Some members don't know it all, after all! re: lens filters
Oct 10, 2018 09:10:50 #
Rongnongno wrote:
The real question is not your beef over an answer but...
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
..
Oct 10, 2018 09:15:53 #
olemikey
Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida
I would suspect that many lenses that do not "telescope" with barrel segments (like internal focus, internal zoom models) could be considered weather resistant with the addition of a filter, or even a "glassless" sealing ring, perhaps with o-ring. Granted there are other areas on the electronic lens bodies that could allow moisture in (like around switches), but that could also be mitigated with a little Imagineering (been waiting to throw that term in!!). I don't have any of those really expensive weather proof/resistant lenses, so I would have to yield to those that do.
When I had my 18-200 VR apart looking at the focus motor, I was thinking about the switch area, but sealing the barrel sections would require re-engineering (perhaps Teflon barrel slides/seals, strategic o-ring placement) probably best left to the professional engineers. Not some old country bumpkin!
When I had my 18-200 VR apart looking at the focus motor, I was thinking about the switch area, but sealing the barrel sections would require re-engineering (perhaps Teflon barrel slides/seals, strategic o-ring placement) probably best left to the professional engineers. Not some old country bumpkin!
Oct 10, 2018 09:27:38 #
Oct 10, 2018 09:31:42 #
Rongnongno wrote:
The real question is not your beef over an answer but...
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
Very true! That's exactly why I wouldn't own a canon lens! You pay for weather sealed lens and you have to spend money for a filter to complete the weather sealing? NEVER!!! I, in fact, think, someone is blowing smoke up somebodies you know what!!!
Oct 10, 2018 10:03:01 #
bpulv
Loc: Buena Park, CA
Rongnongno wrote:
The real question is not your beef over an answer but...
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
WHY THE HELL DOES ONE HAS TO ADD A FILTER TO COMPLETE THE DEFICIENT WEATHER SEALING OF A LENS???
Anybody purchasing such a lens is a fool.
Not necessarily, if you use a rain cover for your camera, weather sealing is just an added layer of protection. Nikon does not require a filter to complete there sealing system and I normally do not use a filter for protection, however I still use a rain cover in heavy rain as an added protection. But I agree that if you are going to advertise your camera as weather sealed, everything should be sealed. However, your camera should be considered like a water resistant watch as opposed to a divers watch. The manufacture is only responsible for water damage during the warranty period and after that it is on your buck.
Oct 10, 2018 10:20:11 #
I have Nikon lenses and not one that will take a clear filter doe not have one. I buy and use them to protect the glass. I did have an occasion where the filter did get a scratch - the filter, not the lens. That one occasion justified, for me, all that I have spent for clear filters.
Oct 10, 2018 10:29:54 #
Festus wrote:
Very true! That's exactly why I wouldn't own a canon lens! You pay for weather sealed lens and you have to spend money for a filter to complete the weather sealing? NEVER!!! I, in fact, think, someone is blowing smoke up somebodies you know what!!!
Please read my original post entirely. On some newer L series lens, those with WITH EXTENDING FRONT ELEMENTS, the filter completetes the weatherproofing. This is per Canon!! Further reading of knowledgeable responses indicates it applies to select NIKON lens as well.
Regarding "smoke", please don't sit down until you're sure it's cool enough to do so safely.
Oct 10, 2018 10:35:32 #
clickety wrote:
In response to drmax's 10/03/18 question about usi... (show quote)
Quoting you:
But my real point is, bellicose replies by 'old established' members often spreads or perpetuates false information. Times and technology advance and old cliches may no longer apply.
Oct 10, 2018 10:37:53 #
clickety, you hit both filters and brands with one post, care to try for the trifecta?
Oct 10, 2018 10:48:22 #
clickety wrote:
Please read my original post entirely. On some newer L series lens, those with WITH EXTENDING FRONT ELEMENTS, the filter completetes the weatherproofing. This is per Canon!! Further reading of knowledgeable responses indicates it applies to select NIKON lens as well.
Regarding "smoke", please don't sit down until you're sure it's cool enough to do so safely.
Regarding "smoke", please don't sit down until you're sure it's cool enough to do so safely.
Guess Nikon fanboys don't know squat about their own lenses and just need to bash Canon.
https://www.provideocoalition.com/your-weather-sealed-lens-may-need-a-filter/
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/02/14/how-a-lens-becomes-weather-sealed/
Oct 10, 2018 10:50:16 #
Oct 10, 2018 11:03:50 #
First post.
In the mid 50's my dad had me use a UV or Haze filter.
I was 15. His main point of the filter was to prolong the
life of the lens coatings. You can change a filter for a lot
less than a lens.
In the mid 50's my dad had me use a UV or Haze filter.
I was 15. His main point of the filter was to prolong the
life of the lens coatings. You can change a filter for a lot
less than a lens.
Oct 10, 2018 11:13:15 #
genefowler11 wrote:
First post.
In the mid 50's my dad had me use a UV or Haze filter.
I was 15. His main point of the filter was to prolong the
life of the lens coatings. You can change a filter for a lot
less than a lens.
In the mid 50's my dad had me use a UV or Haze filter.
I was 15. His main point of the filter was to prolong the
life of the lens coatings. You can change a filter for a lot
less than a lens.
And your father was absolutely correct and brilliant.
Oct 10, 2018 11:19:43 #
Architect1776 wrote:
img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/images/s... (show quote)
Funny that in the first link they say:
"That’s what manufacturers indicate in some of their manuals."
The only manufacturer they specifically mention is Canon.
I believe the second author uses the phrase "everybody knows" which is a code phrase for I have no proof, you just gotta believe me.
I have never read in a Nikon manual for a lens that is sold as weather sealed or resistant that you need to add a filter. If anything to that effect, "from Nikon" exists I'd like to see it. It may well be true, but internet articles without sources are kind of like reading historical novels where the emphasis is on novel, not historic.
IMHO of course.
--
Oct 10, 2018 13:05:11 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Guess Nikon fanboys don't know squat about their own lenses and just need to bash Canon.
Guess Nikon fanboys don't know squat about their own lenses and just need to bash Canon.
Jealousy takes many forms!!!!
SS
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.