16-50mm PLM and flare

Robot camera · 01-12-2023, 04:33 PM

Is this the usual amount of flare I might expect from the 16-50mm PLM lens? My old 16-50 SDM wasn't this bad. It's the veiling flare I'm most concerned about.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by Robot camera; 01-12-2023 at 04:35 PM. Reason: Added a bit.

Sandy Hancock · 01-12-2023, 04:54 PM

That's pretty bad! Were you using the hood? Any filter?

I haven't seen anything like this with mine, but I'm not sure I have shot it with the sun in the frame yet. It might be time to do some tests....

**luftfluss** · 01-12-2023, 04:55 PM

Well, according to the PF review of the lens, the flare suppression in the reviewer's copy was "not particularly impressive".

asahi67 · 01-12-2023, 09:06 PM

Never had this issue on my 16-50 on a K3 but always have the hood on

Robot camera · 01-13-2023, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

That's pretty bad! Were you using the hood? Any filter?

I haven't seen anything like this with mine, but I'm not sure I have shot it with the sun in the frame yet. It might be time to do some tests....

I was using the hood, and a protector filter. I've done some quick tests, and while the filter makes things slightly worse, this veiling flare is still very apparent. The flare still happens (to a lesser extent) when there's a bright background but no sun.

---------- Post added 01-13-23 at 07:55 AM ----------

Originally posted by luftfluss

Well, according to the PF review of the lens, the flare suppression in the reviewer's copy was "not particularly impressive".

Yes, I've seen it. But that review statement is so vague I can't tell if my copy of the lens is typical.

Looking into the lens from both ends, all seems as it should be. In use, focusing and sharpness are just as I had hoped.

BarneyL · 01-13-2023, 02:56 AM

Strong light source in the corner of the frame = bad time

pid · 01-13-2023, 03:10 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Robot camera

I was using the hood, and a protector filter. ...

...that is the reason for the flairs! Don't use a filter if it is not nesessary.

**Rondec** · 01-13-2023, 03:33 AM - **1 Like**

You'll actually have less flare if you include the sun in frame. That said, I would drop the UV filter. I don't know how much protection they really provide, but they are just one more piece of glass for light to pass through and they will add to flare for certain.

**DAKS** · 01-13-2023, 06:57 PM

Rondec: I looked at your photos on 500px and they are great examples of what you did with the sun in the frame. I think yours are great.

Wheatfield · 01-14-2023, 09:28 AM

That's an almost impossible situation for a lens. You have the sun just outside the top left corner of the image, so there will be tons of strong light hitting the front element at an oblique angle. The filter on your lens is going to exacerbate veiling flare to a huge degree.
Pentax flare control is among the best in the business, but it can't work miracles. Veiling flare is nearly impossible to control.
As was mentioned, you are better to have the sun in the frame, or make sure no direct light can be hitting the lens if the sun is outside of the frame. Often this just means a very small adjustment in composition. Had you moved probably less than a foot either left or right you would have not encountered that flare. If you had removed the filter you might also have not had the problem.

**RICHARD L.** · 01-16-2023, 01:36 PM - **1 Like**

**mikesbike** · 01-16-2023, 02:26 PM

That lens is one of my favorites. I bought mine new way back during the 90's for use with my 35mm film bodies. Very useful- as an all-around prime on APS-C, and as a WA on a FF body. Sharp even wide open! Unfortunately, it did not come with a hood. However, I happen to also have the FA 43mm Ltd, which has the same FOV on FF as this FA 28mm on APS-C, so I transfer its hood to the 28mm for APS-C use. For FF, I bought a low-cost screw-on hood for this 28mm lens, which works fine.

As to the DA* 16-50mm PLM zoom lens, it represents much improvement over the original version in a number of ways, but no lens is perfect. And, certainly having the sun or other strong light at that angle from the upper corner is about the toughest test under which a lens could be expected to function perfectly! If the previous version without the HD coatings can do better, I would be surprised.

Robot camera · 01-17-2023, 10:21 AM

Thanks for all your comments so far. I'll post some more examples once I've paid the forum some money, as I've used up my free allowance.

