16-35 flare

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by edward_h, Apr 21, 2005.

  1. For those of you who are interested in this glass' flare characteristics: I was out night photographing tonight because I was bored and ended up unknowingly testing the 16-35 for flare. I do have a B+W uv-filter on it, but a separate test shows exactly no difference between a naked lens and uv-filtered lens so don't jump on my back unnecessarily; the uv-filter makes _no_ difference, I've checked. Now regarding the flare: I shot straight into several light sources. I expected some flare. I haven't yet used any glass that is completely flare free when shot into a light source. What surprized me was the sheer amount of flare. It's everywhere! As much as I like/love the 16-35, it's not going to be my night photography glass I don't think. Too susceptible to flare and I shoot cityscapes a lot. Inside, sure, there isn't any problem. During daytime there isn't any flare problem with it either, but it's during night photography that the 16-35 becames close to unusable. As a comparison, my 24-70 rarely, rarely flares.
  2. Yup. In your earlier thread on the same lens, another poster wrote: > And I thought to myself... 'hmmm, I wonder if this fellow would trade with me.' Indeed my copy is a pretty flare prone lens. I try to make an asset of it whenever possible.
  3. Of course, whether I'm succeeding in making an asset of the flare... that's another story.
  4. Wow, Scott, that is a LOT of flare. Do the Canon wide angle primes flare (like the 14mm-L and the 20mm)? If they don't, perhaps toting them along is the only way to get those focal lengths when shooting into light sources.
  5. I would expect any lens to flare in this situation (can you show us some comparisons Edward) - and as the light source(s) in each picture is within the frame how exactly will any lenshood help?
  6. > I would expect any lens to flare in this situation (can you show us some comparisons Edward) Here one... not exactly the same shot but there are a lot of bright lights in the frame and flare is almost nonexistent. I say almost because there IS some flare, but it's so close to the light it gets caught up in the light's halo and can be ignored.
  7. Thanks Edward but those light sources look much less intense than in your 16-35 shot

Share This Page