203 Responses

1. Now that Kolari Vision is offering AR coating for the sensors the Hoot Spot list will most likely need to be revised for people who get the AR coating.

   Log in to Reply

2. Konica 50mm f1.4 — terrible hot spot all the way down to f4
   Konica 57mm ƒ1.4 — no hot spot at all

   I test by using a tree in my alley and centering the lens int he open sky just above the bright trees. My camera is 720nm A7II. No AR coating.

   Log in to Reply

   1. i bought and tried the Konica 57mm f1.4. correct, absolutely no hot spots any any setting. i also needed some wide angle so i also used my zeiss zf-ir 24mm f/2.8 lens and wow, there’s a big noticeable difference in contrast and sharpness without having to pixel peep. not bad, but i want something a little better so you’ll see one for sale on ebay soon.

      Log in to Reply

3. Samyang T-S 24mm f3.5 ED AS UMC on converted to full spectrum Canon 50D.
   Outstanding resolution, no hot spot on every aperture.
   Perfect for visible and IR spectrum.
   Tested on visible light, 690nm and 720nm.

   Log in to Reply

4. On a Canon 40D with 590nM conversion, I can confirm the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX HSM DC* hotspots that start to appear at f/13 and is visible at f/22. I’d say it’s mild from examples I’ve seen posted by others from other lenses.

   Log in to Reply

5. ZEISS 50mm f/2 Planar ZM T* : No problem at all
   Voigtlander 35mm f/2.5 Color Skopar Leica M mount : No problem at all
   Just to be more precise about the FUJI XF 27mm f/2.8, it’s usable at f/4 no hot spot visible,it begins to be very faint and wide at f/5.6, very bright small hot spot at f/16.
   All the tests were done on FUJI X-Pro1 camera.

   Log in to Reply

   1. what about the Voigtlander 10.5 f/0.95? it’s not mentioned.

      Log in to Reply

      1. The Voigtlander 10.5 f/0.95, on my Olympus e-m1 mark ii, has a medium intensity, huge hot spot right in the center.

         Log in to Reply

6. I just got testing a Sigma 35mm Art lens on my Kolarivision converted 60D and experience a hot spot at all apertures smaller than F2.8. The intensity increases as the aperture size decreases and is really intolerable at F6.7 or smaller. At apertures wider than F2.8 you really have to look for it.

   Log in to Reply

7. I’ve got the Fuji 16 F 1.4 – very bad at all apertures past F2.8 and not so good at 2.8 and lower. The only good thing to say about the otherwise wonderful lens is that the hot spot does not have a hard, harsh border, and is very wide – hiding the effect a bit.

   Log in to Reply

8. Samyang 24 3.5 ts-e don’t produce any flare.

   Log in to Reply

9. I would like to see the newer Fuji lenses tested. In my limited trials, I find the Fuji 35mm F2.0 to be an excellent performer, but the autofocus tends to hunt. The 16mm 1.4 is terrible. Autofocus doesn’t work at all. The 90mm is good from 2.0 to 5.6.

   Log in to Reply

10. So I have gone crazy with testing Standard/Normal old glass over the past three months. I shoot a pair of oak trees in front of my apartment building late in the afternoon. Testing season will be done soon 🙁

    Konica AR 57mm ƒ1.4 – fantastic lens both color and IR.
    Konica AR 50mm ƒ1.4 – well defined hot spot from ƒ4
    Konica AR 50mm ƒ1.7 – clean lens, great performer
    Konica AR 50mm ƒ1.8 – hot spot looks like smudges in the imager after ƒ11, also Ninja Star
    Mamiya Sekor 55mm ƒ1.8 SX – clean lens that has smudge Hot Spot after ƒ11
    Mamiya Sekor 55mm ƒ1.8 – clean great performer
    Olympus 50mm ƒ1.4 Zuiko – Ninja Star, and bad hot spot, really bad
    Olympus 50mm ƒ3.5 Macro Zuiko – lovely performer, sharp and no hot spot
    Canon FD 50 ƒ1.8 – clean great performer
    Canon FD 50mm ƒ1.4 – one of the worst from ƒ4 on
    Minolta MD 50mm ƒ2 – visible hot spot starting at ƒ8
    Minolta 50mm ƒ1.7 Rokkor – clean nice lens
    Minolta MD 50mm ƒ1.7 Rokkor-X – clean great performer
    Minolta MD 50mm ƒ1.4 Rokkor-PG – terrible hot spot one of the worst starting at ƒ5.6
    Minolta 50mm ƒ1.7 AF – clean but the lack of live preview of aperture is a no-go
    Yashica 50mm ƒ1.5 Yashinon DS-M – Bad, really bad, one of the worst
    Nikon 50mm ƒ2 Nikkor pre-AI – clean sharp and no hot spot
    Nikon 50mm ƒ1.4 Nikkor pre-AI – not terrible just unusable after ƒ8
    Nikon GN 45mm ƒ2.8 Nikkor – crazy sharp and no hot spot.
    Fuji 55mm ƒ1.8 Fujinon – Ninja Star, nice lens otherwise with slight smudging at tine apertures
    Pentax 50mm ƒ1.8 Takumar – No hot spot, but not as sharp or interesting as the Konica/Mamiya/Minolta lenses.

    So what can we learn from all of this.

    1. The Konica 57mm ƒ1.4 is the only ƒ1.4 that I have tested that has no hot spot at all. Combine that with it’s color performance and despite my best efforts to replace it, I still find it to be a winner.

    2. The color and bokeh of the ƒ1.4 lenses all made me happy with the exception of the Ninja Star issue on the Oly. If I was not shooting IR there is not a loser among the rest.

    3. I have not tested any m39, M, Pentax 50mm ƒ1.4, Leica R or Contax lenses.

    4. Simpler design seems to make for less hot spots. Though that is not always the case. The ƒ1.8-ƒ2 lenses seem at worst to have more of a smudging issue or than the cheap Minolta 50mm ƒ2.

    5. I own too many of these lenses and need to sell off most of them.

    Log in to Reply

    1. Since these test I have tested a few more.

       Pentax 50/1.4 7 element — Only the 2nd 1.4 that I have ever tested that matches the Konica 57mm. I have also tested two different versions of the Konica and both have same great results.
       Pentax 35/2 Super-Takumar — big heavy lens that delivers fantastic results.
       Konica AR 135/3.2 Hexanon – my favorite 135 of all time. This lens is light weight, compact, crazy sharp, and clean hotspot results. Crazy short focus distance, if you love shooting flowers this is an amazing lens. I also bought it for $5 out of a bargain bin!
       Konica AR 35mm ƒ2.8 – older Hexanon version and excellent results.
       Konica 28/3.5 Hexanon – Great results some hint of smudging past f11.
       Konica 200/4 — great results. I love this lens.
       Konica 200/3.5 — great results
       Vivitar 200/3.5 m42 — Fantastic lens, great Hot Spot results.
       Vivitar 19mm/3.5 — Not the sharpest lens in my kit, but clean IR results
       Canon FL 85/1.8 – a lot to love about this lens other than weight — classic all metal construction, sharp and clean IR results.
       Canon FD 24/2.8 — some smudging at ƒ11
       Canon FD 35/2.8 – very clean results
       Nikkor 35/2 Pre-Ai, really nice lens with clean results.
       Nikkor 135/3.5 Pre-Ai, clean lens, just not as sharp as some of my other 135s
       Voigtlander 35mm ƒ2.5 MC LM — hot spots at ƒ8
       Minox Color-Minotar 35mm ƒ2.8 — this is m39 converted from the legendary Minox cameras and it gives great results. Downsides are 4 sided bokeh, and fidgety to use thanks to a tiny aperture ring.
       Topcor 58mm ƒ1.8 — I have two of these and was not impressed with either. Hotspots start at around ƒ11.
       YUS (Yashica) 28/2.8 C/Y — this is simply an amazing lens — my hands down favorite 28 for any purpose.
       YUS (Yashica) 135/2.8 C/Y — next to the Konica 135/3.2 this is the best 135 I have ever tested, sharp, contrasty, and no Hot Spot issues.
       Yashica 50/1.8 ML C/Y — stay below ƒ11 and watch how you shoot with it.

       There are other lenses I have tested and to be frank was not impressed. Hot spot issues were not terrible, just not what I was looking for in terms of other results:
       Hanimar 35/2.8, Pentacon 50/1.8, Fujinon 55/1.9, Miranda 50/1.9, Pentax 35/3.5, Pentax 200/4, Minolta 35/1.8 Rokkor-X, Minolta 135/2.8 Rokkor-X, Olympus 28/3.5, Nikkor 28mm ƒ3.5 Pre-Ai.

       Log in to Reply

    2. I heard nothing but good things about the Minolta 57mm f/1.4 so i got one.
       it’s true. no hot spots and nice color, but it was not sharp at all. it’s cheaper and easier to just get a point and shoot modified camera if you want this kind of softness.

       Log in to Reply

    3. I can add a lens to your list. The Minola MC ROKKOR-PF 58mm f1.4. I just compared it side by side to the Konica 57 f1.4. THEY ARE BOTH COMPARABLY SUPERB. If I had to choose, I’d go with the Minolta. But they’re both very close to perfect.

       Log in to Reply

11. fujifilm 23mm f2 has NO hotspots using R72 filters at any aperture

    new lens to add, been using same a LOT

    “angry photographer” on youtube channel , thats me

    Log in to Reply

12. You have it marked as good, but I’m getting large but faint hot spots from a Tamron 15-30 at mid-apertures on a converted D3300.

    Log in to Reply

13. What is the best way to test lenses for hot spots, so that I may add my lenses to this database? Do you have a recommended testing routine?

    Log in to Reply

    1. Find a tree with full canopy of leaves. Set camera up on tripod and aim center at a sky just above the foliage. I have an Oak that has a nice V shaped area I aim at. You want a cloudless sky – make sure the sun is not in or near the image area. Shade it out if needed. I start at minimum f16-f22 and then work back in full stops while looking through the lens. If you are going to have an issue it will be obvious at smaller apertures. Most lenses with issues lose their spot at around f4-8. If you read my earlier note I have done way to much testing.

       Log in to Reply

14. Fuji 35/2 very good at all apertures. Database re: Fujifilm lenses agrees w/ my Pro & Con experience. Thanks for publishing the database

    Log in to Reply

15. Fuji 14/2.8 also very good at all apertures

    Log in to Reply

16. Tamron 15-30 hot spots fairly bad at smaller apertures.

    Log in to Reply

17. Your database shows that the OLYMPUS 12-50 has poor performance after f/9.
    The fact is : ALL 4/3 and micro 4/3 lens start to perform badly after f/8, from Diffraction Limit. No exception.

    I use 12-50 for over 1,000 images. None has hot spot.

    Log in to Reply

    1. Note : Personal Opinion.

       Almost all MF lenses of film era have IR marking.
       Does that mean it have to be able to handle IR beautifully?

       If the MF is not tested on modified IR mirrorless camera, I believe that all MF lens will perform poorly because the IR ray __is designed__ to be focused at the different plane from visible light.

       Log in to Reply

    2. this is a hot spot performance list, not an image quality performance list.

       Log in to Reply

18. Hello, I’d keen about what’s wrong with the Canon TS-E 24mm f3.5 L II, listed in bad performers: “Canon TS-E 24 mm f3.5 L II* (see comments for details)”. Cannot find anything in the comments here. Many thanks for your help!

    Log in to Reply

19. No dis-respect, but take this list with the proverbial grain of salt. Listed above as a “Poor performer” is the Nikkor 24mm F2.8. However, I get excellent results from my Nikkor 24mm, F2.8 on my converted D7000. Now I have the narrow filter, and shoot only in the deep 850 nm range.

    However, the Nikkor-NC Auto, 24mm F2.8 lens, all versions, is not a great lens. IR or everyday shooting. If you use that lens on any full frame camera, and compare shots side by side, you’ll see the difference in sharpness on any photograph.

    So I suspect the poor rep is based on the N or the NC version. This manual focus lens is still made new today. if any of you still want to dump one off cheap, just let me know. 🙂

    Log in to Reply

    1. yes, the problem too is that i doubt people are testing every focal length on zooms and every aperture and every type of IR filter (590,665,720,850nm). so you’ll only get a general idea from this list but it’s the biggest list i’ve seen. hot spots are the most frustrating part of IR phtography.

       Log in to Reply

20. I find that Nikkor 17-55 has hot spots over f/5.6 or on times over 20 sec.
    The same with Nikkor 18-55 VR II but definitely less visible hot spots on this lens.

    Log in to Reply

21. i’d like to add to the list:
    olympus 12-100 f/4 (very bad hot spots)
    leica 8-18 f/2.8-4 (no hot spots)
    leica 12mm f/1.4 (no hot spots)

    Log in to Reply

    1. I just ordered the Leica 8-18 for my fully converted Pen-F, thanks.

       Log in to Reply

22. Have you tested this lens?
    Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens
    Thanks, John

    Log in to Reply

    1. I went ahead and purchased this for $125 and it performs like a champ on my 850nm converted 5D Mark III. I sold my Sigma Art 50mm for a couple reasons and one of them was the terrible hot spot.

       Log in to Reply

23. Olympus OM 21mm f/3.5 Auto-W performs well from 660nm and longer wavelengths at f11 or lower without hotspots and very little chromatic fringing at corners at f8 or higher.

    Log in to Reply

    1. Forgot to add “Zuiko” and MC (multi coated) to lens description.

       Log in to Reply

24. Voigtlander 15mm f/5.6 Heliar III, AWFUL HOTSPOTS at all apertures, increasing as they increase.

    Log in to Reply

25. Have anyone tested Sony GM 24-70 F2.8?

    Log in to Reply

    1. I tried, Unfortunately poor perfomance

       Log in to Reply

26. The Canon 70-200/4 L non-IS model is in the Good Performer category. I had the IS model and I would put that in the Bad Performer list.

    Log in to Reply

27. Hello, Has anyone experience with the nikon 24-85mm VR, because does not saw on the list?! Thank you!

    Log in to Reply

28. has anyone tried the
    Zeiss 12mm f/2.8 Touit Distagon T*
    or
    Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM
    ?

    Log in to Reply

    1. The 12mm Zeiss is my almost-full time lens on my Fuji X. I have 100+ images posted on Instagram with it. #zeiss

       Log in to Reply

    2. The sony 16-35 G has hotspot starting at f/8

       Log in to Reply

29. Has anyone tried Tamron 10-24 VC (New model B023) or Sigma 17-50 OS??

    Log in to Reply

    1. Forget sigma lenses, very bad for IR, tested several of them…

       Log in to Reply

       1. Thank you for your input. According to this review, Sigma 18-35 is great for infrared. I wouldn’t discredit all Sigma lenses just yet.

          Log in to Reply

          1. Well, I had one, so believe me it’s not good, this article it’s only about hotspot, probably is hotspot free, but it’s terrible otherwise…

             Log in to Reply

       2. Old Sigma 12-24 has no issues – a wonderful overall lens and my go to lens for IR

          Log in to Reply

    2. Have had great results with Sigma 17-50 830M IR Untested with 720 NM

       Log in to Reply

30. Has anyone tried the Voigtlander 10mm Hyper Wide (Sony E mount)?

    Log in to Reply

31. Has anyone tried the Neewer/Meike 35mm 1.7, 7Artisans 25mm 1.8, or Sigma 19mm 2.8?

    Log in to Reply

    1. I just got a copy of the 7Artisans 25mm for my fuji x-e1. Happy to say that it is workinf flawlessly for me so far.

       Log in to Reply

32. On or Sony A7S the 24-240 lens produces hot spots most of the time. They can be corrected in Lightroom and Photshop, but it is annoying. Sony lenses generally has this problem.

    Log in to Reply

33. a few other aditional lensdata not in list, I take ir /uv photo’s since 2008 (modded Nikon D200): Good performers: Tokina ATX Macro 90mm f2.5 ; Tokina 17mm SL f3.5 ; Sigma EX 50mm DG; Sigma EX APo 100-300 f4 ; Sigma 180mm f3,5 APO Macro HSM; Sigma EX 15mm fisheye. Nikkor AIS 105mm f2.5 ; AIS 80-200 f4. E serie 35mm f2.5 also suberb in UV! AI Micro 55mm f3.5. Sigma EX 10-20 f3.5 does well. Samyang 14mm f2.8 UMC, IRIX 15mm f2.4 . Voiglander 40mm Ultron f2 (nikonversion) . BAd performers: Nikkor AIS 28mm f2.8 (with CRC) , Tokina ATX 12-24 f4 dx ,

    Log in to Reply

34. Anyone tried ultra wide angle performance of 7Artisans 12mm f2.8 and meike 12mm f2.8?

    Log in to Reply

    1. The 7artisans 7.5mm f/2.8 fisheye works well enough in the infrared, with slight corner softness and slight color fringing in high contrast. I used f/5.6

       Log in to Reply

    2. Looking for the same information myself. Any luck finding out more?

       Log in to Reply

35. Two more lenses for the list:

    Rokinon 24mm tilt-shift with full-frame Sony e-mount. No hotspots observed at all.
    Sony 70-300 G in full-frame Sony e-mount. Nasty hotspots at wide end, OK at 300 with widest aperture.

    Log in to Reply

36. what about the new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC ?

    Log in to Reply

    1. Hi,
       I also am trying to find out about this lens for infra red, have you had any luck with it?
       Thanks
       Lee

       Log in to Reply

    2. Hi again, So I have just tested out my Hoyar72 77mm filter on the Tamron 24-70 g2 lens, (I taped it onto the 82mm lens and blocked the edges as best as possible.)
       Pleased to report no visible HotSpots till f22, then of course it’s quite small by then.

       Here is a link to some test files…. kolarivision.com//kolarivision.com//we.tl/t-E7UEqpiBtO

       Just ordered a 82mm R72.

       Other data (camera exp, f, iso etc in the metadata of the files).

       Log in to Reply

37. Sony Distagon T* FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA Lens is pretty much garbage, you can use it wide open but it still has a hot spot at f/1.4

    Log in to Reply

38. Hello friends,

    How do they behave in Infrared Photography, the next lenses: the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II?

    Thanks for your help.

    Regards,

    Log in to Reply

39. Fujinon XF 10-24 f/4 – hot spot in the center. Rather bad…
    Fujinon XC 16-50 f3.5-5.6 – mild hot spot.

    Both tested on X Pro 1 converted to full spectrum.

    Log in to Reply

40. i get some hot pink in the center when doing faux color at f/11 with a Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar.
    i don’t notice it when doing mono IR though. that is probably why it’s in the left/good column.