crazy rainbow flair

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I understand there can be flare when shooting into the sun. And I figured the rainbow effect was just prismatic spread. And I know that bright windows and other sources can bloom or show c/a. But I really have not seen this much blooming around windows or light fixtures in any of my shots with other digital cameras that I've used. And I frequently shoot at 1600 ISO at night with bright lights. I also shoot many room interiors at low ISOs and often have light fixtures and bright windows in my shots.

 

So here is what I'm trying to understand. Is this image an anomaly - possibly from using a Zeiss lens. Or is it repeatable? Will it be repaired?

 

In other words if one used an M8 and a Leica coded lens and shot a room interior with normal light fixtures (such as the large one) and specular ones (such as the small ones) would you expect to get a red ring around the light? Would this change at different ISOs?

 

If this is common now, is it expected to be fixed on the updated M8s?

[mike prevette]

I have not seen these issues In the majority of my photos with the m8. I'm thinking the bloomins is actually due to how dirty the window was, basicly making a large soft light. Therfore the gross overexposure was spread to a larger area. As far as the halo around the lamps, I attribute that to the ammount of IR put out by those little halogen par-15 lamps. Since IR focuses at a different point than visible light they apear hailiated.

 

The zeiss is an exceptional lens. I beielve that most of the anomolies in this photo are juat due to the adverse conditions that would have sent any lens/camera combination into fits.

 

_mike

[jaapv]

I understand there can be flare when shooting into the sun. And I figured the rainbow effect was just prismatic spread. And I know that bright windows and other sources can bloom or show c/a. But I really have not seen this much blooming around windows or light fixtures in any of my shots with other digital cameras that I've used. And I frequently shoot at 1600 ISO at night with bright lights. I also shoot many room interiors at low ISOs and often have light fixtures and bright windows in my shots.

 

So here is what I'm trying to understand. Is this image an anomaly - possibly from using a Zeiss lens. Or is it repeatable? Will it be repaired?

 

In other words if one used an M8 and a Leica coded lens and shot a room interior with normal light fixtures (such as the large one) and specular ones (such as the small ones) would you expect to get a red ring around the light? Would this change at different ISOs?

 

If this is common now, is it expected to be fixed on the updated M8s?

 

I think my shot proves that it not a m8 flaw.

[MrEd]

You guys need to stop pointing your camera at the sun.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[mike prevette]

Like I said before, this photo was the only one of several frames that showed this issue, so I'm chalking it up to bieng enviromental. That said, I will always think about it when the m8 gets around the sun.

 

Also Those people who think it's unpossible for a photographer to shoot into the sun, need to spend some time on Magnum's site looking at the work of the masters.

 

_mike

 

_mike

[FastFashnReloaded]

Wow, I didn't think that such a basic question would have raised such intense mudslinging. Alas it is the internet.

 

I didn't post this under the auspice of "discovering a new m8 problem" I just wanted to point out a possible quality the camera has. Knowing how the camera reacts is the only way to garunte being able to deliver exactly what I want when I need to.

_mike

 

Oh PLEASE MIke, like you didn't know that people would react this way? "Knowing how the camera reacts..." I think that in a normal situation, someone would set a shot up so that it had a chance to look good. If you want to make modern art, use a 2MP point and shoot.

 

"Your species is always suffering and dying." - Q

[mike prevette]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Didn't really think I was being that unreasonable. Learning how tools react to input is the same in every aspect of craft, from the carpenter with a hammer, to the painter with a brush.

 

Also modern art does not necicarily imply the use of inferior tools. Photography is a black magic craft, art is what you put in the photograph.

 

_mike

[AlanG]

I think my shot proves that it not a m8 flaw.

 

Are you refering to the photo of the tree with the sun behind it? If so, I don't see how that is comparable. I am specifically wondering about the red ring around the large light fixture and the red rings around the small lights. Also this may be speed sensitive requiring above a certain ISO and perhaps would only show up against a darker background than your example provides.

 

Your tree image is far too small for me to judge anything from it. But I assume you looked at it closely and didn't see any problems. So you can shoot using an M8 into the sun with what seems like fairly typical photographic results which is good. But I am not really asking about that.

 

So if it doesn't offend anyone, I'd like to know if others have shot images with similar light fixtures and gotten this red ring effect? Perhaps if it is from IR, someone has shot with the filter and without. Although I can't quite fathom why IR would make a darker red ring around something.

[mike prevette]

If the red ring is from IR, it's because the IR image would be out of focus in comparision to the visible spectrum image. The different wavelengths of light converge at different focal planes. This out of focus image would effect the visible light image because of the extreme IR sensitivity in the M8. I have had this effect in several photos, and mainly from hallogen lights. I don't have a filter here to test further with.

 

_mike

[AlanG]

If the red ring is from IR, it's because the IR image would be out of focus in comparision to the visible spectrum image. The different wavelengths of light converge at different focal planes. This out of focus image would effect the visible light image because of the extreme IR sensitivity in the M8. I have had this effect in several photos, and mainly from hallogen lights. I don't have a filter here to test further with.

 

_mike

 

So you feel it does happen in other shots.

 

I can't say that it is not IR but it seems unlikely . I haven't really thought it through completely or researched IR, so please bear with me here. The color around the lights and the windows are red at the top and purple at the bottom. So it seems to be working in a linear direction up and down rather than in a spherical one from the light source. (Although I haven't seen the whole image at 100%)

 

You were using a wide angle lens with a lot of depth of field so the IR should be in focus too. (If IR was so unsharp then you'd see a lot of blurry edges on other M8 images that have IR contamination.) But perhaps it is the IR radiation that spills into adjacent pixels and this won't happen with light. Who knows? I'm just speculating the cause here.

 

Perhaps this is one of the things that the Leica firmware corrects when optimizing w/a image from coded lenses.

[mike prevette]

Good points.

 

I have always been of the understanding that wide angle lenses actually had a greater shift in focus with IR light. Very similar to the fact that flange focal length is much more important to wide angle lenses.

 

>edit this article explains the shift and has a photo of a zoom with seperate IR shift marks for different focal lengths. Reflected infrared photography: Optical considerations

 

My Zeiss 21 actually has a IR focus mark, and it is considerable offset from the standard focus mark. For example if your focused at IR infinity, the lens is visible focused at about 7.8 feet. And visible infinity puts the IR focus point well beyond the the settings of the lens, most likely making it extremely out of focus. I would assume that since the M8 sees this extended out of focus IR image that it would creat an effect very similar to the one shown.

 

_mike

[tjphoto]

It's a cool shot. Almost all cinematic lighting is back lite. I shoot into full sun all the time.

From the looks of most photos on here, you guys might try it yourself. If you guys didn't know, lens flare is cool.

[jaapv]

In the last issue Natur Fotografie there is a shot of Marabou's in a tree against the setting sun. The sun itself has a very pronounced red fringe, as have the outlines of the branches and the birds. Clearly some kind of blooming or fringing. The shot was taken with a 1DsMkII. Get real. In this kind of light the answer is: Yes there is flare under these circumstances. So what?

[adan]

Mike: returning to your question - i just got a similar effect using my C/V 15mm against the sun where the sun was just outside the frame (ISO160). There was a beam of generally white flare spreading into one corner of the shot, and it had similar rainbow ripples through it.

 

No window glass involved - outdoor shot.

 

The flare is common old flare, but the coloring could be something common to Cosina-made superwide glass (they build the Zeiss 21), or it could be some odd effect of the microlenses doing a prismatic thing with the flared light.

 

I kind of think it's probably something inherent in the lens(es), that is just a bit more noticeable looking at digital files pixel by pixel than looking at slides on a lightbox.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[plasticman]

Get real. In this kind of light the answer is: Yes there is flare under these circumstances. So what?

 

Jaap - i honestly don't think that Mike was trying to stir things up. He found an interesting artefact in one of his shots, and the debate about its possible causes and repeatability is definitely legitimate.

 

I personally think that the M8-untouchables need to calm down a little.

[RaySwan]

Jaap - i honestly don't think that Mike was trying to stir things up. He found an interesting artefact in one of his shots, and the debate about its possible causes and repeatability is definitely legitimate.

 

I personally think that the M8-untouchables need to calm down a little.

 

I agree with you. He was simply making an observation but he forgot where he was! There are two basic kinds of photographers. Those interested in collecting equipment and shooting occasionally and those only interested in the final image. The latter buy equipment only as a means to an end, a great image. The former feel assaulted when you say anything about the equipment they have. The latter are interested on what the gear can do.

 

For instance, I'm only interested in B&W witih this camera. I'm thinking that maybe the IR problem might be part of the reason I've seen so many nice B&W shots? Could it be that this problem might be a benefit for me? That's why I'm reading these threads. I may end up looking for an early version of the M8. Not only that, but like the D200 banding problem Nikon has I haven't found it to be a problem for me. I've taken3000 images with it and found banding on 2 images. It's still a great color camera in my opinion.

 

So when I get my M8, if I find something wrong with it I'll think of the story of the Emperor with no cloths on! I'll just pretend there are no problems with it so as not to upset those who practice Leica religious faith.