[Ben_Edict]

I would love to compare your K15/3.5 to my newly aquired Samyang 14/2.8 I got the samyang because it was easy to get at a price well belwo what the pentax 15mm goes for, and have been questioning the difference in performance between the two. If I had to bet, I would think the pentax is much better on distortion, worse on CA and probably worse on internal reflections as well. but I seem to have hijacked the thread a little. OOPS!

The flareing of the K15 is really heavy, when shooting into a light source. Even my Sigma 15-30, which is not too highly regarded, has way better flare control. On the other hand the K15 is sharp and has excellent colour and contrast. I simply love that lens for the combination of sharpness, contrast and its "typical Pentax" colour rendition. Distortions are more or less limited to the amount inherent in the lens design and you won't see the distortions typical for wide angle zoom lenses and the like. But I cannot compare it to the Samyang, as I have no experience with it. The example images I have seen so far, don't look bad at all, though.

As the 15/3.5 was produced over quite a long period in several incarnations, flareing may vary between the different modells, though. So I would expect a later A-version to have better coatings.

[Cannikin]

Your lens looks fine; that pink artifact (and the yellow hexagon inbetween the street lights) are perfectly normal. There is no such thing as a flare proof lens, only that some make it less obvious than others. The 15 is exceptional in performance, but still far from "flare-proof".

It's actually not that hard to provoke visible flare artifacts from the 15 if you look close enough (and no I'm not talking about the starbursts). In particular, there tends to be a subtle clustering of hexagonal artifacts around exceptionally bright off-center light sources like the sun (and occasionally some colored streaking). They sometimes take on different colors, but are usually the same color as the light source. I'm pretty sure that pink thing in your picture is one of them and that hexagon in between the two lights is definitely one of them. It's not a big issue as they usually blend in with the glare around the light source, but the more you stop down the more obvious they get; they get more well defined and the glare around the light source becomes smaller. They also become much more visible if you overexpose.

There is no way to get rid of them (just like any other lens), but you can minimize their appearance if you avoid stopping down more than f/8, and avoid overexposure (or even underexpose a bit). f/8 is plenty to get the starburst effect, gives you massive DOF already (3ft/1m to infinity), and is the aperture of maximum sharpness on this lens anyway.

Btw, I should note that one time I did manage to provoke some truly atrocious flare that smeared blurry streaks across the entire frame. I've never been able to reproduce it outside of that day (might have been something smeared on the front element). I found that the lens hood is not long enough on the 15, as shading it with my hand helped a lot.

[twitch]

From my experience of the DA15 that look perfectly normal.

Your exposure will affect flare a great deal by the way. I tend to bracket when I shoot into strong light sources so I know I have a shot that isn't severely flare affected.

[Marc Sabatella]

If you want to see wide angle flare... put a 28mm f2.8 on film, with no hood. Good luck .

I haven't had that "pleasure", but I can tell you that even on digital, my M28/2.8 is my most flare-prone lens (a close second would be my Vivitar/Samyang 500/8 mirror lens). Not just in the obvious sense of seeing reflections of light sources, but just a general loss contrast when shooting anywhere in the general vicinity of the sun. I'm sure this contributes to the low esteem with which many hold this lens, but it gets a *lot* better with a good hood.

[paperbag846]

it gets a *lot* better with a good hood

I agree! I loved my 28mm lens (with a hood). I think, from it's time, I got the most keepers with that lens overall. Really, really high IQ all around, and the FOV is to die for... it just took horribly to flare without a hood (exact same experience - veiling flare galore).

I'm planning on replacing it with the F 28mm 2.8, but right now the kit is covering that ground (still feeling the sting from my recent spending sprees).

In fact, my first post on this forum was a "is this normal?" post with some serious flare from my new-old 28mm lens. One of the sages here told me about the wonders of lens hoods, and my life was forever changed .

[mikeSF]

i know this wasn't the question, but just FYI, the double starburtsts on the streetlights suggest that those lights have 2 bulbs in them.

[123ben]

First of all, thanks to everyone responding to my questions!!! Really great how you helped me to find a decision! I will definitely keep it and take it with me to Tibet next week. Looking how it performs there

It appears that the first 2 photos were taken from a pedestrian walkway.

Yapp!

I believe the double star busts were caused by vibration from traffic below.

Hmm but in this case the picture won’t be that sharp? I’ve been there today and found out that the lights have 2 bulbs

The star effect is quite normal- a smaller aperture will likely reduce it

Yes, I knew that and I was only wondering if it performs well enough in this street light situation.

To get it flare proof simply refrain from shooting directly into a strong light source.

Good tip

There is no way to get rid of them (just like any other lens), but you can minimize their appearance if you avoid stopping down more than f/8, and avoid overexposure (or even underexpose a bit). f/8 is plenty to get the starburst effect, gives you massive DOF already (3ft/1m to infinity), and is the aperture of maximum sharpness on this lens anyway.

I’ll try this within the next few days. Thanks!

Again thanks to everyone! Great forum!