B+W slim sline 72mm UV Haze fillter lens Cap
Aug 4, 2013 14:29:07 #
I have a B+W UV Haze slim line filter, which cap with a push on lens cap, which will obviously fall off and get lost easily, my Canon 82mm cap will not fit because of the slimness of the specialized filter to stop vignetting on my 16-35mm L Wide Lens, can anyone help me find a more secure Lens Cap for this filter. Thank you in anticipation of your help.
Aug 4, 2013 14:35:38 #
You may not like my answer, Candy, and it's purely a matter of individual choice.
I believe the UV filter makes as good a lens protector as a lens cap does, and either, or both, should be removed before taking photos. Back in the film days, a UV filter had a specific optical function, other than its' protective feature. This no longer holds true with digital photography.
I believe the UV filter makes as good a lens protector as a lens cap does, and either, or both, should be removed before taking photos. Back in the film days, a UV filter had a specific optical function, other than its' protective feature. This no longer holds true with digital photography.
Aug 4, 2013 14:53:26 #
Aug 4, 2013 15:24:24 #
Candy wrote:
what about the vignetting? thanks for your comment.
What about vignetting? Should not happen unless you are extending something beyond the front element far enough to cause it. I'd say that if you're getting vignetting without the filter there is something wrong with your lens, or the lens shade.
Aug 4, 2013 15:26:45 #
Candy wrote:
what about the vignetting? thanks for your comment.
Any filter, or lens attachment can increase the likelihood of vignetting, especially at smaller apertures. The thin UV you mentioned shouldn't pose a problem. But if it does, try staying with larger apertures (f/3.5, 4.5, 5.6) and avoid the smaller apertures (f/8, 11, 16). Other than that, there's little you can do, if your lens is vignetting with no accessory attached.
Aug 4, 2013 15:30:03 #
My mistake, I was referring to the original post I saw to be that regular UV filters caused to filter which they said would cause, I accidentally did a typo in my heading it should have been 82mm 16-35mm wide lens It use filters to protect my L Lenses only.
Aug 4, 2013 15:30:17 #
Candy wrote:
I have a B+W UV Haze slim line filter, which cap with a push on lens cap, which will obviously fall off and get lost easily, my Canon 82mm cap will not fit because of the slimness of the specialized filter to stop vignetting on my 16-35mm L Wide Lens, can anyone help me find a more secure Lens Cap for this filter. Thank you in anticipation of your help.
This won't help you with your B+W, but you can file it away for future reference. I have a few Hoya HMC UV (C) slim filters, and they hold caps just fine.
Aug 4, 2013 15:32:43 #
I thought I had a problem when I could not find anything on the regular web, put this mistake to a very expensive one. thanks for being there.
Aug 5, 2013 10:02:38 #
I would forget about the filter. Attach the lens hood and LEAVE it on for protection and get an elastic "hoodie" to go over the lenshood for a cap.
Aug 5, 2013 11:19:11 #
Aug 5, 2013 14:15:56 #
Candy wrote:
My mistake, I was referring to the original post I saw to be that regular UV filters caused to filter which they said would cause, I accidentally did a typo in my heading it should have been 82mm 16-35mm wide lens It use filters to protect my L Lenses only.
Candy, they make the slim line of UV filters for wide angle lenses so that they don't get in the way of the shot causing the corners of the image to be dark when shooting at the widest focal length. Therefore, some lens caps will not work because there isn't enough of a lip for the cap to catch on.
What people are saying here is that the UV filter isn't really necessary to protect your lens but if you feel more secure using it then by all means use it. If you bang against something that might break the front piece of glass on your lens then this might save your lens from damage, or it might not. Many people put UV filters on their lenses instead of lens caps for protection against dirt and scratches when stowed away. Most photographers don't use them while shooting because it's just another piece of glass that can cause some irregularities in your final image due to flaws in all glass.
Aug 5, 2013 19:42:17 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
What people are saying here is that the UV filter isn't really necessary to protect your lens. Most photographers don't use them while shooting because it's just another piece of glass that can cause some irregularities in your final image due to flaws in all glass.
This is one of the most contested topics in photography, second only perhaps to Canon vs Nikon. The opponents of using UV protective lenses cry about image deterioration caused by one extra piece of glass in front of their sensor. A specious argument at best as they are have no issue using a mega zoom with 18 elements and a Kokin P filter holder with three elements to take their "money" shot.
A good UV filter has 99.7% or better light transmission. I have collected vintage Konica SLR cameras & lenses for a long time. I have owned hundreds of lenses and probably 5-10% had damaged filter rings or worse from falls or collisions. IMHO, a UV protective filter is good insurance. And digital camera sensors ARE affected by UV radiation.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.