Nikon 18-135mm Vignetting

denz1968 · 30 Apr 2007 at 09:23

Hi

Just a quick question ref my kit 18-135mm lens and vignetting on my Nikon D80.

Noticed some pictures from my recent holiday showed signs of vignetting. So i got the camera out yesterday, and sure enough at certain points in the lenses zoom range you can see the vignetting through the viewfinder.

Do any other Nikon users experience this with the kit lens? Should i expect to see this? If not then i assume it will be an RMA.

Thanks

robertgilbert86 · 30 Apr 2007 at 10:03

I've just bought this lens and find it ok. When I get home I'll check for it, but I think you'd only get vignetting at 18mm. Maybe you had the hood on?

denz1968 · 30 Apr 2007 at 10:37

robertgilbert86 said:
I've just bought this lens and find it ok. When I get home I'll check for it, but I think you'd only get vignetting at 18mm. Maybe you had the hood on?

The hood was definately not on

Helium_Junkie · 30 Apr 2007 at 11:28

I wouldnt have expected vignetting on a telephoto

Do you have any filters attached?

alexisonfire · 30 Apr 2007 at 11:33

Yeah vignetting on that lens seems odd. Only thing i can think of that might cause it is what helium mentioned - filter stacking. What focal range do you get it?

denz1968 · 30 Apr 2007 at 21:05

Helium_Junkie said:
I wouldnt have expected vignetting on a telephoto
Do you have any filters attached?

Yes, I have a UV permanently attached, and a CP which i use sometimes, sometimes not. On this occasion it was attached, but if I recall correctly i got vignetting without the CP attached also.

SDK^ · 30 Apr 2007 at 21:20

You just answered your own question. Remove the filters and you'll get no more vignetting

denz1968 · 1 May 2007 at 08:59

SDK^ said:
You just answered your own question. Remove the filters and you'll get no more vignetting

OK. You are correct

Tried without the CP this morning and no vignetting at all.

So I assume it is just a stack up of filters that have caused it, and no way around it other than to live with it and photoshop it out????

Thanks

Messiah Khan · 1 May 2007 at 09:17

Im not sure if it would work, but you could try using stepping rings and use larger filters? Although then you might have the stepping rings cause the vignetting.

Edit; Or you could use the square Lee or Cokin filters.

denz1968 · 1 May 2007 at 09:49

messiah khan said:
Edit; Or you could use the square Lee or Cokin filters.

Looks like time to change filter system

Would you keep the screw thread UV filter if going to Lee or Cokin??

SilverPenguin · 1 May 2007 at 13:07

denz1968 said:
OK. You are correct Tried without the CP this morning and no vignetting at all.

So I assume it is just a stack up of filters that have caused it, and no way around it other than to live with it and photoshop it out????

Thanks

Why are you using both filters together? Take off the UV and use the CP when you need the effect of the CP. There is no good reason to use both together anyway, in the real world UV filters do very little other than protect the front element. Also, the more glass (especially cheap glass) you add to the front of the lens the more you will reduce contrast and sharpness.

So again, I say remove the UV when your using the CP and you'll have no vignetting and nice colourful images staight out of the camera.

denz1968 · 1 May 2007 at 14:02

SilverPenguin said:
Why are you using both filters together? Take off the UV and use the CP when you need the effect of the CP. There is no good reason to use both together anyway, in the real world UV filters do very little other than protect the front element. Also, the more glass (especially cheap glass) you add to the front of the lens the more you will reduce contrast and sharpness.

So again, I say remove the UV when your using the CP and you'll have no vignetting and nice colourful images staight out of the camera.

Was always keeping UV filter on as a matter of couse. It just meant that basically the lens never got exposed. But I will take what you say on board.

Thanks

divine` · 1 May 2007 at 15:30

SilverPenguin said:
Also, the more glass (especially cheap glass) you add to the front of the lens the more you will reduce contrast and sharpness.

There was no post processing done to those at all (sharpening/contrast/levels anything)

denz1968 · 1 May 2007 at 15:39

divine_madness said:
There was no post processing done to those at all (sharpening/contrast/levels anything)

OK thanks for that. So are you saying do away with the UV filter??

robertgilbert86 · 1 May 2007 at 15:40

Anyone wana buy a 67mm UV filter?

divine` · 1 May 2007 at 15:49

denz1968 said:
OK thanks for that. So are you saying do away with the UV filter??

I'm not saying you should or shouldn't, just providing a basis for comparison so you can make your own mind up.

Personally, I think the shots without the filter are noticeably sharper and more saturated (this was more apparent in the full shots where the sky was blue rather than grey/blue with the UV filter on) but i'll probably end up leaving the UV on there as a protector, take it off for anything I feel needs it removed.

Messiah Khan · 1 May 2007 at 15:57

While we are talking about filters.. Ive got a CPL filter(Not sure about brand, but it was cheapish) And one thing that bugs me about it, is that it spins too easy. I know they have to be able to spin , but mine is very loose. I quite often find myself rotating it by accident when I remove the lens cap etc. Are there anny models/brands out there that have the rotation stiffer, so that it will rotate if I want it to, but not so that I spin it accidentally?

robertgilbert86 · 1 May 2007 at 16:03

messiah khan said:
While we are talking about filters.. Ive got a CPL filter(Not sure about brand, but it was cheapish) And one thing that bugs me about it, is that it spins too easy. I know they have to be able to spin , but mine is very loose. I quite often find myself rotating it by accident when I remove the lens cap etc. Are there anny models/brands out there that have the rotation stiffer, so that it will rotate if I want it to, but not so that I spin it accidentally?

My new HOYA 77mm CPL is a little too stiff for my liking. My old HAMA was much nicer to use, and didn't block as much light.

SilverPenguin · 1 May 2007 at 16:22

divine_madness said:
I'm not saying you should or shouldn't, just providing a basis for comparison so you can make your own mind up.

Personally, I think the shots without the filter are noticeably sharper and more saturated (this was more apparent in the full shots where the sky was blue rather than grey/blue with the UV filter on) but i'll probably end up leaving the UV on there as a protector, take it off for anything I feel needs it removed.

I'd agree with that, the filterless ones are better. That was the conclusion I came to a few years ago and have never used one since, my lenses are nakes %99 of the time with the exception of the lens hood and I never have any problems at all.

robertgilbert86 said:
My new HOYA 77mm CPL is a little too stiff for my liking. My old HAMA was much nicer to use, and didn't block as much light.

I have a 77mm Nikon CP, its stiff so you can't move it by mistake but easy enough to move that your not fighting against it. Not the cheapest route to take though!