Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM: Flare

GerardEOS70D · Apr 29, 2015

Dear all,

I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

Brgds,

Gerard

Michael Fryd · Apr 29, 2015

Are you using Canon's Lens Hood EW-73C ?

What brand/model filter are you using?

GerardEOS70D · Apr 29, 2015

Michael Fryd said:
Are you using Canon's Lens Hood EW-73C ?

What brand/model filter are you using?

I do use that hood as well as the Hoya UV Pro 1 filter.

Michael Fryd · Apr 29, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Michael Fryd said:

Are you using Canon's Lens Hood EW-73C ?

What brand/model filter are you using?

Click to expand...

I do use that hood as well as the Hoya UV Pro 1 filter.

Take the filter off. That may go a long way into solving your problem.

There are two relevant differences between shooting film and shooting digital:

1) Film is generally sensitive to UV light. Canon DSLRs are not. There is no advantage to external UV filtering.

2) Undeveloped film has a dull matte finish. A digital sensor is very reflective. A filter is a flat piece of glass that is parallel to the reflective sensor. Light can bounce back and forth between the sensor and the filter. This means that when using filters, DSLRs are far more flare prone than film cameras. A good filter does not flare as much as a cheap filter, but it still flares more than no filter.

Try shooting without the filter and let us know if that solves your problem.

photonius · Apr 29, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Dear all,

I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

Brgds,

Gerard

do you have examples? 60% sounds like really a lot. maybe you expect to much

the digital picture has flare samples, you can compare to the 10-22, which is regarded as one of the best lenses regarding flare, but it's not without it either.

Lemming51 · Apr 29, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Michael Fryd said:

Are you using Canon's Lens Hood EW-73C ?

What brand/model filter are you using?

Click to expand...

I do use that hood as well as the Hoya UV Pro 1 filter.

First, I would stop using the UV filter.

Second, you may need additional shading of the lens if the hood isn't enough to eliminate out-of-frame sun. Use your hand or hat or other to keep direct sun off the front lens element. You should be able to see the flare in the viewfinder. Use DOF preview since the effects change or can be more noticeable when stopped down.

--
Unapologetic Canon Apologist

GerardEOS70D · Apr 29, 2015

photonius said:
GerardEOS70D said:

Dear all,

I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

Brgds,

Gerard

Click to expand...

do you have examples? 60% sounds like really a lot. maybe you expect to much

the digital picture has flare samples, you can compare to the 10-22, which is regarded as one of the best lenses regarding flare, but it's not without it either.

GerardEOS70D · Apr 29, 2015

Michael Fryd said:
GerardEOS70D said:

Michael Fryd said:

Are you using Canon's Lens Hood EW-73C ?

What brand/model filter are you using?

Click to expand...

I do use that hood as well as the Hoya UV Pro 1 filter.

Click to expand...

Take the filter off. That may go a long way into solving your problem.

There are two relevant differences between shooting film and shooting digital:

1) Film is generally sensitive to UV light. Canon DSLRs are not. There is no advantage to external UV filtering.

2) Undeveloped film has a dull matte finish. A digital sensor is very reflective. A filter is a flat piece of glass that is parallel to the reflective sensor. Light can bounce back and forth between the sensor and the filter. This means that when using filters, DSLRs are far more flare prone than film cameras. A good filter does not flare as much as a cheap filter, but it still flares more than no filter.

Try shooting without the filter and let us know if that solves your problem.

I only use UV filters to protect the lens against damages/ scratches. I got the Hoya UV Pro because I read some very positive reviews about this filter and am using it on a couple of other lenses without any issues.

Michael Fryd · Apr 29, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
GerardEOS70D said:

...

Click to expand...

I only use UV filters to protect the lens against damages/ scratches. I got the Hoya UV Pro because I read some very positive reviews about this filter and am using it on a couple of other lenses without any issues.

The front element of your lens is pretty sturdy. You're more likely to damage the filter than a bare front element.

Most people are concerned about scratches because they worry that a scratch in the optical path affects image quality. Of course that's true wether the scratch is on the filter or the lens.

When was the last time you replaced one of your "protective" filters? If the answer is "never" then the money you would have saved by not buying filters would probably cover a few lens repairs.

Not only do you save money by not using "protective" filters, but you also get higher contrast and less flare.

