From what I have heard from the guys I work with the Nikon's are great filters. I believe MT Shooter also uses them which is a good endorsement. :thumbup:

Well this thread did what I was hoping for and generated a healthy discussion and nobody got mean so that's a good thing
:mrgreen:

In reading through the replies there are a couple of things to remember about my "test". First I used this scene because it had plenty of detail and contrast to show if there was a significant degradation of the image with the filter in place. Second I did not compare this filter to the cheaper filters simply because I no longer have them. I also used my Hoya's because the original post from Jerryc41 used a Hoya and his results were pretty bad with the filter. In my mind I said "my pictures look the same with or without my filters" then my brain said "you should prove that to yourself" so I did and I am satisfied with the results and wanted to share them with you folks for some conversation.

Now as for the ones that think the filters should be "tested" in the low light or in direct sunlight I will try and do that when I have time but I can tell you that I have already used them in almost every situation imaginable and there is no discernible difference in my images. I do this for a living and I need my lenses to survive wherever I am asked/assigned to go take pictures so I like having the filters in place and to date they have been the last line of defense for some expensive glass, I have replaced a scratched filter but never a scratched lens.

Oh and the guy who asked when we have time to take pictures because "we" are to busy on a forum (Pst, your on the same forum buddy). Well I have to go take pictures today of a basketball team. Tomorrow is a story about the up and coming baseball team, the guy who is running for cancer research, some politician that is in trouble is giving a presser on Wednesday, Prep Wrestling, boys soccer, girls basketball then boys basketball, on Thursday and Friday, some thing at the beach Friday (charity cleanup I think). Nothing for Saturday and Sunday but there will be. So what's on your plate? :lol:

Um, yeah it was pretty much what it said in the post. There was another post that demonstrated how terrible the addition of a clear protector filter was so I simply took two identical pictures with and without a clear Hoya HD Protector installed. I compared the two images in Lightroom as RAW files and yes there is a very small difference but I wanted to show that the "technical" versus the "perceptible" difference was almost undetectable. By the way, the top image with crisper colors and better saturation is the one with the filter installed :roll:

What I am using are not UV filters, they are optically clear protector filters.

Hummm well when I bought them the HD was a model that sported the tougher glass. I'm glad I have one for all my lenses, a few spares, and the Circular Polarizers so I don't have to buy any more. They all come out with a newer greater version every six months

:roll:

Well the jest was to see if there was a noticeable difference under exact circumstances as was the case with Jerryc41's post using the Hoya Pro1 filter. In his post there was a noticeable difference in color, contrast, and even a loss of fine details that I did not think was happening in my images. I have shot tens of thousands of images through them and I am confident that they do not effect the image to any degree worth worrying about. Like I said I will take some additional images under varying conditions but I doubt they will reveal any real difference either.

I just shot a ton of Xmas stuff for the papers a few months back during the silly season and I did both interior decorations as well as home that were all decked out with lights. I have done plenty of low light high contrast stuff and I had no problems (other than the usual ones lol).

I am using the Hoya HD series for their durability but I know they are both multi coated and high quality. FWIW I have worked for Nat Geo on several spreads over the years. They are very very picky but their quality control is a pleasure to experience if your into good photography.

I went with the HD line since the purpose was protection and the HD stands for Heavy Duty. I saw a video where a guy was banging one on the corner of a table HARD and it did not break. I have the HD Protectors as well as the HD Circular Polarizing filters (77 and 82mm versions) and they have fairly thin frames. There is no vingnetting on my ultra wide angles and the threads allow me to use my Canon lens caps without issue. If its protection you seek the Hoya HD Protectors are a good bet. Now they have an HD2 version out, great haha.

Yep that's the one. At the bottom of page one is the image(s) I was thinking about. All things being equal the lighting should not matter but who knows. I could try varying conditions and I might if I am out and shooting and have a few minutes. But like I said I have been doing this for a long while and I have never noticed a big difference when using filters but then again I have always used good quality filters. I did switch from UV0 filters to clear ones as there is a slight color cast from some UV models. I had a hodge podge of B+W, Heliopan, Tiffen, etc and wanted to standardize. I also wanted a thin filter that had normal threads so my lens caps would work properly. The Hoyas fit that bill and I noticed almost zero change in my images.

There was another pic similar to mine that was a lot of trees and bushes. The difference was dramatic if I remember correctly. Enough to get me to do my own test. These filters are multi-coated so I don't think they would be effected by reflections as much as one might think. I have not had any issues with them having trouble under very contrasty conditions. I choose the scene in my pic's to try and have plenty of differing light levels and detail to really judge the difference. Overall I think it shows that there is not a huge drop off in image quality with this particular filter.

Yeah the Red and Blue are down a tiny tiny bit. Not too shabby though.

I mean Red and Green :shock:

Your glasses? really? that's cool. Like I said I did some pretty serious reading and comparing and after a big debate and for several reasons I decided to eliminate all my various filters and go with a single manufacturer. Then along comes ol Jerry and scares the crap out of me after spending like two grand on filters haha. I honestly think he got a bad filter as none of mine give me any reason to suspect that they are robbing any image quality at all and I wanted to give the UHHers something to compare. I think the Hoya HD's are awesome. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

That's why I was so interested in the comparison that Jerry did. He has great gear and knows what he is doing so I was kinda blown away at the huge difference he got and on several different tests. I was fairly sure my own experiences were not that drastic but it did put a thought in the back of my head so I wanted to test it out.

Thanks, I debated about the two images brightness and on my monitor they are so close but I agree the one with the filter might be a tiny tiny bit darker. That's why I didn't change any exposure settings to really see what the filter did. Overall I was totally satisfied with the filters performance. If I am going out shooting calm landscapes I pull off the Protector and usually have a CP or an GND on there but for "work" I protect those front ends...

Very true so long as the Boss/Client is happy right? If you scroll the image up and down while keeping your eyes in the same spot or angle to the monitor I think you will see that the images are virtually identical in brightness. Not sure if everyone knows what all that IPS Monitor stuff is all about but its In Plane Switching and they have very even illumination all over the screen compared to TFT style monitors. They also have way more resolution than a typical computer monitor, but are also (sadly) about $3K :cry: