Filters
Dec 29, 2013 13:23:32 #
What if any filters make sense for a digital camera lens. I have read that a UV filter is not necessary because unlike film the sensor itself does not pick up UV. I am considering a Hoya PRO1D protector, for lens protection only. Alternatively I could just try to be very careful with the lens but I see that already in a couple days I managed to get a fingerprint on it. Thoughts?
Dec 29, 2013 13:26:45 #
I still use a UV filter on all of my lenses to protect feont element coatings.
This Ugly HedgeHog article may be of interest:
FAQ: Which Photographic Filters for Digital Photography?
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26502-1.html
This Ugly HedgeHog article may be of interest:
FAQ: Which Photographic Filters for Digital Photography?
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26502-1.html
Dec 29, 2013 14:57:12 #
rssmith wrote:
I have read that a UV filter is not necessary because unlike film the sensor itself does not pick up UV.
Absolutely false information that several people seem to be intent about spreading. UV filters are meant to reduce UV light reflections in the air, and work well at this task. If using them as "protective" filters, simply take them off when you need no protection as they can soften your image, especially cheaper models without proper coatings.
Dec 29, 2013 15:20:19 #
Lenses get fingerprints. It happens. I'm not sure I understand the reference to digital sensors not needing a UV filter. A UV (sometimes called a skylight) filter will help reduce a blue cast that can be present in outdoor images. With digital you can easily adjust white balance before, or after shooting, to correct a color cast. This was not as easy with film.
I recently researched the topic of filters vs no filter and I have tried it both ways. Below are some of my thoughts on the subject.
Some people like to use a UF or clear filter at all times to protect the lens. The filter is certainly easier to clean, it's flat, and it can protect the lens from some types of damage. Having a filter on the lens provides some convenience as one doesn't need to keep putting the lens cap on/off to protect the lens when walking around, storing the camera, etc.
The down side is the filter adds an additional glass element. A poor quality filter can cause distortion and even with good quality filters there is some loss of transmission, which may matter in dim lighting conditions. I have seen reflections caused by a filter. Yes I shot the same image with/without the filter and with the filter there was a flare on the image. Filters cost money. Filters don't eliminate the need for lens cleaning. Fine dust will invariably get around the threads on a screw on filter. But the filter will keep fingerprints off the lens itself and keeping it on on the lens will help to reduce the frequency of having to clean the lens.
There are reasons to use filters, to enhance the image quality, to create effects, etc. The question is: "Is it really necessary to have a filter on at all times to protect the lens?"
I think it's really comes down to individual preference.
I recently researched the topic of filters vs no filter and I have tried it both ways. Below are some of my thoughts on the subject.
Some people like to use a UF or clear filter at all times to protect the lens. The filter is certainly easier to clean, it's flat, and it can protect the lens from some types of damage. Having a filter on the lens provides some convenience as one doesn't need to keep putting the lens cap on/off to protect the lens when walking around, storing the camera, etc.
The down side is the filter adds an additional glass element. A poor quality filter can cause distortion and even with good quality filters there is some loss of transmission, which may matter in dim lighting conditions. I have seen reflections caused by a filter. Yes I shot the same image with/without the filter and with the filter there was a flare on the image. Filters cost money. Filters don't eliminate the need for lens cleaning. Fine dust will invariably get around the threads on a screw on filter. But the filter will keep fingerprints off the lens itself and keeping it on on the lens will help to reduce the frequency of having to clean the lens.
There are reasons to use filters, to enhance the image quality, to create effects, etc. The question is: "Is it really necessary to have a filter on at all times to protect the lens?"
I think it's really comes down to individual preference.
Dec 30, 2013 08:03:49 #
How did you manage to get a fingerprint ?Didn't you use the lens cap?...
rssmith wrote:
What if any filters make sense for a digital camera lens. I have read that a UV filter is not necessary because unlike film the sensor itself does not pick up UV. I am considering a Hoya PRO1D protector, for lens protection only. Alternatively I could just try to be very careful with the lens but I see that already in a couple days I managed to get a fingerprint on it. Thoughts?
Dec 30, 2013 08:51:11 #
FILTERS ARE CHEAPER THAN LENSES OR CAMERAS SIMPLE AS THAT. And you would have to try hard to see the with/without difference.