GerardEOS70D · Apr 29, 2015

Michael Fryd said:
GerardEOS70D said:

Michael Fryd said:

...

Click to expand...

I only use UV filters to protect the lens against damages/ scratches. I got the Hoya UV Pro because I read some very positive reviews about this filter and am using it on a couple of other lenses without any issues.

Click to expand...

The front element of your lens is pretty sturdy. You're more likely to damage the filter than a bare front element.

Most people are concerned about scratches because they worry that a scratch in the optical path affects image quality. Of course that's true wether the scratch is on the filter or the lens.

When was the last time you replaced one of your "protective" filters? If the answer is "never" then the money you would have saved by not buying filters would probably cover a few lens repairs.

Not only do you save money by not using "protective" filters, but you also get higher contrast and less flare.

True, however I still prefer to use filters for my more expensive L lenses.

Anyway, I don't want to start a discussion about using filters because I think there are enough of those already on the web

I'll make some photos without the filter and will have a look at the results.

Michael Fryd · Apr 29, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Michael Fryd said:

GerardEOS70D said:

GerardEOS70D said:

...

Click to expand...

I only use UV filters to protect the lens against damages/ scratches. I got the Hoya UV Pro because I read some very positive reviews about this filter and am using it on a couple of other lenses without any issues.

Click to expand...

The front element of your lens is pretty sturdy. You're more likely to damage the filter than a bare front element.

Most people are concerned about scratches because they worry that a scratch in the optical path affects image quality. Of course that's true wether the scratch is on the filter or the lens.

When was the last time you replaced one of your "protective" filters? If the answer is "never" then the money you would have saved by not buying filters would probably cover a few lens repairs.

Not only do you save money by not using "protective" filters, but you also get higher contrast and less flare.

Click to expand...

True, however I still prefer to use filters for my more expensive L lenses.

Anyway, I don't want to start a discussion about using filters because I think there are enough of those already on the web I'll make some photos without the filter and will have a look at the results.

Let's us know what you find out. Perhaps without the filters you won't need expensive L lenses.

J A C S · Apr 29, 2015

I have heard this before about that lens but never used it. The 10-22 that I used to own, was very flare resistant with some moderate problems in nightscape images which are very demanding.

Charlienmr · Apr 29, 2015

Why shoot at f16? DOF? Diffraction will be an issue at F16 I would think. And for a 10-18 range, the DOF is not very different for F16 vs F8, just a couple of feet on the near end and infinity for the far end if you choose to focus at 10 feet. Or maybe You have another reason for F16, in which case

. BTW, I love shooting my 10-18 and 70D. Great combo. I do use the Canon hood and no filter and I don't see much flare unless the sun is in the shot.

Earth Art · Apr 29, 2015

Use a lens hood for protection and get rid of the filter first of all. The 10-18 is not very flare resistant. You will unfortunately have to shell out more money to get a decent landscape lens. A used 10-22 would be a far better option. It's better in every way.

You can otherwise learn to use blending methods for taking several shots with your fingers covering the flare source. Check out the Canon 16-35L landscape guide on my website for an example of how well this can work. Even the best lenses need some flare work from time to time.

--

Photo Tour Guides + Articles

500PX

skanter · Apr 29, 2015

photonius said:
GerardEOS70D said:

Dear all,

I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

Brgds,

Gerard

Click to expand...

do you have examples? 60% sounds like really a lot. maybe you expect to much

the digital picture has flare samples, you can compare to the 10-22, which is regarded as one of the best lenses regarding flare, but it's not without it either.

--
*** Life is short, time to zoom in *** ©

I use 10-22, very little flare issues, even without hood. I have seen no difference with or without UV filter.

--
Sam K., NYC
“A camera is a tool for learning how to see without a camera.”
-Dorothea Lange

brightcolours · Apr 30, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Dear all,

Dear Gerard.

GerardEOS70D said:
I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

Why are you always (or 60% of the time) shooting into the sun? It is usually the most unattractive angle, as subjects will show their shadow side. Learn to look for attractive light.

GerardEOS70D said:
I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

It is fine to shoot on sunny days. Turn your back at the sun and see the difference, sometimes?

GerardEOS70D said:
I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Architecture looks nice when the sun is shining on it, instead of the shadow side, too.

