After all of the posts concerning this issue, I went out today in my three free minutes and started taking snaps with the sun in the frame (upper L,C,R) and with the sun just out of the frame. To my surprise, not only didn't I see the flare that others have reported but with only one exception, I didn't see any flare at all! Only the sun in the upper left produced any flare and it was very well controlled given the conditions. I am still concerned about when this strange flare occurs but from what I have seen in my admitedly very brief, non-scientific test is that my copy of the 24-105 is the most flare resistent lens I have ever seen - which probably means that it is broken. Whole thing is just weird.

Hrow wrote:
Whole thing is just weird.

I expect somebody will take the lens apart to find out where the beams of light are coming from. I'm betting it's plutonium.

No, kryptonite. Does anyone remember that substance. Go ahead, show your age...

The flux capacitor is broken!

John Power wrote:
No, kryptonite. Does anyone remember that substance. Go ahead, show your age...

Yup! you need superman's eyes to see those flare and most of us are blessed with the lack of super vision .

I'm finding it hard to duplicate these rays too. I've tried this lens shooting landscapes and portraiture on sunny bright conditions and I agree with some of the posters here that this lens have very, very good flare control.

Cheers,

José

spartan123 wrote:
The flux capacitor is broken!


That's a distinct possibility. Do you have any idea how to fix it?

Hrow wrote:
spartan123 wrote:
The flux capacitor is broken!


That's a distinct possibility. Do you have any idea how to fix it?
I believe you have to go "back to the future" to fix it.

John Power wrote:
No, kryptonite. Does anyone remember that substance. Go ahead, show your age...

dude thats not that far back yet... wait like 20 yrs

I am glad to see that this thread has generated such an intelligent discussion! No wonder the Canon marketing people think so highly of us and take into account the needs of those who wander through the hallowed halls of cyberspace. Now about this flux capacitor problem....

I've heard from an EXTREMELY reliable source that the flare issue was one found on some very early samples of the lens that were supposed to have been recalled but apparently slipped out. Any lenses in stores and at any time since the very first ones should not have the problem.

- Jay

I got mine from Badger Graphic just a few weeks ago, and mine produces the flare. I can reliably reproduce it. It does look cool, but the fact that it doesn't show up in the viewfinder means the lens can't be reliable at 24mm. Push it up to 28 and it pretty much goes away, but still.

Someone did have a very helpful solution the other day in that Canon can just put a stop in the zoom and Sharpie out the 24 and change it to 28.

Although this would seem logical at first blush, if it were true Canon wouldn't have stopped production. As far as I have heard, there are no lenses in the distribution chain which gives a lot of validity to the belief that something is going on relative to its manufacture.

Concerning the comments in other threads that all lenses have flare, that is true. What is missed is that I can't recall any lens having flare as bad as some of the examples shown. While in certain cases you might get lucky and have the flare produce a uniquely beautiful image, if it is not supposed to be there then it shouldn't be. If it is going to flare like that erratically, then God help anyone that is using the lens professionally. I want to know what I am going to get when I shot something. If I screw up, well that's my problem. If my equipment goes flaky at random moments then I am going to start to get mighty ticked. While mine has not shown the flare problem I am concerned that it will under circumstances that I have not yet encountered. Makes me nervous.

From my perspective, this is not a cheap lens and as such it shouldn't be in first place for the award for the worst flare ever. Further, to say as some have, that "the 70-300 has bad flare as well so what's the problem" is an inane defense of a problem that should have never occurred in the first place.

Hrow,
I agree 100%. People send lenses back for focusing issues, real or imagined, all the time. No one buys a lens to get random effects like flare, whether it looks cool in a particular exposure or not. This is obviously a problem, at least with a significant number of lenses, that Canon has begun to address. If I were in this situation, I think I'd want a new lens rather than have someone taking my lens apart.For most of us,$1200 is nothing to laugh at.If it were me, I'd send it back even if I THOUGHT there was a problem.Canon's offer to replace or repair the lens may limited to a certain period of time. Good Luck to everyone who finds themselves in this situation.

I'd like to add one more thing. Sometimes folks are reluctant to admit that something may be wrong with thier new purchase, as if they made a mistake. If any mistakes were made, it's on the part of the manufacturer and not the buyer. You bought in good faith and should expect to get what you pay for.
I say this because I have been guilty of just this thing and lived to regret it.It wasn't camera gear, but it was something that could have been taken care of right away for nothing, but ended up costing me because I dragged my feat.
Again, Good Luck !

I think people are able to laugh at the situation because they know the story will have a happy ending when Canon fixes or replaces the lenses. Nobody is making light of the inconvenience that the lens buyers will have to suffer. We were just trying to cheer people up with a little humor.

Anyone has a link to the recall?

I tried it again tonight to duplicate an image with 'heavenly rays'-----once again to no avail.

Here's one where my lens was almost touching the bulb of the bright light I placed to the right of the lens. Shot this without filter (I normally have the Hoya Super HMC 77mm UV filter) and lens hood:

http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/image/51074629
http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/image/51074651

I even gave the Maxxum 7D + Maxxum 28-75/2.8 a cameo appearance just to compare the flares:

http://www.pbase.com/jmb_56/image/51074646

My conclusion about the rays------fuggett about it! :-)

Cheers,

José

i like the little angel in the second pic

Can anybody put a detailed step by step guide on how to get this flare problem I tried all kinds of things light at an angle in frame of frame hood no hood I did get pretty bad flare at extreem angles but normal flares (no beam me up scoty kind of rays) and in such situation is normal to get a flare I could see it in the view finder.

bright light source in front and above at a 45 degree angle. Take the hood off.
Move the lense/camera around, pointing it perpendicular to the light rays until you see it in the viewfinder.

ward1066 wrote:
i like the little angel in the second pic

I think I see God in that picture too. Nice to know he looks over you when you're using the ski machine.

Ok first of all I have tried to do that and it did not work.
Second why would I want to shoot with the hood off (Although I did test with the hood off and it did not work)?
Third people say that you canot see it in the view finder. If I can see it than is simple to correct just change position a little to avoid the flare.

I even tried it a few times pointing the lens at different angles with my Alien Bees strobes----still nothing, just regular honest to goodness flare. Maybe, I am just a bad boy and no glorious light will shine upon me :-)

Cheers,

José

Clayphish wrote:
ward1066 wrote:
i like the little angel in the second pic

I think I see God in that picture too. Nice to know he looks over you when you're using the ski machine.


i need to see GOD too

$1,299 is a small price to pay, and you can still use the lens for other things