Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
camer filters
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Sep 22, 2017 16:24:01   #
tenny52
 
I am an amature photographer with Nikon610 How do I find out one filter(UV or Polarized) is better than the others just by the pictures; what criteria should I be aware?
My favorite lens is 24-85 AF 3.5-4.5G ($170 used) using the cheap Vivitar filter package(VU, Polarized, 10N 67mm) for only $13.
Should I buy a filter for over $50?
I don't want to buy something more expensive that I don't find them superior. Or does anybody buy filters just based on the reports?
I don't see reports of the inexpensive but rather reputable brands such as Vivitar or Altura; is it just because their quality is so inferior that they fall below the range?

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 16:28:28   #
toxdoc42
 
Do you "need" to spend more?

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 16:30:41   #
tenny52
 
I don't understand what you meant. Who need to spend more if one can't find the difference?

Reply
 
 
Sep 22, 2017 16:32:30   #
toxdoc42
 
Do you need to have a specific brand? If you buy a filter and it is no good, take it back to the seller!

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 16:45:53   #
tenny52
 
Ok since you ask. Is Altura better than Vivitar brand? or Hoya better than Tiffan? How do you justify?

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 16:52:19   #
Steve DeMott Loc: St. Louis, Missouri (Oakville area)
 
If I understand your question correctly. You want to know if B&W,or other name brand, Filters are worth the extra cost vs. Uncle Bobs bargain basement filter.
This might answer your questions. https://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 17:13:42   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
In most situations, an image with an expensive filter will be nearly identical to the same image with a cheap filter. If it's worth spending more for the few images where it actually could make a difference is something you will have to decide.

Reply
 
 
Sep 22, 2017 17:24:07   #
tenny52
 
In what situation that I can tell the difference, night shorts, color, distortion?
I don't want to put on a BW which might cost even more than my $170 lens, or do you find it could be worth?

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 17:45:16   #
CO
 
Check if the filters have multi-coatings on the glass that are optimized for digital. It's more critical for digital than it was for film. It will minimize flare and glare on the sensor. I was looking at the Vivitar filter package that you mentioned online. I don't see anything about coatings on the glass. I don't think they have any coatings at all.

There's a difference in the quality of the glass. Some of the top quality filters like B+W use Schott glass. Hoya and Nikon also produce outstanding quality filters. I have a Nikon 67mm circular polarizer. It gives excellent results.

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 18:07:23   #
G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK
 
The idea of filters has in most cases disappeared with the ability to digitally post process. The probable exceptions are a circular polariser to cut glare, enhance cloud formation, 'make blue' really blue and add depth the green woodland. A graduated filter (but even that is questionable) to reduce highlight when shooting from shaddow into sunlight or sunlight skies, and 'stoppers' (dark filters) to allow exceptionally slow shutter speed for movement effects. These usually work the same as reducing Fstop beyond what the camera accepts - so having a 10- 15second exposure during the day without ending up with a totally white image. These come as sets based upon Fstop values. Try night shooting with a long 'bulb' exposure time.

Cost wise, it depends upon how well you would use them. A bit like camera's: the more you pay there is a thought that you get better kit. Sometimes you do and sometimes you cannot see a provable difference. An effect is only as good as you are in creating the right image to warrent it's use.

If you are experimenting - buy second hand or cheap. When you know the pitfalls, and get frustrated with their limits Then buy what is considered to be a well recognised and recommended item.

BW is often available as a setting on your camera. It can be achieved by reducing saturation in PP (also look at adding noise to selected areas) and there are well respected 'Monochromists' that will argue for and against whether 'shooting in BW' or 'PPing a colour image to monochrome' is best.

Have fun

Reply
Sep 22, 2017 21:55:08   #
tenny52
 
Thanks, even my cheap Vivitar polarized filter makes sky bluer or I can make the sky as blue as I want in Lightroom.
I know the multiple coatings will reduce ghost light when shooting against the sun or other light sources, what is the other advantages?
If a filter has coatings, is that meant that I should not touch it with my fingers or wipe it with my undershirt?
If so, one uses an expensive filter with multiple coatings, then he should use another protective filter on top of it.
Another question, if I shoot indoors, is it better(quality wise) to shoot without UV filter or any filter is good for flash lighting?

Reply
 
 
Sep 22, 2017 22:39:30   #
CO
 
tenny52 wrote:
Thanks, even my cheap Vivitar polarized filter makes sky bluer or I can make the sky as blue as I want in Lightroom.
I know the multiple coatings will reduce ghost light when shooting against the sun or other light sources, what is the other advantages?
If a filter has coatings, is that meant that I should not touch it with my fingers or wipe it with my undershirt?
If so, one uses an expensive filter with multiple coatings, then he should use another protective filter on top of it.
Another question, if I shoot indoors, is it better(quality wise) to shoot without UV filter or any filter is good for flash lighting?
Thanks, even my cheap Vivitar polarized filter mak... (show quote)


You should not touch the surface of any filter or lens whether it has coatings or not. I wouldn't wipe it with an undershirt. Get one of the micro fiber cloths made for lenses. If it's really dirty, use lens cleaning tissues with one or two of drops of a lens cleaning solution on the tissue. Wipe in a circular motion. Some lenses now have a fluorine coating on the glass that helps to repel dust, water, grease, and dirt.

I know a lot of people leave a UV filter on their lenses for protection. I don't use them. I put the lens cap back on when I'm finished taking photos. I don't know of any filter that's good for flash lighting. Be sure to put the lens hood on to reduce the possibility of flare from the flash.

Reply
Sep 23, 2017 00:12:16   #
tenny52
 
Thanks, I even blow my hot air into it, disregarding I have a pump blower and a micro-fibre in my bag.
Shall I use the solution used on car windshield which makes the rainwater or night-mist into beads.
Is glass filter better than non-glass type? It is sometimes difficult to tell one from the other. Does the sound of knocking it with a key render its material?

Reply
Sep 23, 2017 02:42:53   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
tenny52 wrote:
In what situation that I can tell the difference, night shorts, color, distortion?
I don't want to put on a BW which might cost even more than my $170 lens, or do you find it could be worth?


Shooting into or at an angle to a bright light source (sun, street lamp at night, bright reflecting surface, etc.), the cheaper filter often will produce more pronounced light flare artifacts onto the image than the expensive filter.

Reply
Sep 23, 2017 02:58:30   #
JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA
 
tenny52 wrote:
I am an amature photographer with Nikon610 How do I find out one filter(UV or Polarized) is better than the others just by the pictures; what criteria should I be aware?
My favorite lens is 24-85 AF 3.5-4.5G ($170 used) using the cheap Vivitar filter package(VU, Polarized, 10N 67mm) for only $13.
Should I buy a filter for over $50?
I don't want to buy something more expensive that I don't find them superior. Or does anybody buy filters just based on the reports?
I don't see reports of the inexpensive but rather reputable brands such as Vivitar or Altura; is it just because their quality is so inferior that they fall below the range?
I am an amature photographer with Nikon610 How do ... (show quote)


A UV filter really isn't needed on a digital camera since it already has one over the sensor. Actually, it is a cut filter where it keeps the light in between UV and IR.

This wasn't the case in the film days, and the UV filter provided a necessary function.

Some use the UV filter to protect their lenses. But the UV filtering is redundant.

Reply
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.