Touted as the only lens filter guide you will ever need! A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide:...

Kuzano

A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide:

https://www.format.com/magazine/resources/photography/lens-filters?utm_source=mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mag-newsletter&utm_term=lens-filters&utm_content=march-27

Since I have a huge number and sizes of filters from years of learning filter effects in film photography, I often find myself using filters on my digital camera's. I do this because of all the time spent in my early years of photography AND to avoid the unnecessary time and learning curve necessary to learn redundant processes in Post Processing.

Also goes hand in hand with my aversion to digital Post Processing and still gives me manual control of filter effects on the camera.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Kuzano wrote:

A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide: br ... (show quote)

I don't mind post processing at all, I like it and I think it is fun, but I'm with you, still use all my filters from way back on my digitals as well, have never tried to do "filter effects" in pp!

Bipod

Kuzano wrote:

A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide: br ... (show quote)

Filters are so Old Technology. With digital, there is never any reason to
fiddle with the front of your lens.

You don't need a polarizer filter, just click on "Polarizer" in the processing package
of your choice.

If the lens was dirty, just click on "Lens Cleaner".

And if you forgot to remove the lens cap, just click on "Lens Cap Remover".

Software is magic--it can do anything!

Bipod

Kuzano wrote:

A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide:

https://www.format.com/magazine/resources/photography/lens-filters?utm_source=mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mag-newsletter&utm_term=lens-filters&utm_content=march-27

Quote the link:
"Close-Up Filters: Used to achieve closer minimum focus distance for macro photography."

These are not filters, they are "helper" lenses. So this topic really doesn't belong in an
article about filters.

Most are single-element, uncorrected lenses with poor optical quality. Doublets can give
give decent results---but cannot match extensions tubes or lens reverse adapters---let alone
an actual macro lens.

Complex and non-standardized lens have made extension tubes and reversers expensive and
often unsatifactory. So now we're back to the inferior "close-up filters". How sad.

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

Bipod wrote:

Filters are so i Old Technology /i . With digit... (show quote)

The first sentence in this statement is correct.
After that it is all wrong.

machia Loc: NJ

[quote=Bipod]Filters are so Old Technology. With digital, there is never any reason to
fiddle with the front of your lens.

You don't need a polarizer filter, just click on "Polarizer" in the processing package
of your choice.

If the lens was dirty, just click on "Lens Cleaner".

It’s old technology but it works.

machia Loc: NJ

[quote=machia]

Bipod wrote:

Filters are so Old Technology.

It’s old technology but it works.

machia Loc: NJ

Good article and guide. Thank you.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Aside from a polarizer and the occasional use of ND, I have absolutely no reason to use filters. Everything a filter can do Photoshop can do infinitely better. It's like using a typewriter instead of a word processor: extremely limited. You folks who refuse to learn digital processing make me wonder how serious you are about the craft. It's like trying to play the piano with only the Black keys ;)

machia Loc: NJ

kymarto wrote:

Aside from a polarizer and the occasional use of ND, I have absolutely no reason to use filters. Everything a filter can do Photoshop can do infinitely better. It's like using a typewriter instead of a word processor: extremely limited. You folks who refuse to learn digital processing make me wonder how serious you are about the craft. It's like trying to play the piano with only the Black keys ;)

I’ve been playing the guitar for 46 years and into photography for 49 years. I wouldn’t trade anything that works for me as an artist.
Your summation has elements of technological arrogance to it.
If it works for you, then fine.

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

Kuzano wrote:

A fairly good summary of lens filter's guide.

Great article... and appreciated. I notice they left out the gelatin filters.

Dik

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Bipod wrote:

Quote the link: br "Close-Up Filters: Used to... (show quote)

Of course they are filters, ok, they do not belong in the color correction line of filters, but belong in the line of trick filters, like all the prism and star filters and so on!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

RichardTaylor wrote:

The first sentence in this statement is correct.
After that it is all wrong.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

kymarto wrote:

Aside from a polarizer and the occasional use of ND, I have absolutely no reason to use filters. Everything a filter can do Photoshop can do infinitely better. It's like using a typewriter instead of a word processor: extremely limited. You folks who refuse to learn digital processing make me wonder how serious you are about the craft. It's like trying to play the piano with only the Black keys ;)

I think its the other way around, it makes me think how serious you are about the craft! The use of filters is just a part of "the craft" and as that a very much fun part of it and you do not have to fiddle around in post, trying to correct some color casts, because you were able to avoid them all together in-camera!

timcc Loc: Virginia

Bipod wrote:

Filters are so i Old Technology /i . With digit... (show quote)