-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
grid-like flare with my x-e1
- Thread starter extraeee
- Start date
MrFresno
Senior Member
It is a reflection of the sensor (cfa) on the rear element of the lens. There have been a couple of previous threads about this. Mirrorless cameras are more prone to this because the sensor is closer to the lens.
HB1969
Senior Member
I've taken a few shots at sunrise and mid-morning with sun directly into the lens (same camera/lens combo and similar aperture) and I've not seen this kind of flare. It's possible that Randy is right but I would still take it in for servicing just in case.
Wheatfield
Veteran Member
That's normal, garden variety flare, nothing else. If you have a filter on the lens take it off, but otherwise it's perfectly normal given the type of picture that is.
This is something I'm having a bit of a problem with coming from Pentax to Fuji. Pentax prime lenses, which is what I am more used to just don't flare this badly, while with every other brand, this sort of thing is pretty normal.
This is something I'm having a bit of a problem with coming from Pentax to Fuji. Pentax prime lenses, which is what I am more used to just don't flare this badly, while with every other brand, this sort of thing is pretty normal.
C
Carsten Pauer 2
Guest
theNeverKings
Well-known member
Hi.
Yes, unfortunately this seems to be the norm. I had the "textured" flare appear on a number of shots when shooting into the low evening sun (I owned the XPro1/35 1.4 kit). However , you will see many fine examples of contre jour shots where it doesn't seem to be an issue, suggesting it only appears under very specific circumstances. It seems likely that it's caused by an internal reflection. It's up to you to decide, realistically, how often you will take this type of shot and perhaps to experiment so as to determine the exact conditions under which it occurs and how to avoid it.
Good luck!
Yes, unfortunately this seems to be the norm. I had the "textured" flare appear on a number of shots when shooting into the low evening sun (I owned the XPro1/35 1.4 kit). However , you will see many fine examples of contre jour shots where it doesn't seem to be an issue, suggesting it only appears under very specific circumstances. It seems likely that it's caused by an internal reflection. It's up to you to decide, realistically, how often you will take this type of shot and perhaps to experiment so as to determine the exact conditions under which it occurs and how to avoid it.
Good luck!
thanks. btw i didn't have any filters on it. Here are some more shots into the sun, all without filters.
don't seem to see the pattern in this one.
can see the pattern again in the trees if you zoom in to the upper right corner.
this looks alright.
can see it again.
this one looks fine again.
Not sure exactly under what conditions this happens. I'll have to play around with it more and see if I want to keep it.
don't seem to see the pattern in this one.
can see the pattern again in the trees if you zoom in to the upper right corner.
this looks alright.
can see it again.
this one looks fine again.
Not sure exactly under what conditions this happens. I'll have to play around with it more and see if I want to keep it.
57LowRider
Senior Member
- Messages
- 4,240
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 2,053
Already discussed http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51910807
Already discussed but no clear conclusions about what causes the pattern !
MrFresno
Senior Member
The grid pattern is caused by a reflection of the sensor microlenses. I have seen other images where all three colors of the color filter array were visible in the pattern. It might not have been clear in the referenced thread, but there have been many threads for other cameras with the same issue. This kind of flare would be impossible with a film camera and unlikely with a dslr.
Last edited:
noyo
Leading Member
With respect, having reviewed the issue on both threads it is my opinion that they relate to separate issues.
The thread in the link looks to me to be an issue with the sensor or its related data processing, covering large areas of the images.
The issue in this thread would appear to be lens/sun flare. It's certainly surrounding and appears to emanate from the sun-spots, but it's not traditional 'Newton's Rings' flare (which is present and recognisable in some of the examples).
The nature of the pattern suggests to me, as has been suggested by others, that the intense spot of sunlight is being reflected back from the sensor's optical array, into the lens, via a wider path than the original sunlight entering. Perhaps the micro lenses or colour filters are distributing the reflected light which then diffuses due to a fine film of dust (or another substance) smeared on the internal surfaces of the lens. An alternative to this is that the anti-reflection coatings on the lens are missing, incomplete or not adequate. If so, is it a QC issue or a design issue?
Where I would differ from other's analysis is that I do not consider this to be 'normal' nor acceptable for any quality camera, speaking generally as I don't as yet own any X Systems.
A significant part of my photography is contre jour and if this is 'normal' for this X system it makes it useless for many of my images. Plus, how many of us could tolerate being restricted to not taking sunsets/sunrises or having them hit or miss?
