Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2012, 04:16 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
I use my DA*16-50 quite a bit with my K7, sometimes with the K5, and I have yet to report continuous flare with that combo.
JP
The 16-50/2.8 is probably the most flare prone lens Pentax have ever produced....

03-14-2012, 04:45 PM   #17
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,198
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The 16-50/2.8 is probably the most flare prone lens Pentax have ever produced....
Sorry to see that your DA*16-50 is so prone to flare !

Mine,on the other hand, doesn't really show that much flare, even in backlit situations.
Well, maybe I got lucky.

I started to check a few "reviews" here and there on the WEB about this flare and of course I've come across a few reports mentioning such behavior.
There were also some reports on the "positive" side of things, stating that many other high end lenses are also quite subject to this.

Where can I read the report stating that the DA*16-50 is the worst flare prone lens ever produced by Pentax? I am curious to see what sort of pics actually show this and under which lighting conditions.


@ OP: Did you get any suggestion(s) which will correct the situation?

Cheers to all.

JP
03-14-2012, 04:55 PM   #18
Veteran Member
Don From The Radio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Delaware
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 344
I had noticeable CA and flare on exactly one photo that I took with my DA*16-50 when I had it. For a lens with such a huge front element, it's remarkably good on flare, if you ask me. Use the hood, don't use a UV filter (the hood is sturdy enough to protect it), and don't shoot into the sun. You'll be fine.
03-14-2012, 04:58 PM   #19
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,198
QuoteOriginally posted by Don From The Radio Quote
I had noticeable CA and flare on exactly one photo that I took with my DA*16-50 when I had it. For a lens with such a huge front element, it's remarkably good on flare, if you ask me. Use the hood, don't use a UV filter (the hood is sturdy enough to protect it), and don't shoot into the sun. You'll be fine.
Ditto !

No filter ... use the hood and,

You must be, like me, one lucky fellow ! with hardly no flare from that lens.

JP

03-14-2012, 05:20 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,744
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The 16-50/2.8 is probably the most flare prone lens Pentax have ever produced....
Wow. Compared to the old non coated lenses? Even compared to a more recent vintage lens like the FA 50, the 16-50 does a lot better.

Sure, compared to recent primes (like the DA 15 limited), it is more flare prone, but it isn't that bad. Really.
03-14-2012, 05:25 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
Original Poster
Ok, will probably buy one later with so much reassurance;-)
03-14-2012, 05:38 PM   #22
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,198
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Wow. Compared to the old non coated lenses? Even compared to a more recent vintage lens like the FA 50, the 16-50 does a lot better.

Sure, compared to recent primes (like the DA 15 limited), it is more flare prone, but it isn't that bad. Really.
Even the 15 Ltd, (I agree it is better than the 16-50 for flare) which I happen to use as well, flare is going to happen under some circumstances.

I think there is a bit of hyper mode here for saying this (the DA*16-50) lens is the worst ever produced by Pentax.
Nonetheless, I have it, use it, and sure enjoy it.

JP
03-14-2012, 06:11 PM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,744
Just another shot (this one at 16 mm and f5.6) shot directly into the sun. Once again, a little bit of flare, but still pretty good overall contrast.



03-14-2012, 06:56 PM   #24
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The 16-50/2.8 is probably the most flare prone lens Pentax have ever produced....
I've owned the 16-50 almost since it came out, and I've never seen it on my copy. My 50-135 has shown flare in extreme cases, but I still love it.
03-15-2012, 04:07 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
Original Poster
Ok I hold you to your words and get one:-)
03-15-2012, 05:32 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Just another shot (this one at 16 mm and f5.6) shot directly into the sun. Once again, a little bit of flare, but still pretty good overall contrast.
No. It is horrid. You don't see much of the flare because you use such a wide aperture; it has the effect of reducing the contrast which is clearly visible in the image. If you had stopped it down to F:16 you would have been in for a surprise.
03-15-2012, 05:34 AM   #27
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Wow. Compared to the old non coated lenses?
I have never use a non-SMC lens. However, the 16-50 flare signifactnly more than any other Pentax lens I've used including super wides and fish-eye lenses.
03-15-2012, 05:47 AM   #28
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
I am curious to see what sort of pics actually show this and under which lighting conditions.

Heres an example.

03-15-2012, 05:59 AM   #29
Veteran Member
Verglace's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 468
I use a hoya hmc uv(0) filter. If I want to get rid of the flare I just remove it and use some tricks like a newspaper to block the sun if its not in the frame (which usually causes the unwated flare). I don't get much flare if I shoot at the sun, in fact I get the same starburst effects as my old DA15 ltd used to.
03-15-2012, 06:33 AM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,744
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Heres an example.
You clearly either had a dirty filter on the front, or a dirty front element.

I just have never seen anything resembling that, but maybe copies differ...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thematic A Flair for Flare jheu02 Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 546 4 Days Ago 01:53 PM
Measurement of lens flare (veiling glare) with and without UV filter labnut Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 05-14-2011 09:13 AM
Nature Tame, yet wild, rabbit topgun Post Your Photos! 3 05-10-2011 11:56 AM
What is this (flare?) ? sterretje Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-03-2011 08:37 AM
Manfrotto 359 Long Lens Support with gimbal head? need to tame the SMC 1000mm tvfd911 Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 9 05-08-2010 05:51 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top