« on: January 08, 2015, 08:43:36 AM »
Flare artifacts: looking at the sample image pair linked above, even after 'correction' the flare appears pretty bad – there is still a very noticeable veiling glare on the image. I'd be interested to see what a shot with a strong light source (the sun, for example) a bit outside the frame looks like. As it is, the lens should probably come with a 'black box warning' not to use it for backlit shots.
Also looked at the pair of night-scene images supplied by Nikon and totally agree. It is really bad. Even after "software correction". However, the first 2 Canon DO lenses [400/4 DO and 70-300 DO] are probably not any better as far as flares/ghosting goes in counterlit shots. At least i got that impression from quite a number of user reports [never tried them myself]. Whether the 400/4 II is (significantly) better, remains to be seen.
For reasons of price/value and also those qustions marks re. optical performance with strong light sources in the frame or just outside I will definitely not buy any DO (or "PF") lenses but leave Augustin Jean Fresnel's 1822 invention to lighthouse lens and similar use cases.
btw: 1822 ... 2001 ... so much for Canon being "innovative" with DO.