Bigma vignetting with 5D

I couldn't find any info on this when I was buying my 5D so I wanted to add this as a point of reference. Yes, the Bigma has a heavy vignetting issue on a full frame body.

Example:
500mm @ f/8

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Sometimes, I think vignetting just works in some photos... like this one. I like it.

I'm very agreeable with the vignetting found on some of my wide angles and medium format gear. I think it adds a lot of character to the capture. I don't, however, want it on my tele's. I'd rather have to add it in post rather than having to deal with it always being there.

Bit of a bummer. My next option looks like the Sigma 300 2.8 with a TC, but I don't think I could justify spending that amount of money on a long prime. Maybe a Sigmonster is in my future?

It's not bad though and you don't have black corners. I think there's still plenty more than enough information left in the corners to correct it in any RAW processing software and it'd look fine.

that's just some light fall off, it'll take 10 seconds to correct in photoshop.

True, it'd normally just be a quick fix in Bridge, but there's a slight halo effect that causes problems with Bridge's vignetting tool. When you compensate for the vignetting you end up with a strong halo in the middle. I've been playing around with compensating for the vignetting for a while now and haven't found any quick solution - or even a very effective drawn out procedure.

And with my understanding of the terms "light fall off" is another issue. Light fall off refers to parallel with the lens. Vignetting is perpendicular to the axis of the lens.

would you be willing to send me a RAW file? I'd like to run it through CS2's raw converter and see if I can correct it.

angryhampster wrote in post #2649293
would you be willing to send me a RAW file? I'd like to run it through CS2's raw converter and see if I can correct it.

HAPPILY - PM sent. I'm not saying it isn't correctable; it's just not correctable easily. I think I'll try defining a PS action for it.

I find it very pleasing to the eye, and in that shot, I think it would have far less interest without it. To me personally, that is. It adds to the shot.

The bigma is not known for its superior optics. I think you should have suspected it would, but as others have said it generally adds to the photo. I don't have any lenses that naturally vignette, yet I add it in on almost all.

ACR or Lightroom will very quickly batch edit it out if its a issue for you.

coreypolis wrote in post #2649402
The bigma is not known for its superior optics.

Most review sites and owners would disagree with that statement. You'd have to spend 5x as much to get similar results with anything else.

I've been pleased with the forums adherence to the notion that you shouldn't add anecdotal evidence to an issue when you don't have first hand experience. I don't see the Bigma, or any other long tele for that matter, in your gear list. So please, tell me how the Bigma is "not known for it's superior optics". A diamond it is not, but cubic zirconia it certainly is.

[I'll just withdraw that post - I don't think it would have been received well]

cataclysmcow wrote in post #2649501
Most review sites and owners would disagree with that statement. You'd have to spend 5x as much to get similar results with anything else.

I've been pleased with the forums adherence to the notion that you shouldn't add anecdotal evidence to an issue when you don't have first hand experience. I don't see the Bigma, or any other long tele for that matter, in your gear list. So please, tell me how the Bigma is "not known for it's superior optics". A diamond it is not, but cubic zirconia it certainly is.

For the past 2 years I had basically every Canon, Nikon and Lieca lens plus othes at my disposal for free rental I've used all the 300,400 2.8s, 50 1.0s, etc. Just because I don't own them all doesn't mean I don't have first hand knowledge of them

its not in the same league as a long prime, and should be treated as such. a minor vignette on a FF camera should be expected given the nature of the lens.

Ok, I borrow equipment too. Keen.

My request still stands. Show me evidence that states the Bigma isn't known for superior optics. Just because it's not expensive or an L doesn't mean it's not good glass. Find me a reputable source that states that for 1/5th the price you can't get less than 1/2th the performance of the 500mm prime. It shoulders up pretty close to the 500mm prime as far as IQ.