Lens flare - I'm getting lots (pics)

Ben Digedig

Ben Digedig

Well-known member
Can anyone here confirm that they too are getting significant lens flare on their HPX 300? We touched on it here before, and it is an artifact of all lenses as light bounces INSIDE them causing this. I had it recently on a £10k lens I was using on a digi Beta camera.

I am however concerned that the level of flare I'm getting may be a fault after seeing some recent shots.

This shot has a Schneider W/A adapter on, and I recorded the scene with and without - there is no significant reduction in flare with the adapter off.

MASSIVEflareMPwaadapterUSEDBUTNOTTO.jpg



All the following shots are adapter off :


waterflare.jpg



noteflaretoprightnowadapter.jpg



gooddemoofbadflareandgooddofDEINTER.jpg

(sorry for the 1/3"chip shallow DOF on this above one :laugh: - but do you see the flare on the Nikon name?)


The purple flare is pretty off putting - and In saying that I am making plenty of allowances for the fact that a 2/3" HD lens costs 5 figures £ or $.

Pls let me have your thoughts.

Thx
 
Guys - any feedback on this? Is it typical/normal? Are you getting similar results on sharp light to dark transitions?

BD
 
Actually it is flare. It happens only on overexposed areas, and it is showing up on both sides of the object. A typical lateral chromatic aberration would show purple on one side and green on the other, and is not restricted to overexposed areas.

Top-end cameras typically have a flare setup option in the menus. The HPX300 doesn't.
 
Last edited:
Ok - thanks Barry. Its a cost/function compromise thing and not an issue with my camera/lens then.

Cheers

D
 
Purple flares? Never saw that on my HVX 200. Have shot water reflections just like Ben's shots, no purple. It becomes a deal breaker for me. Really thinking about buying this camera, someone please convince me otherwise.
 
What I heard someone tell somewhere that flare is mostly visible in overexposed conditions. So I guess there are more than one option to change the exposure conditions (even I can think of a few) but was wondering which one is the most effective.


Ben Digedig said:
What kind of useful post is that Cees??? ;-)

Is there an anti-flare button under the handle or something that I dont know of?

BD :)
Click to expand...
 
You thinking of dropping in some DRS then Cees? Hmmm - might try it, but I found it works best in shots with a genuinely large dynamic range - rather than ones with hotspots... In that top image example DRS it might make the shadows noisy. D
 
Those highlights are so small in that water pix, that closing down the aperture will make your water too dark. Can you imagine what this camera might look like against a blown out window?
 
It is worth trying it with DRS.

Ben Digedig said:
You thinking of dropping in some DRS then Cees? Hmmm - might try it, but I found it works best in shots with a genuinely large dynamic range - rather than ones with hotspots... In that top image example DRS it might make the shadows noisy. D
Click to expand...
 
This is nothing new, in fact could be easily replicated with most if not all 1/3" chip cameras fairly easily. Point at a mid to dark area with an extreme highlight next to it behind it and voila.
 
Agreed.

I have seen it on an HVX200 and HPX500. Fairly overexposed areas flare poorly on CCDs. If the exposure is extreme, you will see the tell-tale 'rip' or 'stripe'.

I wish it didn't occur, as it looks so typical 'video' to me. Anytime a highlight has a color fringe, be it green and red or blue/purple, it just looks fake. The only way I know how to reduce it is to actually reduce the dynamic range of the scene so that the highlights just reach or barely exceed 100IRE.


Jason
 
Never in 30 years of shooting have I seen purple high lights as indicated in Ben's original water shot.
Not with any 2/3" camera, nor with my HVX 200.

Ben have you tried using a pola in exterior settings to see if this might knock the purple out?
 
My instinct too Barry.

I tend to have the polariser in on exterior shots, but the only one I'd definitely say it was in on was the slate shot. I can imagine I took it out for the water glint shot.

BD
 
Ben, In the start of this tread you said " I had it recently on a £10k lens I was using on a digi Beta camera" So why do you think now it is the lens if a 10K lens has the same problem as I understand from yourself (see your first post)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top