It does remind me of the 'red spot' issue that some DSLR-lens combinations had around 10-12 years ago, only these were circular in the centre of the image. They were characterised by centred subjects that were darker relative to bright white studio backgrounds and worse at certain apertures. It was deemed at that time to be caused by reflections from the sensor being diffused within the lens. Of course in these days the pixel count was around 3MP to 6MP vs. the 16MP of the X system, so the respective behaviours will not be identical. It would be interesting to hear from any studio photographers to see whether they have any issues with this sort of thing with the X-series cameras.
Returning to the OP's images that are said to be 'okay'. If I were to be hyper-critical, I think there are still hints at fuzzy definition around some of the sun flares that suggests to me that the lens is either dirty or not capable. Again, is it a QC issue or a design issue?
If it were me, I would certainly be speaking to Fujifilm technical support to see whether this is a faulty/dirty lens (internally) or something they think is system related. Should it be the later, for me it diminishes the whole X-Series as a tool for serious photography, although it could still be useful to have around generally. But not at the current prices.
These are just my pragmatic thoughts. I don't mean to be arrogant or contentious with anyone about this. I could be wrong about this so will be watching this thread to see what Fujifilm come back with. I do hope you find a solution.
--
Norman Young
www.noyo.co.uk
Last edited:
Albert Valentino
Forum Pro
i noticed this problem last December shortly after getting my XE1. I have run many tests on different lenses and different apertures. The problem is internal reflecrion from the sensor and it gers worse as the lens is stopped down and the when there is a dark area behind the diffracrion pattern. It is not the lens, as I have reproduced this with every lens I tried when a hot fireball, is in the composition.
In geneal shoot wider than f/8. As the lens is stopped down the pattern ges smaller and more colorful. It is one of those things you need to both accept and also know how to minimize. F/5.6 is mich better than f/11. F/22 can a composition where he subject is the pattern.
In geneal shoot wider than f/8. As the lens is stopped down the pattern ges smaller and more colorful. It is one of those things you need to both accept and also know how to minimize. F/5.6 is mich better than f/11. F/22 can a composition where he subject is the pattern.
theNeverKings
Well-known member
Hi Keit 11.
The diffuse grid like pattern of the flare/reflection looks to be moiré. If it is indeed a reflection of the CFA surface on the underside of the glass protecting the sensor, or possibly the rear element of the lens, the size of the pattern will be determined by the distance between the reflecting surfaces. A similar effect can be noted when looking through two sheer fabrics whilst varying the distance relative to eachother. That's my theory, but who knows.
What I do know is that I found it to be too objectionable. I enjoy contré jour photography and I did not relish the prospect of constantly wondering whether or not a potentially good capture had been compromised by the noted effect. I have not noticed any such issue with my Nikon DSLRs. As good as the XTrans sensor is, I don't believe it is so good as to have to put up with such issues.
PCheers.
noyo
Leading Member
That's very interesting.
What you are say seems to confirm my theory as to what is happening, only it is not lens specific and is inherent to the product.
I did wonder if some lenses or apertures were better/worse than others so that's interesting too.
I also wondered if reducing the exposure would benefit.
I searched on Flickr for 'X-E1 18-55 sunset' and 'X-E1 sunset'. There were many into-the-sun images where there doesn't seem to be any issue. I guess people wouldn't post their bad or problem shots on that site, so perhaps a fruitless exercise, but it suggests that it is possible to get some clean, direct into the sun images some of the time.
This has shifted my aspirations to purchase an X-series model, other than as a light-weight walk-around.
Anyone know how the equivalent/competing Sony NEX series fair on this issue?
What you are say seems to confirm my theory as to what is happening, only it is not lens specific and is inherent to the product.
I did wonder if some lenses or apertures were better/worse than others so that's interesting too.
I also wondered if reducing the exposure would benefit.
I searched on Flickr for 'X-E1 18-55 sunset' and 'X-E1 sunset'. There were many into-the-sun images where there doesn't seem to be any issue. I guess people wouldn't post their bad or problem shots on that site, so perhaps a fruitless exercise, but it suggests that it is possible to get some clean, direct into the sun images some of the time.
This has shifted my aspirations to purchase an X-series model, other than as a light-weight walk-around.
Anyone know how the equivalent/competing Sony NEX series fair on this issue?
DAndison
Leading Member
I often shoot directly into the sun when using ND Grads and I have never seen that pattern flare before. Examples of shots I've taken are here and here.
My only issues are controlling the reflections from the ND Grads onto the ground in the picture. I have to burn these out in C1. Certainly never seen any round flare before though.