GerardEOS70D said:
Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

I read that you shoot at f16. Try shooting at f5.6 to f8 instead, the sharpness will improve and you will have more than enough DOF anyway.

Also, stop using that UV filter when it is not needed. Thin glass does not a great job of protecting (in a bump or fall it may break and actually scratch the front element for instance) and filters are harder to clean than front elements. Protect the lens in normal conditions with front cap when not actually taking a photo, and protect against bumps with a les hood. UV filters add 2 other surfaces for flare to show up.

And also, lens flare is not always bad. It can actually add a nice touch to a photo, so learn to not be too irritated by it if it does show up at times.

GerardEOS70D said:
Brgds,

Gerard

photonius · Apr 30, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
Michael Fryd said:

GerardEOS70D said:

GerardEOS70D said:

...

Click to expand...

I only use UV filters to protect the lens against damages/ scratches. I got the Hoya UV Pro because I read some very positive reviews about this filter and am using it on a couple of other lenses without any issues.

Click to expand...

The front element of your lens is pretty sturdy. You're more likely to damage the filter than a bare front element.

Most people are concerned about scratches because they worry that a scratch in the optical path affects image quality. Of course that's true wether the scratch is on the filter or the lens.

When was the last time you replaced one of your "protective" filters? If the answer is "never" then the money you would have saved by not buying filters would probably cover a few lens repairs.

Not only do you save money by not using "protective" filters, but you also get higher contrast and less flare.

Click to expand...

True, however I still prefer to use filters for my more expensive L lenses.

Anyway, I don't want to start a discussion about using filters because I think there are enough of those already on the web I'll make some photos without the filter and will have a look at the results.

filter tests can be found at lenstip. the hoya pro1 does add a bit of flare.

UV filters test - Hoya 72 mm Pro1 Digital MC UV-0

...

www.lenstip.com

but it looks like the main flare you have problems with is at 10mm, which gives at all apertures, a rather strong image of some internal element (the smaller the aperture, the smaller that element in the flare samples at the digital picture)

photonius · Apr 30, 2015

GerardEOS70D said:
photonius said:

GerardEOS70D said:

Dear all,

I am using the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM (mainly for landscapes and architecture). The problem I am having is that there is flare in about 60% of all photos I have taken. Flare occurs also when the sun is not inside the frame.

I have used the lens only on sunny days and know that flare is a natural enemy of ultra-wide lenses, but it really is quite frustrating. I had to delete quite a few photos and had to do a lot of editing in Photoshop for the photos I decided to keep.

I love landscape and architecture photography. That's the main reason I bought an ultra-wide lens, but I did not expect to have this flare problem.

Is this problem just a general ultra wide lens problem which I should just learn to live with or is it typical for this specific lens?

Brgds,

Gerard

Click to expand...

do you have examples? 60% sounds like really a lot. maybe you expect to much

the digital picture has flare samples, you can compare to the 10-22, which is regarded as one of the best lenses regarding flare, but it's not without it either.

Click to expand...

GerardEOS70D · Apr 30, 2015

Charlienmr said:
Why shoot at f16? DOF? Diffraction will be an issue at F16 I would think. And for a 10-18 range, the DOF is not very different for F16 vs F8, just a couple of feet on the near end and infinity for the far end if you choose to focus at 10 feet. Or maybe You have another reason for F16, in which case . BTW, I love shooting my 10-18 and 70D. Great combo. I do use the Canon hood and no filter and I don't see much flare unless the sun is in the shot.

True, for DOF. But I guess you are right and F8 should be sufficient. I'll give it a try.

GerardEOS70D · Apr 30, 2015

Earth Art said:
Use a lens hood for protection and get rid of the filter first of all. The 10-18 is not very flare resistant. You will unfortunately have to shell out more money to get a decent landscape lens. A used 10-22 would be a far better option. It's better in every way.

You can otherwise learn to use blending methods for taking several shots with your fingers covering the flare source. Check out the Canon 16-35L landscape guide on my website for an example of how well this can work. Even the best lenses need some flare work from time to time.

--

Photo Tour Guides + Articles

500PX

I am not so sure about that. I read various reviews and all of them stated that the 10 - 18 is at least as good as the 10 - 22.

Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM: Flare

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Active member

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts