Lenses with most "artistic" lens flare characteristics?

<p>I searched for photo.net for "best lens flare," and found the thread below:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00TXNu</p>

<p>Among the best candidates for lenses which produce the most "artistic" flare, the consensus seemed to be:</p>

<p>1. Wide-angle zooms with lots of elements.<br /> 2. Large-aperture Ais primes (e.g., Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 Ais).<br /> 3. Interestingly, one member posted a very beautiful flare effect produced with an AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G VR I, shooting into what appeared to be an ellipsoidal (focusable) stage light.</p>

<p>Any other recommendations? Modern lenses just seemed so darned flare-proof these days. Even my crummy old 18-55mm DX kit lens was hard-pressed to flare-out as I recall (note that I'm looking mainly for FX lens suggestions here). Armed with the above information, since I also own a handful of fast Nikkor Ais lenses, I now plan to experiment with them all. I'll also be testing my three wide-angle FX zooms. Also, one member suggested removing the lens coating to produce more distinctive flare effects. He described exactly how to remove the coating on a lens, but I can't seem to find that thread again (however, to ellicit that "repeating aperture" flare, you probably need to remove any internal coatings as well). I know that FX-maker, Red Giant software makes Knoll Light Factory for Photoshop, which is capable of producing some fairly realistic flares, but I would prefer to produce them optically.</p>

<p>This old post from the Leica forum has some real beauties (but, unfortunately, I don't own a Leica):</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00bg6i</p>

<p>Any other suggestions? Either Nikon FX, or any third-party, full-frame F-mount lens recommendations would be most appreciated!</p>

<p>Most of the time I find flare annoying. Whether it has artistic value is highly personal. To you it may, to me it does not.</p>

<p>Yes, I think it's a cool effect. In the movie world, it's a stylistic effect favored by filmmakers such as Steven Spielberg, Terrence Malick, and J.J. Abrams. Around the time of the release of <em>E.T.</em>, I believe, I remember someone once saying in an interview that, <em>"Spielberg always likes to include a light source in the frame."</em> And, when shooting with anamorphic lenses, you get that cool blue horizontal streak from sources aimed directly into the lens (e.g., car headlights). While these effects can certainly be over-used, I think it can add a lot of "dimension" to a shot.</p>

<p>Photoshop can take any image and add add flare to it. And it does a pretty good job as well. You might want to experiment with it before your ruin a good lens by removing the coating. Also, it is sometimes not possible to get the sun or available lighting in the right spot to produce the flare you want.</p>

<p>The image below is with the flare filter that comes with Photoshop. It does allow numerous options to adjust it. I am not familiar with the flare filter you reference.</p><div></div>

<p>I really like the flare I get from vintage uncoated lenses. They didn't start coating lenses until about 1946. I have a couple of these lenses mounted in Nikon F-mount by SK Grimes. Another thought is that Holga lens available in NIkon mount. I haven't bought one yet, but I think it's certainly uncoated and likely to flare if any light hits the front element. Here's a shot I made using a Petzval lens made in Paris in the mid 1850s by Eugene Derogy. A train is approaching the rail yard shortly after midnight.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>Elliot said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Photoshop can take any image and add add flare to it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I've used the lens flare filter in Photoshop. The Red Giant product is like Photoshop's filter on steroids (written by Photoshop co-author John Knoll), but with many more presets and controls (though I haven't tried it myself yet). Thanks for your comments, but I'd just like to shoot something more organic--something with octagonal aperture reflections, and weird, <em>tweaky</em> light streaks (the Photoshop filter's reflections are both too perfect, and perfectly round).</p>

<p>I just looked around, and found an old DX image, what I thought was shot with the 18-55mm kit lens, but the EXIF data seems to indicate the AF Nikkor 18mm f/2.8. While this lens exhibits some amount of flare, I'm looking for something a bit more extreme, and not quite as "modern," for lack of a better term (of course, I'll now try re-testing this lens on an FX body, at f/2.8):</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/flare1-18.jpg" alt="" /><br /> AF Nikkor 18mm f/2.8D @ f/5.0</p>

