nzeeman
Well-known
i was watching some old galleries here on rff and i saw this
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=5011
i couldnt believe how great i26 handled that light .
does anyone have more examples. i have i26 but i never btried it in extreme situation like this.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=5011
i couldnt believe how great i26 handled that light .
does anyone have more examples. i have i26 but i never btried it in extreme situation like this.
R
Roberto
Guest
You think it handled it well?
I stopped using that lens because of that flare issue...
Not sure why lot of ppl like that shoot
I stopped using that lens because of that flare issue...
Not sure why lot of ppl like that shoot
wolves3012
Veteran
I haven't had an issue with flare on the I-26...but maybe I'm cautious because of its reputation?
MartinP
Veteran
I have used a couple of these lenses and their relatives. Any lens as old as these is going to vary depending on how it was used, stored and serviced. I had a "new" I-61 (newer than the I-26 of course) which was super clean and performed very well. On the other hand, an I-26 was cloudy inside despite only having tiny cleaning marks on the front.
Probably, this basic tessar design doesn't have to be prone to flare, having so few glass/air surfaces and such a simple lens barrel. There are also push-on/fall-off lens hoods still available all over the place for the lenses of course !
Probably, this basic tessar design doesn't have to be prone to flare, having so few glass/air surfaces and such a simple lens barrel. There are also push-on/fall-off lens hoods still available all over the place for the lenses of course !
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
I also have this flare when using it without a hood (actually I don't have a hood at all). See:

nzeeman
Well-known
i think it controled flare good in first post because light didnt degrade other parts of photo. in florian photo light degraded photo really a lot.
Share: