Horrendous flare on 35mm summicron ASPH v1, bad copy?

[IamTheDistance]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, I bought a 35mm summicron ASPH v1 a couple weeks ago and the two days I've been shooting with it, some pictures show this bad flare. I've been looking for this problem on this Forum and some users posted pictures with flares but not as bad as mine. Only one user had the same problem but he posted in 2013 and nobody replied about his problem. Do I have a bad copy or is it a normal problem on this lens? Thanks!

EDIT: The lens had its plastic hood on and I didn't use filters.

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!

Edited December 21, 2020 by IamTheDistance

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[otto.f]

I don’t know, I wonder if flare can vary by the copy, that sounds strange to me. It can vary by aperture though. This photo is taken exactly in a camera position which can elicit flare, viz. with the sun just on the edge of image/not image. Mostly you can predict this because you see it in your viewfinder. I mostly hold a helping hand in line with the angle of the hood to prevent it. You can see the point where your hand just comes into view

Edited December 21, 2020 by otto.f

[IamTheDistance]

1 minute ago, otto.f said:

I don’t know, I wonder if flare can vary by the copy. That sounds strange to me. It can vary by aperture though. This photo is taken exactly in a camera position which can elicit flare, viz. with the sun just on the edge of image/not image. Mostly you can predict this because you see it in your viewfinder. I mostly hold a helping hand in line with the angle of the hood to prevent it. You can see the point where your hand just comes into view

Yes, this flare happens when the sun is outside the frame but not only when it's in the very corner. When shooting with the sun in front of me, the flare is minimal and beautiful. Thanks for your reply!

[wattsy]

Looks pretty normal to me for that lens. When the sun catches the lens at certain angles (not always predictable and obviously impossible to see in advance unless using a digital M with live view) it can be a pretty flarey lens. I usually just roll with the flare when using that lens – it rarely ruins a photo IME. In the OP's example, I think the flare adds a bit of atmosphere. I'd be more concerned with levelling the horizon.

[otto.f]

2 minutes ago, wattsy said:

obviously impossible to see in advance u

Don’t you think that in this photo you would have seen the sun right outside the framelines for the 35? And knowing the risk for this lens you couldn’t have acted upon it?

[harryzet]

the flare is it, that makes this picture interesting

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, otto.f said:

Don’t you think that in this photo you would have seen the sun right outside the framelines for the 35?

Possibly but you can't predict what the flare will actually look like. I have often done what you mention in your previous post (use a hand or even hat as a hood extension) when it seems likely that the flare is going to be a problem, but I generally just run with it because, as often as not, the flare can be desirable.

[otto.f]

Ok, we always have the screen to check various takes 

Edited December 21, 2020 by otto.f

[jankap]

Try to reach member " 01af" or "0laf". He has published several posts about flare on Summicrons.

[lct]

A couple Leica lenses behave this way including the 35/2 asph v1. No lens hood i know of can fix that. My only solutions are (a) cupping a hand around the lens and/or (b) making some shade with a hat or something else and/or (c) using an EVF to avoid the problem and/or (d) abstaining from shooting the sun or other strong light source when they are just outside the frame.

[jdlaing]

Outside the frame does not necessarily mean not in front of the lens. If shooting into a bright light, even just outside the frame, flare should be expected.

[Keith (M)]

There is flare - and then there is flare! 

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!

50mm Summilux-ASPH + med yellow filter on M10M.  And yes, the lens hood (such as it is) was extended.

[adan]

I can't speak to the 35 ASPH specifically, except to say I saw occasional-but-not-abnormal flare when I had it (I've tossed away those pictures).

But shooting with the sun that close to the edge of the picture will always be problematic, even with a lens hood. Because any light outside the picture area still gets inside the camera, and can bounce around off the inside of the "box" between the camera and the sensor.

The lens projects an "image circle." A rectangular lens hood can crop that circle a little bit - but not completely, or it would start to show up in the pictures as vignetting. So there will always be a gap of at least 10% of the picture dimensions that the sun (that continuous thermonuclear explosion) can leak through, bouncing around inside the camera and onto the sensor.

That will happen evern with perfectly "flare-proof" lens - since it happens after the light has passed through the lens. it's a function of the camera design as well.

With ttl viewing (SLR or EVF) one can see it happening and adjust for it - with the rangefinder, one just has to know where not to place the sun (or spotlights or other intense light sources) just outside the frame.

I have to keep this diagram around because the issue comes up once a month or more, in one form or another.

Let me guess - you are using a digital M, possibly an M10 variant....?

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!

