"UV Filter or not?"
Yes, for no other reason than to protect your expensive glass from dirt & scratches.
Toby wrote:
The following Youtube video about the value of UV filters is quite interesting. I know there are a ton of opinions on this so I apologize for trying to add some science.
www. youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds&feature=youtu.be
Thank you for the correction
Whuff
Loc: Marshalltown, Iowa
I was not successful in making your link live.
Look at the link I posted & then tell me about dirt & scratches....
nakkh wrote:
Yes for no other reason than to protect your expensive glass from dirt & scratches.
I have often wondered about the sensitivity of an electronic sensitivity to the ultraviolet, near and far field. If the sensor is insensitive to the UV, then a filter does nothing.
It protects your thousand dollar lens from dirt & scratches...
That's worth something...
John_F wrote:
I have often wondered about the sensitivity of an electronic sensitivity to the ultraviolet, near and far field. If the sensor is insensitive to the UV, then a filter does nothing.
:-)
I don't know why the problem as I cannot get it to work either now. Try this
https://youtu.be/P0CLPTd6BdsIf that doesn't work go to the Backcountry Gallery.com website and search for it Sorry
BHC
Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
John_F wrote:
I have often wondered about the sensitivity of an electronic sensitivity to the ultraviolet, near and far field. If the sensor is insensitive to the UV, then a filter does nothing.
**********************************************
For years, I have been in the habit of using filters on my camera lenses whether it was UV..2x yellow 3x orange 6x red etc. or polarizer. Two reasons ...1. for the effect it produced...2. to protect the very delicate / expensive front element of the coated lens. For colour slide film use, the correction 81 series warming filters were a normal addition to the lens. As long as they were kept clean, and were of good quality glass, filters were an improvement, and NOT a degredation to the image produced. Just what one might consider normal atmospheric conditions will eventually leave a coating deposit on the glass surface. Constant cleaning would soon affect the lens surface, but if a filter is taking this atmospheric 'attack' , any cleaning 'damage' that happens, will be to a replaceable filter, and not a very expensive lens element.
John_F wrote:
I have often wondered about the sensitivity of an electronic sensitivity to the ultraviolet, near and far field. If the sensor is insensitive to the UV, then a filter does nothing.
I meant "electronic sensor" - I should learn to proof read.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.