I'd be surprised if no flare. It's subtle, in any case, and I have trouble picking it up except against the dark tree top center.
Jack --- Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's a frame shot with the 16-45, showing flare: > > http://photoblog.jbuhler.com/index.php?showimage=502 > > (you can see it down the center of the frame, especially on the > horse) > > No filter used. Although I'm not sure how clean the front element > was. > I've gotten this kind of flare from my 16-45 a few times, but only in > extreme conditions like this. > > j > > > On 11/22/06, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No, it's not, but I'm in the minority on this list. There are only > two > > others here that I know of who feel similarly. > > > > The issue about the hood can be easily corrected, and that may help > with > > the flare issues I encountered. Paul's pic is not a particularly > good > > example (IMO) of a flare-producing situation. > > > > I suspect you'll find the lens to be acceptable .... but I can't > gush over > > it as some others have. > > > > Shel > > > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > From: John Whittingham > > > > > > > Not exactly a glowing recommendation Shel. The trouble is it's > difficult > > to > > > find a lens in this FL range that doesn't have some kind of > issues with > > it, > > > be it Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina etc, prime or > zoom. Now > > if > > > the Tamron 17-35 XR Di were a bit wider at the short end I might > well be > > > tempted. > > > > > > John > > > > > > ---------- Original Message ----------- > > > From: "Shel Belinkoff" > > > > > > While I liked the lens, and found it to be a nice "walking > around" > > > > lens, I wasn't quite satisfied with it for critical work and > fine > > > > details. The standard hood is, imo, inadequate, and the lens > is > > > > prone to flare and purple fringing in some situations. I > actually > > > > used two samples, one briefly and another for more than a > month, got > > > > the fringing with both of them. I didn't like the way it > > > > "tromboned" but soon learned to accept that aspect of it. > Overall, > > > > I think it's fine for most work, but it would not be my first > > > > choice for a lot of photography that I do. I'd consider buying > one > > > > if the price were right now that I know its limitations, > strengths, and > > > > weaknesses. On a scale of 100 I'd rate it about 80. > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > Juan Buhler - http://www.jbuhler.com > photoblog: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com > a book: http://www.jbuhler.com/book.html > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sponsored Link Online or Campus degree Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's in less than one year.www.findtherightschool.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
