, FF K1 and 645Z MF digital. My personal feeling is unless you're shooting film for the love of it, the slower pace, etc., the K1, especially in the pixel shift mode or the 645Z, will easily match or beat most color film stocks shot 645 film format. You'll need high quality drum scans or at the very least scans from an Imacon or equivalent, to come near the resolution of the digital sensors. Scans from flatbed scanners, in my opinion, will not best the files from the K1, much less the 645z. Film scan issues also open up other issues, such as flatness of the film when scanning, the time you'll spend cloaning out dust specs, etc. Film will dramatically slow your pace from capture to post and certainly has the ability to drain your bank account.

**Jim P** · 10-04-2017, 08:37 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by dcshooter

Maximize your value. Buy the K-1 and a 645 to K adapter and start slowly amassing 645 lenses. When you see a good deal on a 645n body (300 bucks or so), snatch it up and hit the ground running.

DCShooter - I skipped ahead a bit in the amassing of 645 lenses, 6 of them and an extension tube.

All - I did purchase the 645n, but did it much more intelligently with the great input from everyone. It came down to what NZ_Ross described as the medium format itch. Plus the fact that my local camera shop processes a lot of 120 film. Mailing film away to be developed probably would have been a game changer for me. The deal came with the 645n, the Pentax-A 645 120mm F4, A 80-120mm F4.5, A 35mm F2.8, L.S. 75mm F2.8, L.S. 135mm F4, and FA 45-85, several film backs, and numerous filters, chords, and even a polaroid back.

Because of the varying opinions, all helpful, I was able to make my decision having thought through the options and now have no qualms. I did come to the realization that I have so very much to learn. So, having attained a level of confidence with my current digital cameras and SLRs, I am back to square one with the 645n. It should keep me busy for a while.

Thanks all!

**NZ_Ross** · 10-04-2017, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by Jim P

Because of the varying opinions, all helpful, I was able to make my decision having thought through the options and now have no qualms. I did come to the realization that I have so very much to learn. So, having attained a level of confidence with my current digital cameras and SLRs, I am back to square one with the 645n. It should keep me busy for a while.

Thanks all!

Have a huge amount of fun and enjoyment learning and making medium format photographs

agp1337 · 10-05-2017, 04:34 AM

Originally posted by agp1337

I have the K1 and the KP. The 28-105 is excellent on the K1, and being full-frame it gives you a wider view than it did on the KP, obviously. It does seem like a 'proper' wide-angle lens. I also have the 12-24, and that is good at longer focal lengths. In effect, with those two I've got 17 or 18-105. I've just tried the 55-300, and that seems fine, but I need to 'pixel-peep' to see how good it is on this camera. Only ones I've found which are useless are the 16-85 (my favourite lens, grrr!) at all focal lengths, even without the lens hood on, as is the 21mm. Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably?

Further to the above, I tried the 55-300 4.5-6.3 on the K1 today. It is very sharp, but towards the corners there is very noticeable vignetting throughout the range. However, the lens is very useable on the K1, and I imagine that the actual 'good' area is bigger than APS-C. Using the Photoshop lens profiles makes quite a difference to the picture, but obviously not the extremes of the vignetting. That's not surprising, as it is not meant to be a full-frame lens! So still very happy.

10-04-2017, 11:13 AM	#11
ronniemac Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Oxford Photos: Albums Posts: 244	I exchanged my 645N plus A35, FA45, FA75, FA120, FA150, FA200, and FA80-160, + $1,500 for all new K-1, DFA15-30, DFA28-105 and DFA150-450. Made a nice profit on the deal so then added three new FA Limiteds (31, 43, & 77). Never looked back since. For me it made sense to stick with just K mount which works directly on both K-3ii and K-1. Like you, I also have some old Pentax K-mount manual and autofocus lenses, and they now have a new lease of life. The LX and MZ-S film bodies also benefit from the new FA Limiteds and some recently acquired used FA lenses. For MF film fun I did buy a very affordable TLR Ricoh Diacord. - but seem to have difficulty putting the digital cameras down to go buy some film again. Maybe that will be my retirement project! Guess that says all that needs to be said about me and film. Last edited by ronniemac; 10-04-2017 at 01:51 PM. Reason: Correction to first line.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Flash Trigger for 645N and 645Z	valvicphoto	Pentax Medium Format	13	07-12-2017 12:35 AM
Flash on 645n not consistently working	BDK	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	7	02-01-2017 12:21 PM
Anyone Using 645N	rollsman4	Pentax Medium Format	17	07-09-2016 08:32 AM
645N film advance	KDINDC	Pentax Medium Format	3	06-16-2016 05:48 AM
Possible Dumb Question About Pentax 645n Auto Focusing	topaz	Pentax Medium Format	3	10-05-2015 04:29 PM

10-04-2017, 12:29 AM	#1
Jim P Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: California, 93004 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 196	K-1 or 645n I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses. I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point. Any input? Last edited by Jim P; 10-04-2017 at 12:44 AM.

