Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/09/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Flare Question......
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:59:46 -0400

Filter with no hood on that lens outside could be it.
And I'm sure by now you've checked your real element. And cleaned the
filter. Both sides. Under very good light.

--------------------
Mark William Rabiner
Photography
mark at rabinergroup.com


> From: Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 20:58:39 -0700
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Flare Question......
> 
> Well, the Tri Elmar has basically a lousy hood.. it is the same as the 21
> ASPH....the thing has really little to no shading and when used with a
> filter, is worse.. the filter is almost at the end of the shade anyway.....
> 
> And I did have the UV/IR filter on.... ( M8 camera.....)
> 
> And the sun, or rather white wall reflection thereof, was in the shot.....
> 
> In doing some more thinking, maybe Geoff did hit on the problem....
> reflection by the B+W 486 filter.....
> 
> I will try to post something later to get a better response.....
> 
> Frank Filippone
> Red735i at earthlink.net
> 
> 
> 
> Have you checked for other possible contributing factors? Dirty front
> element or filter? Filter quality (if fitted)? Reflections into your shot
> from another source? The inside of the (extended) lens hood?
>  My guess is gruk on the front optical surface. Worst case there is damage
> to the front element coating but finger grease is much more likely. Maybe
> post a sample shot?
> Cheers
> Geoff
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> 
> 
> On 7 September 2010 06:45, Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net> 
> wrote:
> 
>> I got some flare from my 90 Elmarit M ( the one with the built in hood)...
>> and I was surprised.
>> 
>> The (partial) background ( and source of the flare) was the reflected
>> light from a very bright wall, the foreground ( also called subject
>> material) was a group of dancers under a tall roof.....  so I was
>> shooting under the roof, while the wall was a long way away, but
>> visible in a corner of the image area
>> 
>> Exposure was 1 / 250 at F2.8... background would have been sunny 16.....
>> F16
>> at 1 /160....  M8, UV/IR Filter on the lens.
>> 
>> Do you think I would have had the same results if I had used a
>> different 90?
>> AA?
>> 
>> PS.. Did not get flare using my Tri Elmar.....F4 @ 1/125... same
>> camera position, obviously different field of view....
>> 
>> Frank Filippone
>> Red735i at earthlink.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




In reply to: Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Flare Question......)