[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Must admit, I have never tested a lens for flare resistance by putting the sun in the very center of the frame. Not at all surprised by the results given the unusual image, other than the lack of veiling flare is remarkable, IMHO. Few lenses would hold the contrast so well.

[nomadkng]

.... I'd personally get either of the two DFA standard zooms, rather than putting down a lot of money for a prime.

I was afraid you'd say that....lol

[pres589]

Here's my latest idea; sell that DA40. Or just, you know, have it and don't bring it. Get an HD DA 35 Macro and use that. It seems like it's got good flare control and is wider than the 40. Then get a 50 1.8 or 1.4 or 55* like you mentioned if you want something in that focal length.

[Nicolas06]

Funilly from what I experienced, DA15, DA21, DA35ltd, DA40 all resist extremely well to flare. DA20-40 is also stellar and not that expensive.

FF is not always better or at least more cost efficient

[Nicolas06]

Must admit, I have never tested a lens for flare resistance by putting the sun in the very center of the frame. Not at all surprised by the results given the unusual image, other than the lack of veiling flare is remarkable, IMHO. Few lenses would hold the contrast so well.

Honestly, since I no longer have zoom and rely on prime, I never have issue with flare. Never.

Here DA15 at work... As you said having the sun not exactly in the center is for composition. Not for technical flare issues.





(A pano stich)


In found out that the 21 and 35ltd many extremely well for themselves too.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Nicolas, you have a considerable amount of veiling flare in those shots. While I agree that prime lenses tend to resist flare better than zooms, nothing is absolute. For instance, my 16-45 resists veiling issues considerably better than my FA 35. Personally, I typically find general veiling a greater detriment than a modest specular flare, although some veiling can be mostly corrected in conversion.

[Nicolas06]

Nicolas, you have a considerable amount of veiling flare in those shots. While I agree that prime lenses tend to resist flare better than zooms, nothing is absolute. For instance, my 16-45 resists veiling issues considerably better than my FA 35. Personally, I typically find general veiling a greater detriment than a modest specular flare, although some veiling can be mostly corrected in conversion.

For me, if you see rays arround a strong light source, is not flare but diffraction. The diaphragm can change the shape of that diffraction. i have a HD DA so the starburst are less vislble an SMC would show the starbursts.

But there no artifact, and no global loss of contrast and no internal reflections.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

If you look closely at the images posted both by Greg and me on the previous page, the contrast loss is comparatively minimal. Unless the scenes you shot were in particularly hazy conditions, the loss of contrast on your shots - and especially in the extended sun ray areas - are significant, and especially so considering the exposure loss or processing preferences that show up in the lost shadow areas. Not extreme considering the situation, but not what I would consider near top of class.

[nomadkng]

Funilly from what I experienced, DA15, DA21, DA35ltd, DA40 all resist extremely well to flare. DA20-40 is also stellar and not that expensive.

FF is not always better or at least more cost efficient

Well cost efficiency has never been a reason I use when choosing photography equipment. My equipment has been paid for by the results I get, so my choice of equipment is results driven.

And "better" is a highly subjective term and that debate is far beyond the scope of this thread.

I appreciate your input, but I owned and sold a DA15 when I used a K3 because I did not like it's rendering style (on several levels). I certainly wouldn't consider it for use with a FF sensor, especially when adding in that it's a crop mode only option. The same applies to the DA21 and DA20-40.

I have been toying with the idea of an FA20-35, but I also owned one a couple years ago and ended up selling it because the red fringing was just plain bad, even at f16. I also wasn't fond of the "brown" leaning tones.

[northcoastgreg]

But there no artifact, and no global loss of contrast and no internal reflections.

I agree. My DA Limiteds (15, 21, and 35) are, along with my DA 10-17, are my most flare resistant lenses, and are one of the (many) reasons I'm sticking with APS-C for the nonce.

I have been toying with the idea of an FA20-35, but I also owned one a couple years ago and ended up selling it because the red fringing was just plain bad, even at f16. I also wasn't fond of the "brown" leaning tones.

Flare control on the FA 20-35 is good, but not necessarily great. Not sure what "brown" leading tones means, but given that the FA Limiteds use much of the same technology (they are film lenses using Pentax's "ghostless" coatings, but lacking ED glass), I would expect a lens like the FA 31 to have similar color rendering to the 20-35. So that's a potential issue with the FA 31.

At this point of time, I really think that landscape photographers should be using lenses (particularly zoom lenses) that feature nano (or nano-like) coating technology. If you want glass for landscape photography that's going to give you the contrast and flare control comparable to Canon and Nikon professional glass provide, that's really the only way forward. And that means, once again, either the HD DA 24-70 or the HD DA 28-105.

And to conclude with a general remark. I'm noticing that a number of landscape photographers migrating to the K-1 are struggling to find the glass they need, and this is largely due to the lack of a wide angle zoom with filter rings in the DFA lineup. Given that the K-1 often considered a great landscape camera (perhaps even the best FF landscape camera currently available), it would seem that providing a wide angle zoom with filter rings should be a central priority for Pentax.

[nomadkng]

There was a 9+ "used" 24-70 at B&H that I took the plunge with this weekend. Should have it by the end of the week.

[Lowell Goudge]

I would agree the samyang lenses are excellent in terms of flare resistance, I have the 8mm fisheye, the 14/2.8 and 85/1.4 also.

The only thing to watch, but likely not too much of an issue with the 14 is it has some barrel distortion.

Flare can be a fact of life with sunsets, but also check your filters if in place. Filters can be the biggest contributor. I have pulled the filters off all my legacy lenses due to the flare and ghost images under bright lighting conditions.

[kh1234567890]

In found out that the 21 and 35ltd many extremely well for themselves too.

The biggest problem I find with the DA21 (at least with the SMC version) is the 'green blob' sensor reflection :