[arthur pappas]

At first I thought it was a reflection from the car window (first pic), but the second pic taken outside the vehicle exhibits the same thing. I'd say 70% of my in-car shots have this problem, while maybe one or two outside shots had this problem. My FA50 did not suffer this issue (but it was not used in-car), onlt the FA20. Both lenses had the same model Tiffen filters (49CP & 67CP) on them all day.








What gives here?

[davemdsn]

Lens flare. The shape is the shape of the aperture blades in their partially closed position.

[arthur pappas]

Ah, I have read the term 'lens flare' a lot on these forums but didn't know this is what is How do I stop this from happening?

[Opus9]

That would appear to be a textbook case of good old fashioned lens flare.

This is caused by sunlight (or some other source) shining directly onto the glass of your lens and refracting/reflecting internally within the lens barrel and through the aperture iris, hence the the hexagonal shape of the flare.

Using a lens hood can eliminate this phenomenon in a lot of cases. I've also used my hand to shade my lens while shooting, or even have my wife stand to one side of me to block light from the front of my lens.

[arthur pappas]

Opus9, thanks for the tips! I don't have hoods for either of my lenses, but I did order a couple figuring a pair of hoods would be much cheaper than the wife option

[Lowell Goudge]

you can always try standing in the shade, after all that is what a lens hood does anyway.

Also use your hand, flair is usually localized, and your hand can shade the lens

[Mike Cash]

When without a hood or when the hood alone isn't sufficient, I take off my hat and use it as a sunshade for the lens. Makes me look like an even bigger jackass than I really am, but it keeps those flares out of my pictures.

[Peter Zack]

A hood is a must have item to try and eliminate this. It is much cheaper than the wife option without question

[ftpaddict]

I dislike hoods. I just use my hand.

[flyer]

Everybody mentionned hoods, but flares can also be caused by "cheap" U.V. or Skylight filters. I don't know if you have one on your lens, but if you do, try to take a picture toward a light source with and without the filter to see if it makes any difference.

[Gooshin]

typicaly, lens flare is visable in the viewfinder before you even take your picture, as others have said sometimes all it takes is to just move your hand around until you block that particular beam.

[Peter Zack]

I dislike hoods. I just use my hand.

Dan if you have a 16-45mm and hate the hood, I lost mine in the woods a few weeks ago I`ll take it off your hands!
As others said, filters will also cause light to bounce between the front lens element and the back of the filter. If you use them, make sure you get good quality multi coated ones. I just like hoods because they protect the front of the lens about the same as a Uv or Skylight filter without any IQ loss.

[Gooshin]

I dislike hoods. I just use my hand.

you cant cup your entire lens... a lens hood is not just against direct sunlight flare, its against all light that is not part of the frame.

[konraDarnok]

This is also why people talk a lot about the number of aperture blades. Typically, your more expensive lenses will have more blades -- hence a rounder hole -- and a more pleasing Bokeh (some unpronounceable Japanese word related to 'fuzzy') .

The shape of the aperture will also appear in out of focus highlights. Look closely at, say, a distant tree -- the tiny white holes between the leaves and whatnot will also be little hexagons when a lens with 6 aperture blades is stopped down to take a picture.

[davemdsn]

I would eliminate filters from your lenses entirely. Pentax is famous for great resistance against flare, but a filter in front of the lens renders that control null and void. Throw the cheap glass away. If you insist on using one, get a Pentax brand. I don't use them at all.