My only issues are controlling the reflections from the ND Grads onto the ground in the picture. I have to burn these out in C1. Certainly never seen any round flare before though.
Albert Valentino
Forum Pro
There are number of factors like aperture, position of the sun in the composition, and how intense and clean the sun is - meaning that mid day is worse than early/late day and if the sun is slightly diffused through haze vs crisp clean sky. The second shot you linked to looks like the aperture was open a bit. The second shot looks stopped down but closer to edge of frame. I would not expect the problem in the second one, the first one looks pretty good in general and seems stopped down a bit but if you look carefully, it is there. Look at the second, darker, mountain ridge from the distance below the sun. I see colored patterns - if the area was darker the colors might be more prominant.
Last edited:
W
wchutt
Guest
What we see here and in other recent examples, is an artifact of an artifact.
That is – the photographer creates an intense primary artifact (gross lens flare). The primary artifact reveals yet another artifact of unknown origin (although I like the moiré theory myself). At the same time, the secondary artifact is not observed in artifact-free photographs.
So the complaint or concern is – I made a very strong artifact and that artifact reveals another artifact.
How can a secondary artifact of a primary artifact be of any concern? I can think of one case – when the photographer is trying to create an aesthetic effect based on random, intense flare. Even then, selective sharpening or other selective post-proessing methods could remove the grid. After all there is no useful detail in regions obscured by gross lens flare. However I would be surprised if the act of printing itself didn't average the grid artifact away.
If the concern is the camera is defective, then rest easy. No brand will ever be able to guarantee their design will generate artifact free artifacts. How could anyone test and design for this circumstance? Sooner or later someone will create an artifact you haven't created in the tests. It is entirely possible the nature of the secondary effect is due to constructive or destructive interference between primary flare artifacts from different reflections. How do you test for all possibilities of interactions between strong primary flare artifacts?
Finally, those of us with non-XTrans cameras could pixel peep images with gross lens flare. Would we expect to see no secondary artifacts of any kind. We might not see the exact same grid pattern, but what exactly should we see when the camera is used in a way that exceeds the design intent and specifications?
That is – the photographer creates an intense primary artifact (gross lens flare). The primary artifact reveals yet another artifact of unknown origin (although I like the moiré theory myself). At the same time, the secondary artifact is not observed in artifact-free photographs.
So the complaint or concern is – I made a very strong artifact and that artifact reveals another artifact.
How can a secondary artifact of a primary artifact be of any concern? I can think of one case – when the photographer is trying to create an aesthetic effect based on random, intense flare. Even then, selective sharpening or other selective post-proessing methods could remove the grid. After all there is no useful detail in regions obscured by gross lens flare. However I would be surprised if the act of printing itself didn't average the grid artifact away.
If the concern is the camera is defective, then rest easy. No brand will ever be able to guarantee their design will generate artifact free artifacts. How could anyone test and design for this circumstance? Sooner or later someone will create an artifact you haven't created in the tests. It is entirely possible the nature of the secondary effect is due to constructive or destructive interference between primary flare artifacts from different reflections. How do you test for all possibilities of interactions between strong primary flare artifacts?
Finally, those of us with non-XTrans cameras could pixel peep images with gross lens flare. Would we expect to see no secondary artifacts of any kind. We might not see the exact same grid pattern, but what exactly should we see when the camera is used in a way that exceeds the design intent and specifications?
KariP
Veteran Member
It checked my sunsets and early morning images from July- August . Low angle sun visible in the image, ISO 400-800, f8-11....
There was some flare and i think less than with some other lenses /cameras - and absolutely no patterns like this . I really wonder - is it absolutely sure you did not shot through a windshield or something? Also i wonder why the circles are not in perfect line as they often are...
Hard to believe that it was only the X-E1 + the lens that caused this... is the lens still doing that ?
Some flare visible.... a normal amount IMO - could not find more in any image
--
Kari
SLR photography started in 1968, Canon DSLR cameras, lenses and now also a Fuji X-E1
60.21 N 24.86 E
There was some flare and i think less than with some other lenses /cameras - and absolutely no patterns like this . I really wonder - is it absolutely sure you did not shot through a windshield or something? Also i wonder why the circles are not in perfect line as they often are...
Hard to believe that it was only the X-E1 + the lens that caused this... is the lens still doing that ?
Some flare visible.... a normal amount IMO - could not find more in any image
--
Kari
SLR photography started in 1968, Canon DSLR cameras, lenses and now also a Fuji X-E1
60.21 N 24.86 E
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum