TG-5 lens flare or defective camera?

Nothing jumps out at me. I did take some pics from the exact same spot with my back to the sun and I don't see it

This just stinks. Any shots I have using the zoom underwater have this. The zoom is worthless. I debated between this and the new SeaLife camera with a 1" sensor but fixed focal length. I thought the zoom might help me get in closer to some of these sea creatures. I thought the zoom would be a step up from my iPhone on land.

Does the tele lens accessory have this same limitation? I can't use it for scuba but it might salvage the camera for land use  but it would add bulk too

would a polarized/UV filter screwed onto the dive housing help?

i guess I now have a fixed focal length underwater only camera.

Bummed.

Although I have a TG-4, I figure it is similar enough to the TG-5, especially in the lens configuration, to be applicable to me.    I am not a diver, but we live in the mountains, so I am in the water (wading to fish),  on the water (in my float tube), hiking, cross country skiing, etc.   Hence the utility of a rugged camera.    The TG-4 was/is intended to supplement and perhaps eventually replace my 1030SW, if/when it ever gives up on me. I also wanted it for the f2 lens at the wide end for when I want to do night photography without carrying a lot of gear.

Shortly after I got the TG-4 we went to San Francisco on family business, but I had some opportunity to test the camera, both day and night and all zoom lengths.    When I initially read this or some other thread dealing with flare I carefully checked my photos from that trip (which is the only time the camera has been out except for the test I will set forth anon).     There was no flare.    This morning I read the inquiry about the tele converter.    I bought a tele converter last winter.    I took the camera with converter out for a short walk shortly after a snow storm, so there was ample reflective ground surface. In one series of photos the flare is there.   It is much more difficult to see than in your samples, but it is there.    In another series of photos, taken from a different direction, there is absolutely none even though that  series has more direct sun exposure.     The main difference appears to be that in the images with flare the sun was closer to a 90 degree angle to me, while the photos with no flare the sun was more directly to my back. So, at least for me (and possibly for you which I why I am posting this) it can happen with the tele converter.     Had I taken some of those same winter images w/o the converter it might still have happened.    It is too late now to find that out.

Herewith the speculation, bearing in mind YMMV.    It would appear that there is some susceptibility towards flare with this series of cameras, but it varies in individual cameras (that is the YMMV part).     I don't know if there is a solution.    I keep the conversion ring on the TG-4 since that allows me to use a lens cap.    That may serve as a partial lens shade or the wide end, or I could buy a lens shade of 40.5mm threat diameter and use that.    That would also apply to the tele converter since it is threaded.

I'm certainly no pro with underwater photos. Just trying to catch a few decent shots for the memories and kids back home. This trip was drift diving- strong currents, I couldn't always pick my vantage point or angle. I had the easiest time shooting into the current so I could maintain my position.

That picture is dark- I was a good 10-15 feet from the fish- thus the tele. Most of my other pics aren't that dark but I do agree- I need to bump the exposure a bit. Sometimes that turtle doesn't hold still long enough to swim up, check the position of the sun, and dial in my settings. I was hoping the zoom would help me cheat a bit but maybe I'm better off just cropping the pics.

I'm  using a custom WB taken from the sand each dive. The built in underwater WB may be good for snorkeling but it's worthless at depth. Every picture was deep blue. Even the pics with the flash were blue. The next upgrade will be a strobe. I'm adjusting the RAW files with Lightroom. That one I posted above with the dot was fresh off the camera.

The last dive I tried the P mode and setup the two custom modes- one with a custom WB and no flash for general shots, and the other with underwater WB and fill flash for closer shots. I haven't looked at those yet.

Custom WB off the sand. 60ish feet.

The reported depth is not accurate inside the case. Most of my pics have been at 40- 50+ deep. At the beginning of the dive I go to the sand at the planned depth and set WB. Today I set the WB at 60ft.

First pic, straight off the camera (iPad airdropped to iPhone) taken around 60ft (+\- 10ft) ,with that custom WB. Thank goodness no purple spots.

second pic with the underwater WB, with built in flash, probably around 40ft but same dive

Default Underwater WB. Probably 40ft or so.

We had incredible 100+ ft visibility and some very bright days fortunately. After going through my shots the UW WB just doesn't do much at any depth. My last dive I switched back and forth between the custom and UW in P mode and the custom was better until we were really shallow (20-30ft). I'll keep playing with the WB but setting it for each dive was better than nothing. I may look at a red filter like I have on my GoPro.

The flash is just miserable unless you're right on top of your subject or in a dark cave/ledge (I have a great crab pic fired under a ledge with the flash) . I'll definitely need a strobe at some point.

The current was too much to mess with the macro mode but I'm dying to try that out

Thanks for the tips. I think as I learn the limitations of the camera it will be more satisfying. No more underwater tele though.

rprice54 wrote:

The flash is just miserable unless you're right on top of your subject or in a dark cave/ledge (I have a great crab pic fired under a ledge with the flash) . I'll definitely need a strobe at some point.

The current was too much to mess with the macro mode but I'm dying to try that out

Thanks for the tips. I think as I learn the limitations of the camera it will be more satisfying. No more underwater tele though.

Using flash in these sensitive areas seems very intrusive and must have some affect on the animals. Is it really so necessary to capture perfect images at all costs. I get really annoyed when people use flash in Zoos as it must be disconcerting enough for animals under constant scrutiny from inquisitive humans without bright flashes of light taking them by surprise. Probably the same in any coral reef which is probably under enough stress nowadays as it is without the human company. Do the animals trying to get on with their daily life need the strobe is the big question?

Having sat in a school play with a DSLR user flashing every photo I do feel for the fish and the crustaceans etc. who have people swimming around their home doing this. Especially as any distraction or temporary blindness can make you something's lunch in an instant.

It definitely makes it easier to spear the hogfish if they are temporarily blinded by the flash.

I don't think the coral minds so much.

FYI I have the same type of lens flare with my TG-5, in similar lighting conditions.

Yea. I’ve just had to accept if I use any zoom, in any lighting condition that purple spot is there. Had a recent trip and with the sun at my back it’s there. Sun from the side it’s there. Indoors with overhead lighting it’s there. It basically renders the zoom useless.

and yes, that purple spot only appears when zooming, it does not seem there with wide angle. and it is only visible if the center of the image is dark and there is some very bright light in the periphery.

it's the kind of artifact that's quite easily corrected with photoshop if it only happens occasionally, but it would be problematic if you shoot mostly in situations that causes this flare.