<p>Kent said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I really like the flare I get from vintage uncoated lenses. They didn't start coating lenses until about 1946. I have a couple of these lenses mounted in Nikon F-mount by SK Grimes . . .</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes! Like that, too! Good info! Thanks!</p>

<p>Here's another old DX image, this time shot with a Tokina 11-16mm. In this shot, I would've preferred a much more "artistic" optical flare, instead of the pin-point magenta dot just left of center (which I know can be easily removed). While a Photoshop lens flare may suffice for this particular image, I would definitely prefer to use optical flares for any people shots:</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/flare3-11-16.jpg" alt="" /><br /> Tokina 11-16mm DX f/2.8 @ f/11.</p>

<p>Although most modern lenses are quite flare-proof, you can push them to produce the funny flare patterns, for instance by shooting dark scenes with a reflector or a flashlight shining straight into the lens. Best observed in LV or video recording. <br>

I've been looking into some particular diffraction(interference)-related patterned flares, that are mostly observed with ILC, compact-camera and phone-camera lenses, probably due to shorter flange distances.<br>

<a href="

<a href="

I've checked the D90 and my lens collection too, where hints of the abovementioned patterned flares may be spotted too (cross-flare), although much weaker than the "regular" lens flares (I don't have any lens that would flare badly). <br>

The most curious was the flare of the Tamron 60/2 DX macro, which shows a weak "front" flare pattern. <br>

One other curious flare was in the form of concentric circles, but I could only see it with the lens dismounted (can't remember which lens... but surely a common one, no fresnel elements inside).</p>

<p>Here's what I get from my AF Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D, pointed straight at the sun (not much!):</p>

<p><img src="http://studio460.com/images/flare4-14.jpg" alt="" /><br>

AF Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D @ f/8.</p>

<p>Sem said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Although most modern lenses are quite flare-proof, you can push them to produce the funny flare patterns, for instance by shooting dark scenes with a reflector or a flashlight shining straight into the lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes! Ever since I heard about J.J. Abrams' behavior on the set of <em>Star Trek</em> (where he would shine a bright flashlight from just out-of-frame into the camera lens to create spectacular, anamorphic lens flares), I've been dying to give that a go as well for stills (obviously, this technique would be only effective for interior set-ups).</p>

<p>Sem said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've been looking into some particular diffraction (interference)-related patterned flares, that are mostly observed with ILC, compact-camera and phone-camera lenses, probably due to shorter flange distances.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Interesting stuff! Thanks for posting that! I'll have to look into those tools and techniques as well. I have an APS-C ILC that sometimes shoots some weird stuff. I'll take it to work tomorrow and try pointing it at some bright studio lights.</p>

<p>I don't have any images to show but I find that my 55 f/1.2 can flare strongly and my old Nikon 58mm f/1.4 can too. I never had many problems with the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 but then I am not usually looking to produce flare.</p>

<p>Here's a lens that was actually quite good, except flare was easy -<br>

It was the Spiratone 18mm f/3.5 lens, probably made by Sigma. Easy to find in Nikon F mount.</p><div></div>

<p>Ralph, have you tried a stack of old uncoated UV filters in front of a lens yet? Or maybe a couple of 85 and 80A filters to give coloured flares. Come to think of it, I don't know why Cokin or Hoya have never produced a 'Lens Flare' filter. Alternatively, you might try one of those cheap and poorly coated front-of-lens wideangle converters designed for use on video or bridge cameras. It goes without saying that you should throw all your lens hoods away, of course.</p>

<p>Personally I prefer the more refined flare that you get from undercorrected spherical aberration. There's no easy way to duplicate the halo-like look of an old 55mm f/1.2 Nikkor S used wide open.</p>

<p>BTW, I never thought I'd live to see flares coming back into fashion!</p>

<p>I'm surprised we've got this far without mentioning the 43-86mm f/3.5 F lens. Not that I've ever used one (I usually try to avoid flare - and, in the case of the 43-86, rubbish lenses).<br />

