Sony FE 90 mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS
8. Vignetting
| A7R II, APS-C, f/2.8 | A7R II, APS-C, f/4.0 |
|
|
In this case you get some chances to notice vignetting only at the maximum relative aperture, where it amounts to 20% (−0.65 EV). By f/4.0 it decreases to an imperceptible level of 6% (−0.19 EV).
Please Support UsIf you enjoy our reviews and articles, and you want us to continue our work please, support our website by donating through PayPal. The funds are going to be used for paying our editorial team, renting servers, and equipping our testing studio; only that way we will be able to continue providing you interesting content for free. |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now let's check the situation on full frame – appropriate thumbnails can be found below.
| A7R II, FF, f/2.8 | A7R II, FF, f/4.0 |
|
|
| A7R II, FF, f/5.6 | A7R II, FF, f/8.0 |
|
|
There are far more problems but we already expected and predicted them in the previous chapter, with significant mechanical vignetting visible in defocused circles of light. By f/2.8 the brightness loss in the frame corners amounts to 53% (−2.17 EV) . What about the results of the competition? The Tamron 2.8/90 VC, a lens with the same parameters, fared a bit better with a value of 46%. The Canon 2.8/100 L IS USM had even a better result, that of 43%. The Sigma 2.8/105 OS was equally weak as the tested lens, with vignetting of 55%.
Fortunately stopping down of the aperture is quite effective when it comes to limiting the vignetting. By f/4.0 that aberration decreases to 29% (−1.01 EV), by f/5.6 it amounts to 17% (−0.55 EV) and by f/8.0 and f/11 it is practically invisible, reaching, respectively, just 10% (−0.31 EV) and 8% (−0.24 EV).
| Sony A7R II, JPEG, f/2.8 |
 |
