Lens Protector - With and Without: I've been waiting for a sunny day to take some with and without pictures with my new lens protector. It's a "Hoya Pro1 Digital 77mm MC Protector Made...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I've been waiting for a sunny day to take some with and without pictures with my new lens protector. It's a "Hoya Pro1 Digital 77mm MC Protector Made in Japan."

I shot with a Nikon D600 and 28-300mm lens on Auto, at ISO 100 on a tripod. There is an obvious difference between the two shots. Notice the bight areas - like the road and the sun on the grass.

Comments welcome.

EDIT: Click on this link to see what a lens protector is.

http://www.amazon.com/Hoya-XD77PROTEC-Clear-Digital-Protector/dp/B0009K7CZC

With the protector

Without the protector

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Now you can see why I don't use one unless its necessary. Is that filter a UV? It looks like it is.

Also I would suggest looking on the case to see if its made in Japan or says "Made in the Phillipines", there are a LOT of counterfeit HOYA filters on the market right now that are actually knock-offs made in the Phillipines.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

MT Shooter wrote:

Now you can see why I don't use one unless its necessary. Is that filter a UV? It looks like it is.

Nope! It's literally a Hoya Lens Protector - clear, coated glass.

http://www.amazon.com/Hoya-XD77PROTEC-Clear-Digital-Protector/dp/B0009K7CZC

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

MT Shooter wrote:

Now you can see why I don't use one unless its necessary. Is that filter a UV? It looks like it is.

Also I would suggest looking on the case to see if its made in Japan or says "Made in the Phillipines", there are a LOT of counterfeit HOYA filters on the market right now that are actually knock-offs made in the Phillipines.

It's a "Hoya Pro1 Digital 77mm MC Protector Made in Japan."

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I cannot say I am impressed with your result, looks like its costing you about 1/3 to 1/2 stop exposure. Maybe try again and dial in +0.3 or +0.7 EV with the filter and see what you get.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

MT Shooter wrote:

I cannot say I am impressed with your result, looks like its costing you about 1/3 to 1/2 stop exposure. Maybe try again and dial in +0.3 or +0.7 EV with the filter and see what you get.

I tried +0.3, and all it did was make it overexposed.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

jerryc41 wrote:

MT Shooter wrote:

I cannot say I am impressed with your result, looks like its costing you about 1/3 to 1/2 stop exposure. Maybe try again and dial in +0.3 or +0.7 EV with the filter and see what you get.

I tried +0.3, and all it did was make it overexposed.

I tried the link you added above, and here is the Product Description:

HOYA DIGITAL PRO1 77MM PROTECTOR This is the ultimate in clear filters. It will not affect the color balance or performance of your lenses in the slightest. However, constant use will protect your valued lenses from expensive front element damage which could be caused by dirt, knocks or scratches

Looks like it DOES affect the "color balance or performance" of the lens. I use the Nikon NC filters for protection when I need them, have done the same comparison as you with no noticeable difference. I only asked if you had a UV because you are shooting kind of into the sun it looks like and a UV will do that same thing to your image.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

MT Shooter wrote:

quote=jerryc41 quote=MT Shooter I cannot say I a... (show quote)

I have the label printed, and it'll go back to Amazon next Wednesday. I thought I would give it a chance. I'll go back to my cheap UV filters for protection, removing them for shots that matter.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I see The Nikons are twice the price, and that's hard for me to justify simply as protection.

WildDog Loc: South Australia

Best lens protector that I've used, (and continue to use) is my trusty lens hood. No colour cast, often produces an INCREASE in contrast.
Used to use UV filter, (hoya)' but always lost (some) contrast.
I've had my tripod topple over on rock, the camera (5D Mk II) took the full blow on the lens, but the hood did it's job, and the camera was unscathed.
Or should I say... The lens was unscathed!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

WildDog wrote:

Best lens protector that I've used, (and continue to use) is my trusty lens hood. No colour cast, often produces an INCREASE in contrast.
Used to use UV filter, (hoya)' but always lost (some) contrast.
I've had my tripod topple over on rock, the camera (5D Mk II) took the full blow on the lens, but the hood did it's job, and the camera was unscathed.
Or should I say... The lens was unscathed!

I agree. The lens hood is a good thing to use on a regular basis. I like the way they can be reversed on the lens for storage.

AdkHiker Loc: Northeast

jerryc41 wrote:

quote=MT Shooter quote=jerryc41 quote=MT Shoote... (show quote)

I have been following thi discussion thread, because it coincides with my thoughts bout taking my protective filters off to boost the quality of my exposure.

I like the approach of for "shots that matter".

:thumbup:

Al FR-153 Loc: Chicago Suburbs

Quite a difference Jerry. The only fly in the ointment that I can see is that you were shooting in AUTO. I wonder if the results would have been different if set in manual, with the same settings for both shots. Reason for questioning is that one is so radically different, it almost looks like a cloud moved in....or something.

I'll have to try the same test with mine....as soon as Santa gets off his butt today and starts delivering the goods (tonight). Mrs Santa is holding my new EF-
S 17-55 f/2.8 and lens hood as hostages.

DaveMM Loc: Port Elizabeth, South Africa

jerryc41 wrote:

I like the way they can be reversed on the lens for storage.

I use one regularly, but am always amused when I see a supposedly professional photographer taking photos with one reversed on his lens. To my mind the worst of all worlds!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Al FR-153 wrote:

Quite a difference Jerry. The only fly in the oin... (show quote)

I thought about using Auto or not, and I figured that the less input I had on the shot, the better. The shot were only seconds apart, with no change in the lighting. I took MT's advice and adjust the camera to EV+.03 for the filter shot, and all that did was over-expose.

Actually, I took another pair of pictures a few days before, but the results were so bad that I thought I should try again. Those shots are below. You can see how the filter knocked out the bright spots if you look at the section of broken branch.

By the way, each of the images below measured about 6000 X 4000, or 24MB, when I posted them, yet they went through with no problem - automatically downsized.

Without the Lens Protector

With the protector