3rd Party IR/UV filters

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Vinay is it mostly night images you getting the filter flare refections or direct sun stuff.

[jaapv]

Honestly after thousands of images with the leica filters on my WATE, 28 and 35 cron i get absolutely zero side effects. My images in the corners always are dead on with regards to clean up. Maybe with shooting test images may not be the case but real world there is not any issues.

 

Indoors with a 28 cron and outdoors with a WATE at 18mm, there is just nothing there that is wrong with them in the corners.

 

Yes there is Guy, there is a dustspot on the righthand top between the palm trees (sorry-couldn't resist...)

[Guest guy_mancuso]

LOL

 

Seriously though was just thinking about this. All my glass down in the wide area is the modern glass and very highly corrected lenses . Question is is it more problematic for the older glass that has more flare to start with and the filters are adding to it. I wonder about this and maybe this is were Vinay is running into more issues. Like pre -Asph stuff

[Guest tummydoc]

Vinay,

 

Would you like to expand on this argument? I'm curious.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

I can expand but not guarantee I can explain it clearly The problem is there are three definitions that get confused. The photographic definition of a high-contrast scene is one where there is a wide range of brightness. The scientific definition of a high-contrast lens is one that can record detail throughout a wide range of brightness. The scientific definition of high-contrast film (or sensor) is one that can record detail only within a narrow range of brightness. Therefore, based on the scientific definitions, with a high-contrast film (or sensor) and/or in a high-contrast scene, one would want to choose a high-contrast lens in order to maximise the ability to record detail throughout the range of brightness. Quite often however, people claim that using low-contrast lenses in those situations counteracts the narrow dynamic range of the medium and/or scene, whilst in reality--again, by definition--it would exacerbate them. I've shot late-model 50 Summicron against the DR with high-contrast film such as Velvia, and with outdoor scenics in harsh light, and found that the newer lens, not the older one, records more detail simultaneously in a wider range of brightness from highlight to shadow. Just as would be expected.

[Guest tummydoc]

Vinay is it mostly night images you getting the filter flare refections or direct sun stuff.

 

Actual reflections (ghost images) mostly at night or in-doors when there are point-source over-head lights, or candles on tables, that type of thing. Out-doors in back-lit or sharply side-lit shots, even with the sun outside the shot (obviously, sun-in-shot you can get flare with no filter at all) I see a loss of contrast...a slight misty veil, so-to-speak. I attribute that to a greater percentage of incoming light rays being reflected off the front of the filter rather than transmitted through the lens. I primarily use 21 ASPH and 24 ASPH . I had a WATE briefly but it had a loose component and I am currently expecting an exchange.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Just pulled a couple from the convention I did in July off Zenfolio. Now these are directly into the light no question here and i expect most of this, but I know your talking of more subtle situations. Here it's the worst case and yes they do fall apart some but this is nasty stuff too

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!

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is the sort of flare I get with the sun near the front of the shot. Biogon 35 (supposedly very flare resistant) and B+W 486.

 

Wilson

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!

[sean_reid]

On the whole, lighting conditions do vary, and, on the whole, the camera's firmware correction doesn't compensate for it. Therefore, on the whole, there is no on the whole. It's a matter of degree and acceptibility. At other than optimal conditions, there is either residual cyan or residual red, with any of these filters. The only thing that varies is the single condition where the filter and software and lighting conditions all come together for complete neutrality.

 

Let me put this in simpler terms then. More often than not, for most photographers, the Leica filters will be better matched to the M8 firmware, than will the other two major filters, when one is using 24 mm and wider lenses. I say this based on very extensive testing with a lot of lenses and a lot of IR-cut filters.

[sean_reid]

I can expand but not guarantee I can explain it clearly The problem is there are three definitions that get confused. The photographic definition of a high-contrast scene is one where there is a wide range of brightness. The scientific definition of a high-contrast lens is one that can record detail throughout a wide range of brightness. The scientific definition of high-contrast film (or sensor) is one that can record detail only within a narrow range of brightness. Therefore, based on the scientific definitions, with a high-contrast film (or sensor) and/or in a high-contrast scene, one would want to choose a high-contrast lens in order to maximise the ability to record detail throughout the range of brightness. Quite often however, people claim that using low-contrast lenses in those situations counteracts the narrow dynamic range of the medium and/or scene, whilst in reality--again, by definition--it would exacerbate them. I've shot late-model 50 Summicron against the DR with high-contrast film such as Velvia, and with outdoor scenics in harsh light, and found that the newer lens, not the older one, records more detail simultaneously in a wider range of brightness from highlight to shadow. Just as would be expected.

 

Vinay,

 

Have you read my last three RF lens reviews? They might be of interest. To respond to this fully would require repeating most of an article section so I'd rather just point you to the original.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest guy_mancuso]

This is the sort of flare I get with the sun near the front of the shot. Biogon 35 (supposedly very flare resistant) and B+W 486.

 

Wilson

 

This too me filters or not is just a simple case of flare. This is were the left hand is the best tool. Just block it out , no shade or hood will do this when into the sun at this kind of angle.

[Guest tummydoc]

Let me put this in simpler terms then. More often than not, for most photographers, the Leica filters will be better matched to the M8 firmware

 

I won't dispute that. For me however, they are not. Maybe I am too picky. I've also wasted a lot of potential shooting time testing one filter vs another and I don't find them any better matched overall, although each brand of filter is better matched under very slightly different conditions.

 

Have you read my last three RF lens reviews? They might be of interest. To respond to this fully would require repeating most of an article section so I'd rather just point you to the original.

 

Thank you for your kind solitication, I will think about it. In this case, the information I offered with respect to popular misconception surrounding the term "contrast" came from a personal conversation I had with the late Dr. Mandler some years ago in Toronto. He was quite explicit and made sure I understood him thoroughly (that was the way he was). I doubt that there is anyone living who knows more about the subject than he did.