 

[Guest Nowhereman]

If a lens is hazed it can accentuate flare. My first DR Summicron, before I kept it in a dry cabinet in Bangkok, acquired flare to an astonishing degree: so much that when I shot with some backlight coming in through a door in a room, virtually the whole image was flared out. After I had the lens  cleaned, it did not flare easily; not more than the way the Summicron 50v4 would flare. What is interesting is that, when I first bought that DR Summicron, I had read that this lens flares easily — and I found that when I started using it, it often had mild flare; but after the cleaning it flared much less than it had in the beginning, meaning that it was already somewhat hazed when I first bought it, though I had not noticed that.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[IamTheDistance]

4 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

If a lens is hazed it can accentuate flare. My first DR Summicron, before I kept it in a dry cabinet in Bangkok, acquired flare to an astonishing degree: so much that when I shot with some backlight coming in through a door in a room, virtually the whole image was flared out. After I had the lens  cleaned, it did not flare easily; not more than the way the Summicron 50v4 would flare. What is interesting is that, when I first bought that DR Summicron, I had read that this lens flares easily — and I found that when I started using it, it often had mild flare; but after the cleaning it flared much less than it had in the beginning, meaning that it was already somewhat hazed when I first bought it, though I had not noticed that.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Thanks! Those were my main thoughts. Haze? Bad copy? Because I've got flares with my other lenses, even cheap lenses like the Voigtlander 35mm Color Skopar but not this bad. This is like stardust. Sometimes I look for the flares, the beautiful ones hahaha.

 

5 hours ago, adan said:

I can't speak to the 35 ASPH specifically, except to say I saw occasional-but-not-abnormal flare when I had it (I've tossed away those pictures).

But shooting with the sun that close to the edge of the picture will always be problematic, even with a lens hood. Because any light outside the picture area still gets inside the camera, and can bounce around off the inside of the "box" between the camera and the sensor.

The lens projects an "image circle." A rectangular lens hood can crop that circle a little bit - but not completely, or it would start to show up in the pictures as vignetting. So there will always be a gap of at least 10% of the picture dimensions that the sun (that continuous thermonuclear explosion) can leak through, bouncing around inside the camera and onto the sensor.

That will happen evern with perfectly "flare-proof" lens - since it happens after the light has passed through the lens. it's a function of the camera design as well.

With ttl viewing (SLR or EVF) one can see it happening and adjust for it - with the rangefinder, one just has to know where not to place the sun (or spotlights or other intense light sources) just outside the frame.

I have to keep this diagram around because the issue comes up once a month or more, in one form or another.

Let me guess - you are using a digital M, possibly an M10 variant....?

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!

 

Thanks for this! Yes, I was using an M10. I changed my lens recently (I was shooting with a 35 Summarit f2.4, then a Voigtlander 35mm Color Skopar, now the Summicron) and I've never got a flare so ugly and intrusive. With this Summicron I've been getting this kind of flare a bunch of times even in situations where my other lenses don't flare. The other threads I read in this forum said when using the lens hood without a filter you don't get flares easily. Other people say it's normal so we'll never know.

[Jeff S]

E. Puts has explained that the M Summarits (now discontinued) are less prone to flare than the Summicrons (including the 35 Summarit vs the 35 Summicron ASPH) as a result of all-black parts at the rear segment of the lens. If so, one might wonder why this isn’t standard practice.  See Part II below...

https://photo.imx.nl/leica/lenses/page83.html
 

Jeff

[Guest Nowhereman]

1 hour ago, IamTheDistance said:

Thanks! Those were my main thoughts. Haze? Bad copy?...

Have you examined the lens with a flashlight? Here are instructions on how to do it.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[a.noctilux]

On 12/22/2020 at 2:53 AM, Jeff S said:

E. Puts has explained that the M Summarits (now discontinued) are less prone to flare than the Summicrons (including the 35 Summarit vs the 35 Summicron ASPH) as a result of all-black parts at the rear segment of the lens. If so, one might wonder why this isn’t standard practice.  See Part II below...

https://photo.imx.nl/leica/lenses/page83.html
 

Jeff

 

I understand why I like Summarit-M 2.5/35 and 50, may it be they flare less than some other lenses.

Maybe the concave front/rear lenses ?

But with my Summilux-M asph. 35mm with same type of concave front/rear lenses, flare is under control ⁉️

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeff S]

7 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

 

I understand why I like Summarit-M 2.5/35 and 50, may it be they flare less than some other lenses.

Maybe the concave front/rear lenses ?

But with my Summilux-M asph. 35mm with same type of concave front/rear lenses, flare is under control ⁉️

I cited reasoning from Puts: internal black parts at back of lens.

Jeff

 

[Dennis]

Long life to flares. They are beautiful.

On 12/21/2020 at 8:36 AM, IamTheDistance said:

some pictures show this bad flare

IMHO, the flare of the picture you posted, it gives a strong character and mood to the image, I love it.