# Lens flare filters?



## Lunchbox (Jul 14, 2009)

I have a lens that has some issues with a lil flare when i catch streetlights and other night situations.

Will these multi coated uv filters really help reduce this or am i stuck with this issue?

just one of many i have seen saying lens flare protection.

X67UVGB Hoya 67mm UV (Ultra Violet) Super Multi Coated Glass Filter


----------



## musicaleCA (Jul 14, 2009)

A lens filter won't reduce lens flare. If anything, it'll make the issue worse. If you want to reduce flare, you need a lens hood. By "lens-flare protection", I think they just mean "doesn't suck as much as cheaper filters when it comes to lens flare".

Longer explanation: Flare is caused by light being reflected in the air gaps of the lens, and a filter adds one heck of a gap in front of the front element, so it greatly increases the risk of getting flare. Multi-coating can reduce, but not eliminate the problem, and if you're already having problems with just the plain lens, a filter will only make it worse. A hood really is the way to go.


----------



## Mark Saint (Jul 14, 2009)

thanks for the Longer explanation.


----------



## Garbz (Jul 14, 2009)

As mentioned flare protection means protection from additional flare caused by the presence of the filter. If you use a filter for protection I recommend it is at the least SHMC (super hoya multi coat) incase of Hoya, and the equivalent type from any other company. The coatings on them these days all but eliminate the flare. The only thing they leave behind is "ghosting" an exact upside down very dim duplicate of a very bright light source on the opposite side of the frame. On a cheap filter this would be just another component of a huge flare, but on multi-coated filters the ghost is all that remains.


----------



## KmH (Jul 14, 2009)

Frequently, with bright lights in the image the problemn is not lens flare but diffraction from using the smaller apertures (bigger numbers, f/16 etc.).


----------



## brucelee82 (Jul 16, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> A lens filter won't reduce lens flare. If anything, it'll make the issue worse. If you want to reduce flare, you need a lens hood. By "lens-flare protection", I think they just mean "doesn't suck as much as cheaper filters when it comes to lens flare".
> 
> Longer explanation: Flare is caused by light being reflected in the air gaps of the lens, and a filter adds one heck of a gap in front of the front element, so it greatly increases the risk of getting flare. Multi-coating can reduce, but not eliminate the problem, and if you're already having problems with just the plain lens, a filter will only make it worse. A hood really is the way to go.



I believe he is talking about light being shined directly into the lens, not from overhead, in which case the hood will do nothing.


----------



## brucelee82 (Jul 16, 2009)

This was shot on the lens he is talking about. Shutter speed was 8 seconds with an aperture of f/10.


----------



## KmH (Jul 16, 2009)

Great example of diffraction spikes from the f/10 aperture. The spikes are caused by the aperture blades. The more blades your lens has the more spikes you get.

The more blades you lens has the creamier the bokeh in shallow DOF daytime shots too because your aperture is closer to actually being a circle.


----------



## brucelee82 (Jul 16, 2009)

If you are referring to the starburst effect of the top yellow bulbs that is not what he and I are talking about. Also to clarify, the "haze" that appears around the car is just the illuminated tire smoke from the burnouts that had just been completed. What he and I are trying to figure out is, how do we eliminate the "second" set of ghost lights on the rear bumper of the car? This was shot on Lunchbox's lens but I am planning on buy this same lens in the near future because of how sharp it was during the day and night, so this will be mutually beneficial for both of us to know if anyone can help.


----------



## JFew (Jul 16, 2009)

I'm having a bit of trouble seeing the picture (very small on my screen) but from what I can tell it looks like a reflection, ie, "ghost lights".

Which lens are we talking about and were there any filters on the lens when that picture was taken? Sometimes reflections like that can be caused by a filter (any kind, really) being on the lens. If it was just a plain old UV filter then chances are a multicoated filter will help reduce (but not eliminate) that kind of issue. The best way would be try without the filter on at all. If it still does it it's just the lens. If that's true, there's unfortunately no way to get rid of it.


----------



## brucelee82 (Jul 16, 2009)

Tokina 50-135 f/2.8, absolutely no filter at all. And you are right, it's more of a ghosting of the lights than diffraction I think, but I'm no expert. Zooming in some _helped_ the ghosting but did not eliminate it; but I think you have answered the original question fairly well. Maybe with a slight zoom plus the multicoated filter it will be eliminated. _Maybe._


----------



## JFew (Jul 17, 2009)

That lens is rather expensive to be having issues like that.

Perhaps you should look into an alternative? I know Sigma claims most of their lenses reduce/eliminate that very thing.


----------

