DSLRUsers.com

As mentioned in a previous post, my dad gave me a D80. The D50 that I had posted about (that I was going to sell) ended becoming an early 21st present for my brother.

My Dad flew me to Sydney (I was there for around 24 hours). He gave me the camera so whilst there we took some photos.

That House ...

The very 1st photo to be taken on the new D80.

Leading Lines

Taken at the monorail station at Darling Harbour.

That Bridge

Taken with my 50mm lens, whilst balancing camera on a bollard. Would have been sooooooo much better if I had a tripod. Anyways

I have a question about this last photo. To the left of the flags and halfway through the bridge, there are light spots. The spot at the same height as the flags and furthest away from them, seems to be an inverted reflection of Luna Park. Would these light spots have been caused by reflections off the UV Filter that was on the lens at the time of shooting ?

Any comments or criticism welcome.
Thanks for looking.

Russell

2nd one stands out to me.

nice photos.

Would these light spots have been caused by reflections off the UV Filter that was on the lens at the time of shooting ?

Quite likely. You also have a line of flares from the roadway lights just below the arch.
Check out the following thread for a lively discussion on the pros and cons of using filters for protection.
Personally I avoid them unless I have a specific need.
http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?t=24171&highlight=filter

Also check out
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml
for examples of a similar case

I still like the photo though.
I also like the leading lines. Nice viewpoint. Were you in the monorail, or were you taking your life in your hands?

Mr Darcy wrote:Quite likely. You also have a line of flares from the roadway lights just below the arch.
Check out the following thread for a lively discussion on the pros and cons of using filters for protection.
Personally I avoid them unless I have a specific need.
http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?t=24171&highlight=filter

Also check out
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml
for examples of a similar case

Yep Thanks. I had been following that thread ... and must admit that up to this point in time, I have always had a filter on the front for "protection" and now evidentially "optical distraction value"

Mr Darcy wrote:I still like the photo though.

Thanks to both you and khalil for your kind comments.

Mr Darcy wrote:I also like the leading lines. Nice viewpoint. Were you in the monorail, or were you taking your life in your hands?

We had just got off the monorail, and I had picked up from one of the attendants that they come every 3 or 4 minutes, so I figured I had a couple of minutes of protection. I had one foot on the platform and one on the monorail track, and took a series of the monorail heading away, including this one after the track was clear.

Russell

To be fair to the pro filter brigade, flare can be caused by internal reflection from any two surfaces within a lens assembly (including filters and sensor!). What happens is that some of the light is reflected away from the "film" plane by one surface, then reflected back in by a second.
Every piece of glass adds two surfaces. Thus on the face of it, multi element lenses will be worse than simple lens assemblies.

This is where coating comes in. The coatings are designed (among other things) to reduce reflections. Also, careful design of lens elements can reduce reflections as well. So the problem tends to be minimal in modern lenses.

Filters though are flat surfaces, so they reflect the image straight back. This is why stacking filters is a bad idea as the reflections between tem lead to subtle blurring of the image in addition to flare.
Also, cheap filters tend not to be coated, or have simple coatings so they are worse at controlling reflections. When I do buy filters I make sure they are described as multi coated or super multi coated, or some such marketing blurb.

To be certain that it is the filter causing the issue, go back and take another shot without the filter ("Hey dad, this guy says I have to go back to Sydney. Can you buy me another air ticket!!" )
If the flare is gone you know the filter is the cause. If not you know that this lens is not suitable for this type of shot (it may just be dirty though - clean lenses have fewer problems)

Russell,

Really like what you did with the monorail shot I agree with Mr Darcy, there are a lot of light sources near the bridge which is a problem. You made great use of your 24 hrs in Sydney