Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/06/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
I don't think it was necessarily the UV filter that caused the goober
in your shot, Roger. I haven't used a UV filter on my Summicron in a long
time, and I still get a lot of flare in my 'contre jour' pictures. Too bad,
as that sort of shot can make an interesting picture when it works (on those
rare occasions when the sun pops out here). About all I can do is move
around and try to frame the shot so I'm not shooting directly into the sun.
I guess I'd be interested to know if the Summilux ASPH controls flare any
better than the Summicron, but for now it's purely a hypothetical interest.
Chuck Albertson
Seattle, Wash.
At 05:39 AM 6/6/96 -0700, Roger L. Beamon wrote:
>The darndest things influence and establish our feelings and biases toward
>equipment. Quick example: Shooting with my "normal" lens on the M6, the 35
>Summicron, for which I have nothing but affection, when the vision of a
>particular shot hit me. It required shooting directly into the sun. The
>result was exactly what I wanted, EXCEPT there was a big old double
>reflection of the aperture in the shot. A flare phenomonon or the result of
>the B+W uv filter on the lens. Almost assuredly the latter, but now I have a
>doubt in my mind. So now the nagging thought of whether the 35/1.4 ASPH
>should be my next "absolutely necessary" purchase creeps into my head. We
>humans are a strange lot.
> --
> Roger Beamon, Natural History Interpreter & Photographer
> Docent: Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
> INTERNET: beamon@primenet.com
>
>
>