01-12-2023, 09:06 PM	#4
asahi67 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Rainforest of Canada Vancouver Island and the sagebrush of southern Okanagan, BC Posts: 123	16-50 flare Never had this issue on my 16-50 on a K3 but always have the hood on

01-13-2023, 12:53 AM	#5
Robot camera Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Posts: 194 Original Poster	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock That's pretty bad! Were you using the hood? Any filter? I haven't seen anything like this with mine, but I'm not sure I have shot it with the sun in the frame yet. It might be time to do some tests.... I was using the hood, and a protector filter. I've done some quick tests, and while the filter makes things slightly worse, this veiling flare is still very apparent. The flare still happens (to a lesser extent) when there's a bright background but no sun. ---------- Post added 01-13-23 at 07:55 AM ---------- Originally posted by luftfluss Well, according to the PF review of the lens, the flare suppression in the reviewer's copy was "not particularly impressive". Yes, I've seen it. But that review statement is so vague I can't tell if my copy of the lens is typical. Looking into the lens from both ends, all seems as it should be. In use, focusing and sharpness are just as I had hoped. Last edited by Robot camera; 01-13-2023 at 01:10 AM. Reason: Added a bit.

01-16-2023, 01:36 PM - 1 Like	#11
RICHARD L. Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,653	The less elements in the optical layout, the less veiling flare : FA 28 mm f/2.8 AL

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HD Pentax-D FA 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED PLM WR SR & HD Pentax-DA★ 50-135mm f/2.8 ED PLM	D1N0	Pentax News and Rumors	227	11-10-2022 05:44 PM
Nature Winter almost over. 645Z + P67 55 mm f/4. Flare, what flare ???	RICHARD L.	Post Your Photos!	2	10-07-2021 06:25 PM
Received the 16-50mm PLM today	Hazephoto	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	08-13-2021 10:57 AM
55-300 PLM or non-PLM version to K-1? Vignetting etc?	HankVonHeaven	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-29-2017 09:54 AM
Other PLM lenses or updates with plm motor?	Pentigor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	07-05-2016 11:00 AM

01-12-2023, 04:54 PM	#2
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,276	That's pretty bad! Were you using the hood? Any filter? I haven't seen anything like this with mine, but I'm not sure I have shot it with the sun in the frame yet. It might be time to do some tests....

01-12-2023, 04:55 PM	#3
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,629	Well, according to the PF review of the lens, the flare suppression in the reviewer's copy was "not particularly impressive".

01-13-2023, 02:56 AM	#6
BarneyL Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 900	Strong light source in the corner of the frame = bad time

01-13-2023, 03:10 AM - 1 Like	#7
pid Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 567	Originally posted by Robot camera I was using the hood, and a protector filter. ... ...that is the reason for the flairs! Don't use a filter if it is not nesessary.

01-13-2023, 03:33 AM - 1 Like	#8
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,666	You'll actually have less flare if you include the sun in frame. That said, I would drop the UV filter. I don't know how much protection they really provide, but they are just one more piece of glass for light to pass through and they will add to flare for certain.

01-13-2023, 06:57 PM	#9
DAKS Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: McLean, VA Photos: Gallery Posts: 97	Rondec: I looked at your photos on 500px and they are great examples of what you did with the sun in the frame. I think yours are great.

01-14-2023, 09:28 AM	#10
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	That's an almost impossible situation for a lens. You have the sun just outside the top left corner of the image, so there will be tons of strong light hitting the front element at an oblique angle. The filter on your lens is going to exacerbate veiling flare to a huge degree. Pentax flare control is among the best in the business, but it can't work miracles. Veiling flare is nearly impossible to control. As was mentioned, you are better to have the sun in the frame, or make sure no direct light can be hitting the lens if the sun is outside of the frame. Often this just means a very small adjustment in composition. Had you moved probably less than a foot either left or right you would have not encountered that flare. If you had removed the filter you might also have not had the problem.

01-16-2023, 02:26 PM	#12
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,566	That lens is one of my favorites. I bought mine new way back during the 90's for use with my 35mm film bodies. Very useful- as an all-around prime on APS-C, and as a WA on a FF body. Sharp even wide open! Unfortunately, it did not come with a hood. However, I happen to also have the FA 43mm Ltd, which has the same FOV on FF as this FA 28mm on APS-C, so I transfer its hood to the 28mm for APS-C use. For FF, I bought a low-cost screw-on hood for this 28mm lens, which works fine. As to the DA* 16-50mm PLM zoom lens, it represents much improvement over the original version in a number of ways, but no lens is perfect. And, certainly having the sun or other strong light at that angle from the upper corner is about the toughest test under which a lens could be expected to function perfectly! If the previous version without the HD coatings can do better, I would be surprised.

01-17-2023, 10:21 AM	#13
Robot camera Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Posts: 194 Original Poster	Thanks for all your comments so far. I'll post some more examples once I've paid the forum some money, as I've used up my free allowance.