At 12:46 AM 14-08-99 EDT, Warren Kato <WKato@xxxxxxx> wrote wrote:
>Flare is just unwanted light bouncing around inside a lens that doesn't
>contribute to your image. It might come from 1/light hitting a reflective
>surface inside a lens, 2/scratches, dirt, etc. on glass, 3/lack of lens
>coating (as you mention), and 4/lens aberrations such as a second image of a
>bright object inside your field of view. Multicoating of lens elements only
>helps as to #3. And you're entirely correct, flare is an effect, not a
cause.
>One flare test that is used is to shoot the inside of a black box which is
>mounted to a white wall. The difference between the densities on the
negative
>should give you some idea of the generalized flare resistance. A flare
>situation is similar to this, i.e. when there is a bright source of light
>either inside or outside the picture area that reduces the general contrast
>of your photo. A hood can help if the source is outside of the picture area.
>A perfectly flare resistant lens could be used to take a backlit portrait
>with the sun also in it.
Discussion on the Leica list some months ago concerned the use of UV
filters on late model Leica lenses and whether such filters were necessary
other than to protect the lens glass from damage.
Is there any opinion as to the "UV retardability factor" of late model
multi-coated Zuiko lenses and whether there might be any advantage to not
using a UV filter when conditions might suggest otherwise?
John Hudson
Vancouver, BC
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|