| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/10/2006 06:58:18 PM · #1 |
|
|
|
03/10/2006 07:00:08 PM · #2 |
that's just a problem with the sensor...duplicate the layer, flip it horizontal then vertical...you will see that each one of those 'highlights' is some type of a reflection of one of the lights on the ground.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2006 07:04:21 PM · #3 |
those are ORBS silly - your city is haunted! Oh and the one looks like a flying saucer so you might be getting invaded too. ;-)
|
|
|
|
03/10/2006 07:39:56 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
03/10/2006 07:41:06 PM · #5 |
Looks like flare to me... is there any dust or scratches on your lens?
|
|
|
|
03/10/2006 07:45:25 PM · #6 |
| DrGee, are those pics of Baltimore? I used to live there, but moved back to Cali last year after the hubby finished residency. |
|
|
|
03/10/2006 10:05:27 PM · #7 |
WAIT, do you have a filter on that camera?
It looks like reflections between the flash and the lens elements.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2006 10:19:59 PM · #8 |
| Try removing your UV filter and try taking some similar shots, I had similar problems with mine. |
|
|
|
03/11/2006 01:07:14 PM · #9 |
What exactly are orbs and glare and does anybody have any examples/how do you get rid of them?
About the glare and dust/scratches on my lens.. there are not any visible scratches and at the time those pictures were taken there was not any visible dust either. After I saw those pictures I tried cleaning the lens with some "pc and electronics cleaning wipes" and another wipe that came with my camcorder but that just made the dust and streaks worse so that lead me to order the canon cleaning kit which I haven't gotten yet.
I do have a canon uv filter that I got thinking that since it was canon it would be the best option for my lens. It does make sense that it is reflecting the light back into the lens and thus causing that. I will try taking some pictures without the filter as soon as I can shoot in similar conditions. Maybe I just got a bad filter and should try to exchange it? Steveinnz do you have any pictures that show the same thing happening that you could post? thanks
Meera: These pictures were taken in downtown Miami... I've never been to Baltimore, maybe they look similar at night?
Thanks everyone for the comments/advice helping a newbie, keep them coming...
Message edited by author 2006-03-11 18:09:58. |
|
|
|
03/11/2006 01:25:07 PM · #10 |
Don't know what most are, but the oval / circular ones in the photo with the sun is definitely lens flare.
-Rick
The others. I doubt that they are dirt - dust. But that's my opinion. |
|
|
|
03/11/2006 01:38:53 PM · #11 |
That's cheap filter. Take it off.
Nick
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 09:15:32 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by CarpeNoctem:
The others. I doubt that they are dirt - dust. But that's my opinion. |
That was the moon... lol
Originally posted by Nikolai1024:
That's cheap filter. Take it off. |
Has anybody had any experience with this filter before? What other filters (inexpensive) can you recommend? Thanks |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 09:50:12 AM · #13 |
Could simply be the lights in the city refracting off airborne dust/smog. No harm or foul in being cautious though and checking the lens anyway. You should try to sell the ufo looking pic to the Enquirer. :o)
Jack |
|
|
|
04/19/2006 05:34:19 AM · #14 |
I think this is a reflection off a UV filter on the lens. Have a read of this discussion:
//forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=16828791 |
|
|
|
04/19/2006 05:37:53 AM · #15 |
Orbs!! Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.
Some of those spots may actually be city lights reflecting on the clouds, but most look like dust to me.
A pro asked me once when I was asking about filters "Why would you pay hundreds of dollars for a good lens, then cover it with a cheap piece of glass?" I haven't used a filter since.
|
|
|
|
04/19/2006 06:48:46 AM · #16 |
I am in no way an expert, but I think your problem may be caused by a filter, if you had one in place.
Take a look at this two photo. There is significant ghosting from the vehicle lights caused by a UV filter.
Maybe that's your problem. |
|
|
|
04/19/2006 06:51:12 AM · #17 |
UFO's!!! Woohoo!
Is that what they call "ghosting" on lenses? |
|
|
|
04/19/2006 07:04:22 AM · #18 |
This is ghosting. It's caused by light reflections within the optics. As previously pointed out, all of them are mirror images of other light sources within the frame, and that's a dead giveaway.
The filter may be the major culprit, but you may still see it to some degree without the filter. It depends on the lens.
|
|
|
|
07/02/2008 11:54:43 AM · #19 |
forgive me for reviving this ancient thread. just wanted to let any googlers know what it was.
as pointed out by some of the bright minds here, it turned out to be the cheap canon filter I had gotten that bounced the light reflected from the lens back into the camera. got a more expensive hoya super multi-coated filter and that solved the problem. |
|
|
|
07/02/2008 03:10:49 PM · #20 |
|
|
|
07/02/2008 04:33:36 PM · #21 |
bounced the light reflected from the lens back into the camera.... no my friend, you have clearly captured a battle between the Gorgon fleet and their arch rivals the Rutan. I suggest forwarding these images to NASA.
Fame and vast quantities of wealth await you.
|
|
|
|
07/03/2008 04:45:25 AM · #22 |
|
|
|
07/03/2008 04:56:41 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by idnic:
A pro asked me once when I was asking about filters "Why would you pay hundreds of dollars for a good lens, then cover it with a cheap piece of glass?" I haven't used a filter since. |
... Quoting Cindi (from two years ago...!).
Anyway, earlier this year I asked at B&H about filters and the two co-workers I spoke with had an ongoing debate about this. One felt like the pro Cindi quoted above, the other felt the extra protection for an expensive lens was worth it. For myself, I'm very glad I had a filter on my Nikon AF 85mm f/1.4D when it got clunked last week. The filter smashed and took the brunt of the damage.
Message edited by author 2008-07-03 08:58:05. |
|
|
|
07/03/2008 05:38:25 AM · #24 |
| You may pay $1000 for a great lens that you have to be really careful with, and think twice about taking it out of the bag where it might get bumped, and stress about putting it back in the bag without the lens cap (I do this by accident all the time). Oh, and if you scratch it a new one will cost you another $1000. Or, you can pay $1100 for a robust lens that is 99% as good, much less worry and stress, and if you do break the $1100 one, it's only $100 for a new one. :) I wouldn't go for "a cheap piece of glass", but a good lens deserves a good filter. It's often a good selling point that the expensive lenses have more pieces of glass, so why argue about one more thin layer of quality glass? :) Ah, but Cindi has a studio now (but not 2 years ago). Yes, possibly a studio camera I wouldn't put a filter on it. It's pretty safe, and with all those bright lights around, maybe internal reflections are more of an issue. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/06/2025 11:48:36 PM EDT.