10-04-2017, 01:51 AM	#2
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	considering it isn't the more current 645NII, I'd get the K1 instead. You already have the D-FA28-105mm lens. I'd make the most of it.

10-04-2017, 03:19 AM	#3
Alex645 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Kaneohe, HI Photos: Albums Posts: 3,526	Both are excellent cameras, but the decision is really more a digital vs. a film analysis, and what are you doing with your images. In wedding photography there is resurgence of interest in MF film, but for landscapes with a good tripod, FF digital is a joy. With the K-1, you will have much better low light capability and pixel-shift...but will have to invest in decent FF lenses to get the most out of that 36.4MP sensor. Remember, the better the sensor, the more it will show the limitations of lenses that may have looked fine with a lesser sensor. Until you could afford good FF glass, you could shoot in crop mode with your current APS-C lenses. The 645N with film is a whole different process. What you'll save in having the lenses, you'll spend on film, lab & scanning fees (or your own DIY with a decent medium format film scanner), etc. Instead of 24x36mm FF sensor, you'll be working with 42x56mm film, and with a good scanner at 4000 dpi produce a nearly 60MP TIFF file. I own both a FF DSLR and a MF SLR and love both. I lean toward the digital for low light and portability due to size and weight but prefer film when I'm shooting black & white with plenty of light and love the more squarish aspect ratio. Of course you can crop either to any aspect ratio, but it does affect my compositions with what I'm seeing in the viewfinder. With digital FF, I find up to ISO 1600 acceptable, but with film rarely exceed 400 ISO. I have both the 645 and 645N and love them both. I concur with Digitalis that the 645NII would be the ideal choice, but not having it hasn't prevented me from getting my shots and continuing a passion for using medium format film.

10-04-2017, 04:08 AM	#4
NZ_Ross Kiwi Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Timaru Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,225	I just spent the money I had for a K-1 on a lens, so still shooting the K-3. I have recently purchased a nice Pentax 67 with 3 lenses. I have been asking the same question as you since the K-1 was released. Where I have ended up is I needed to scratch the medium format film itch, which I am currently having a lot of fun with. I am still planning to buy a K-1 at some stage in the future

10-04-2017, 04:53 AM	#5
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by Jim P numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Which A and M primes do you have, and why are they not high-quality full-frame lenses?

10-04-2017, 05:39 AM	#6
agp1337 Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 46	Originally posted by Jim P I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses. I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point. Any input? I have the K1 and the KP. The 28-105 is excellent on the K1, and being full-frame it gives you a wider view than it did on the KP, obviously. It does seem like a 'proper' wide-angle lens. I also have the 12-24, and that is good at longer focal lengths. In effect, with those two I've got 17 or 18-105. I've just tried the 55-300, and that seems fine, but I need to 'pixel-peep' to see how good it is on this camera. Only ones I've found which are useless are the 16-85 (my favourite lens, grrr!) at all focal lengths, even without the lens hood on, as is the 21mm. Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably?

10-04-2017, 06:27 AM	#7
RKKS08 Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Frankfurt am Main Posts: 1,241	Originally posted by agp1337 Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably? Someone has compared the K-1 crop mode with the K-5 in one of the many early K-1 threads. I can't find it right now, but as far as I remember, the difference was not a big one, and the K-1 was at least not a clear winner concerning IQ...

10-04-2017, 06:42 AM	#8
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,833	Originally posted by Jim P I am at the decision point of whether to purchase a 645n with a wide range of lenses and accessories or purchase a K-1 without any additional lenses. I currently have a K-3ii and film cameras. I have the DFA 28-105, numerous A and M primes and a couple DA limited lenses but no high quality full frame lenses. Landscape photography is my main reason for an upgrade at this point. Any input? You can get good photos either way. I think the decision depends on what photographic process you prefer. The K-1 with your existing 28-105 lens is a great setup for landscape photography. That is my preference, especially when hiking to landscape opportunities. The K-1 is very usable handheld if you don't feel like setting up a tripod. You get immediate feedback on the LCD. You get the astrotracer and good high ISO if you want to do night landscapes. 645 film will be a completely different experience. You'll have to mess with developing film and maybe with scanning. If that "mess" appeals to you then go with 645, because you can't replicate the process with digital.

10-04-2017, 08:16 AM	#9
bjolester Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 211	I have a very nice Pentax 67ii and some lenses, and also a K-5iis. I shoot mainly slide film and send off my films for processing in the UK (my lab here in Norway has abandoned E6 processing). I scan my medium format films on an Epson V750 flatbed and process the images in Apple Aperture. After having used the V750 for several years now I am quite content with the results. I enjoy shooting film, and I enjoy working with the digital scans on my Mac. Some people call this process for «hybrid-film-photography», I do not know if I like this term, only that this combination of film and digitalization appeals to me. I believe one has to value the whole process of shooting film, it takes time to rig the 67 on a tripod and prepare for a shot, it takes time to send the film for processing, it takes time to scan the films, and it takes maybe more time to process scanned film than the RAW files from a DSLR (spotting etc). So there are many things to consider when deciding between K-1 vs Pentax medium format film camera. I enjoy using the K-5iis for Northern Lights photography, landcape, and other kinds of photography, but nothing comes close to the medium format film experience IMHO.

