Vignetting

[Richard Claar]

Andrew McDonald <andy.h@tes.spam> wrote in message news:<kIdPa.93731$Io.8071725@newsread2.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net>...

> Richard Claar wrote:

> > I have learned the (semi) hard way why a lot of you don't wack filters
> > and macro and telephoto lenses on to your digicams, even if they're
> > threaded and the possibility is there: A considerable vignetting
> > problem in wide angle mode when using step-up rings. While with the
> > filters one can always zoom out a little or crop the photo, it's still
> > annoying.
> > By the way, I have the Minolta S414, and I'm. . .fairly satisfied with
> > it, considering the price and the features.
> > But next time, I think I'll save up a little more money and get a
> > "real" one.

>
> A "real" what? This problem can occur with any lens. I have seen it on
> a Minolta 28mm lens with a polarizer attached. At the 28mm setting
> vignetting is certainly possible.
>
> It's just a hazard of using filters, especially thick ones like polarizers.

A "real" brain transplant, as opposed to the cut-rate, economy job.
No, I meant a higher-end digital camera, perhaps even a DSLR, with
more flexibility and ALL the bells and whistles. Not that I'd know
what to do with it.
I would say you are correct when you contend that vignetting is very
common on many lenses with filters, especially polarizers, attached.
However, I have never encountered any vignetting on my old Tamron
(don't laugh) 35-80mm job on my Minolta X-700 with a haze and
polarizer added. But then, it's a pretty thin polarizer on a 62mm
lens.
While not a newbie, I realize I'm getting in a little over my head --
please bear with me. . .be gentle.
What do you think about using a lens hood on the film camera and
losing the extra glass of the filters? How about just suspending with
the filters on the digital all together? Some have said, except for
the polarizer, that they have little or no impact. Perhaps this
belongs in another thread. I stray.
Thanks for your input.

[Andrew McDonald]

Richard Claar wrote:

> A "real" brain transplant, as opposed to the cut-rate, economy job.
> No, I meant a higher-end digital camera, perhaps even a DSLR, with
> more flexibility and ALL the bells and whistles. Not that I'd know
> what to do with it.
> I would say you are correct when you contend that vignetting is very
> common on many lenses with filters, especially polarizers, attached.
> However, I have never encountered any vignetting on my old Tamron
> (don't laugh) 35-80mm job on my Minolta X-700 with a haze and
> polarizer added. But then, it's a pretty thin polarizer on a 62mm
> lens.

I didn't notice it until I went to 28mm. Never saw it on my 35mm length
lenses.

> What do you think about using a lens hood on the film camera and
> losing the extra glass of the filters? How about just suspending with
> the filters on the digital all together? Some have said, except for
> the polarizer, that they have little or no impact. Perhaps this
> belongs in another thread. I stray.

Well I always leave a UV filter on my lenses anyway, all the time. I am
not much into filters, especially in digital since I feel that I can
manage any effect I want later in Photoshop.

The polarizer is an exception to reduce glare and enhance blue skies.