On my 24/7 always with me ZS20 Panasonic I usually have a UV. I took it off to use a different filter and did not put it back on. A week later it is amazing how much junk had accumulated on the lens and protective leaf mechanism. Cleaned it up... laboriously and put the UV back. Cleaning the UV is easy blow, fog with breath, and wipe with my shirt. Should the UV get damaged I throw it over my left shoulder and for little $ put a new 37mm UV on.
On my 24/7 always with me ZS20 Panasonic I usually have a UV. I took it off to use a different filter and did not put it back on. A week later it is amazing how much junk had accumulated on the lens and protective leaf mechanism. Cleaned it up... laboriously and put the UV back. Cleaning the UV is easy blow, fog with breath, and wipe with my shirt. Should the UV get damaged I throw it over my left shoulder and for little $ put a new 37mm UV on.
Dec 30, 2013 10:37:34 #
Got to agree with everything dpullum has said. I shoot rally cars that at speed are followed by a hail storm of small debris. I've had two UV's smashed and one scratched. Total replacement cost under £30. Cost of 3 new 24 - 105 Canons £500 - £600. I use Hoya Pro filters and never had a problem with them, other than they don't like being hit with stones travelling at 100 mph. Mind you I don't like being hit either! The things we do for our art!
Dec 30, 2013 11:02:59 #
Sounds like you need a longer telephoto lens to put more distance between you & the cars !!!
Spindrift62 wrote:
Got to agree with everything dpullum has said. I shoot rally cars that at speed are followed by a hail storm of small debris. I've had two UV's smashed and one scratched. Total replacement cost under £30. Cost of 3 new 24 - 105 Canons £500 - £600. I use Hoya Pro filters and never had a problem with them, other than they don't like being hit with stones travelling at 100 mph. Mind you I don't like being hit either! The things we do for our art!
Dec 30, 2013 11:42:31 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
Sounds like you need a longer telephoto lens to put more distance between you & the cars !!!
I just like living on the edge! Unfortunately sometimes the 'right spot' is too close. I do try and get at least a couple of trees between me and the subject, and the gear is heavily insured!
Dec 30, 2013 13:23:23 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
The UV or no UV debate will go on forever and I won't enter it here; but your question is "what filters make sense for a digital camera lens?" The two filters I would always include in my kit are the circular polarizing filter and a neutral density filter (I have a circular one that gets darker and darker). A third filter is the graduated density filter.
The CPF is great for accenting clouds in the sky (when properly used) and reducing glare (off water, plants, etc.).
The NDF is great for cutting down the amount of light entering the camera. I use it in shutter priority mode when photographing waterfalls and moving water.
I haven't used my GDF that much, but I would use it when taking photos of sunsets, to hold back light and show more detail in the environment.
The CPF is great for accenting clouds in the sky (when properly used) and reducing glare (off water, plants, etc.).
The NDF is great for cutting down the amount of light entering the camera. I use it in shutter priority mode when photographing waterfalls and moving water.
I haven't used my GDF that much, but I would use it when taking photos of sunsets, to hold back light and show more detail in the environment.
Dec 30, 2013 13:42:33 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Absolutely false information that several people seem to be intent about spreading. UV filters are meant to reduce UV light reflections in the air, and work well at this task. If using them as "protective" filters, simply take them off when you need no protection as they can soften your image, especially cheaper models without proper coatings.
:thumbup: :thumbup: Finally someone that says how it is!
Dec 30, 2013 14:10:08 #
Dec 30, 2013 15:13:13 #
I went years without a problem, but three times in the past two years having a UV filter on has saved me from wiping out a lens. Add up those savings and it comes to about $3800. That equates to roughly 750 UV filters. That's one filter per day with 20 spares. I've done the math.
Dec 30, 2013 15:15:24 #
Don't you carry insurance on your gear ?....$3800 divided by 750 comes out to about $5.06 per filter. Please tell me you are not using cheap filters on your lenses?
rdgreenwood wrote:
I went years without a problem, but three times in the past two years having a UV filter on has saved me from wiping out a lens. Add up those savings and it comes to about $3800. That equates to roughly 750 UV filters.
Dec 30, 2013 15:20:48 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
. Of course I do, but putting the responsibility for my accidents on someone else's shoulders hardly seems fair. Besides, it's not like insurance claims are settled in an instant. Asking if I carry insurance in such a situation seems akin to questioning why I bother to have brakes on my car.Don't you carry insurance on your gear ?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.