<br />

My 200 f/2 is a bit prone to flare, but I don't usually point it anywhere near the sun, if only to stop my eyeballs catching fire.</p>

<p>Somebody once showed me some b+w pictures he had taken in the south of France, even in the midday sun. With a modern multi-coated lens the contrast would have been grossly excessive, but with the Nikon F and pre-AI lens he used, the pictures had a certain magical quality. If you want pronounced flare spots, an old cheapo zoom should do it for you.</p>

<p>David, the thing about excessive contrast is that this is the reason we like having sensors with 14 stops of dynamic range. :-) Much as I'd rather have a sharp lens and soften skin in post than have a soft lens and try to sharpen eyebrows, I'd rather capture a contrasty scene unmolested and try to map the contrast than to have the lens "try to do it". YMMV!</p>

<p>Ralph, if you want some distinction in your flare, you may want to try (maybe rent ?) some of the older Angenieux zooms, particularly shorter ones....and you'll have to adopt it to your camera. Hmmm, couple of extra jobs might help :>). I do recall Vilmos talking about leaving the flare in (au naturale)....if you get my drift. Personally, I avoid it unless it's a solid type and no rings attached.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p>One of my favorite lenses is a Tamron Adaptall 24mm f/2.5, which I've used on several different camera bodies and lens mounts. It's remarkably sharp and contrasty in most conditions, but can also be forced to produce some nifty looking ghosting flare when aimed into the sun. That piston shaped artifact is often missing from most add-on digital editing flare effects.</p>

<p>But it's not easy to force it into flaring - even when shooting stage lighting it's not easy to make it flare. That's why it's one of my favorite lenses to use with the V1 and Fotodiox adapter for live music and theater photography.</p>

<p>Even the 35-70/2.8D AF Nikkor doesn't flare like this. The next best lens for deliberate ghosting flare with lots of interesting artifacts was the 28-90mm f/2.8-3.6 Vivitar Series 1. Pretty good lens overall, and the ghosting flare was reminiscent of a cinematography technique often seen in Westerns as the camera pans across the horizon with the sun low in the sky.</p>

<p><img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00T/00TXVa-140201584.jpg" alt="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00T/00TXVa-140201584.jpg" /></p>

<p>The 1st gen 70-200mm f2,8 VR I lens can indeed flare badly if pointed at the sun, much worse than the preceding two-ring 80-200 mm f2,8 zoom as I found out to my dismay at the time. Another extreme flare candidate is the 14mm f3,5 Sigma of late 1980 vintage. The 35mm f1,4 lens suffers from aberrations wide open but is not glaringly flare-prone (pun permitted).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Also, one member suggested removing the lens coating to produce more distinctive flare effects. He described exactly how to remove the coating on a lens, but I can't seem to find that thread again"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I've read some reports that strong vinegar or acetic acid might help remove coatings. Haven't tried that method myself.</p>

<p>I did remove damaged coatings from a couple of older lenses and filters - the coatings had become blotchy so it was worth experimenting. I used Flitz optical polish. A buffer pad on a portable drill or moto-tool would speed it up, but I just used elbow grease. Interestingly, removing the coating didn't seem to make the lenses and filters more flare-prone. It's possible that the older single coatings weren't all that effective anyway, and the simpler triplet lenses weren't particularly flare-prone anyway.</p>

<p>the sigma 15-30 flares pretty easy. not sure how artistic its flare is though.</p><div></div>

<p>B+W makes a cross screen filter that produces a lens flare simulation. Look here:<br>

<a href="https://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/filters/WorldOfFilters.pdf">https://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/filters/WorldOfFilters.pdf</a></p>

<p>and search the PDF for Cross Screen Filter.</p>

<p>I had an old pre-set Soligor 28mm f/3.5 lens that would flare in a dark basement at midnight. Any of the old WA preset lenses from the 60's will get you all the flare you can possibly want.</p>