10-04-2017, 08:56 AM	#10
Jim P Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: California, 93004 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 196 Original Poster	Originally posted by pathdoc Which A and M primes do you have, and why are they not high-quality full-frame lenses? I would include my A 50 1.4 and M 28 2.8 in the quality level that would work well with the K-1. My A 135 2.8 broke but replacing that would help at the longer end. So in reality I would only need a good wide angle. Hmmmm... ---------- Post added 10-04-17 at 09:08 AM ---------- Originally posted by NZ_Ross Where I have ended up is I needed to scratch the medium format film itch, which I am currently having a lot of fun with. I am still planning to buy a K-1 at some stage in the future I do think both the K1 (or K1-ii &#128513 and a 645_ are in my future. The itch for medium format grew after taking an MX with me to Spain in the summer and shooting some BW film. So I will reduce the issue to one of sequencing rather than an A or B decision. If my wife likesbthe results of the first, the second may be easier to bear. And maybe not...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-04-2017, 11:43 AM	#12
CDW Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah Posts: 457	Over the last 30 years I've shot 4x5 large format, 6x7 and 645 MF film, APS-C digital bodies and now m4/3, FF K1 and 645Z MF digital. My personal feeling is unless you're shooting film for the love of it, the slower pace, etc., the K1, especially in the pixel shift mode or the 645Z, will easily match or beat most color film stocks shot 645 film format. You'll need high quality drum scans or at the very least scans from an Imacon or equivalent, to come near the resolution of the digital sensors. Scans from flatbed scanners, in my opinion, will not best the files from the K1, much less the 645z. Film scan issues also open up other issues, such as flatness of the film when scanning, the time you'll spend cloaning out dust specs, etc. Film will dramatically slow your pace from capture to post and certainly has the ability to drain your bank account.

10-04-2017, 08:37 PM - 1 Like	#13
Jim P Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: California, 93004 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 196 Original Poster	Originally posted by dcshooter Maximize your value. Buy the K-1 and a 645 to K adapter and start slowly amassing 645 lenses. When you see a good deal on a 645n body (300 bucks or so), snatch it up and hit the ground running. DCShooter - I skipped ahead a bit in the amassing of 645 lenses, 6 of them and an extension tube. All - I did purchase the 645n, but did it much more intelligently with the great input from everyone. It came down to what NZ_Ross described as the medium format itch. Plus the fact that my local camera shop processes a lot of 120 film. Mailing film away to be developed probably would have been a game changer for me. The deal came with the 645n, the Pentax-A 645 120mm F4, A 80-120mm F4.5, A 35mm F2.8, L.S. 75mm F2.8, L.S. 135mm F4, and FA 45-85, several film backs, and numerous filters, chords, and even a polaroid back. Because of the varying opinions, all helpful, I was able to make my decision having thought through the options and now have no qualms. I did come to the realization that I have so very much to learn. So, having attained a level of confidence with my current digital cameras and SLRs, I am back to square one with the 645n. It should keep me busy for a while. Thanks all!

10-04-2017, 08:45 PM	#14
NZ_Ross Kiwi Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Timaru Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,225	Originally posted by Jim P Because of the varying opinions, all helpful, I was able to make my decision having thought through the options and now have no qualms. I did come to the realization that I have so very much to learn. So, having attained a level of confidence with my current digital cameras and SLRs, I am back to square one with the 645n. It should keep me busy for a while. Thanks all! Have a huge amount of fun and enjoyment learning and making medium format photographs

10-05-2017, 04:34 AM	#15
agp1337 Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 46	Originally posted by agp1337 I have the K1 and the KP. The 28-105 is excellent on the K1, and being full-frame it gives you a wider view than it did on the KP, obviously. It does seem like a 'proper' wide-angle lens. I also have the 12-24, and that is good at longer focal lengths. In effect, with those two I've got 17 or 18-105. I've just tried the 55-300, and that seems fine, but I need to 'pixel-peep' to see how good it is on this camera. Only ones I've found which are useless are the 16-85 (my favourite lens, grrr!) at all focal lengths, even without the lens hood on, as is the 21mm. Of course, I can always use crop mode on the K1. Has anyone ever found if it's better like this, or on an APS-C? I know there are fewer pixels in this mode on the K1, but they will be bigger, presumably? Further to the above, I tried the 55-300 4.5-6.3 on the K1 today. It is very sharp, but towards the corners there is very noticeable vignetting throughout the range. However, the lens is very useable on the K1, and I imagine that the actual 'good' area is bigger than APS-C. Using the Photoshop lens profiles makes quite a difference to the picture, but obviously not the extremes of the vignetting. That's not surprising, as it is not meant to be a full-frame lens! So still very happy.