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
