Close
Close
Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
  1. #11
    Shokinen's Avatar
    Shokinen is offline Always ready
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    581

    Default

    If you are going to use a filter go with brands like Hoya, Tiffen or B+W (I found Hoya very good for the price). Like Scottm mentioned, your goal is to protect your lens, not reduce the quality of your pictures.
    Life is simple: do it, then live the consequenses.
    My Flickr
    Nikon D800, D300, 16-35mm f/4, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR, 2 x SB600

  2. #12
    Doug Sundseth's Avatar
    Doug Sundseth is offline Not quite older than dirt
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Thornton, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,855

    Default

    On UV filters:

    Follow Up To My Post On Using A UV Filter To “Protect” Your Lens Photofocus

    Particularly note that replacing the front element of even an expensive lens like the Nikon 70-200 is in the 120-150USD range. Looking at B&H, a decent quality 77mm UV filter will cost in the range of 70-130USD.

    Filters break far more easily than front elements and filter shards increase the chance that a fall will damage the front element.

    If you're going to add a UV filter to protect your lens, I'd also recommend that you strap a Picasso to the front of your Porsche to protect the bumper from scratches.

  3. #13
    bigben6 is offline Still learnin'
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Sundseth View Post
    On UV filters:

    Follow Up To My Post On Using A UV Filter To “Protect” Your Lens Photofocus

    Particularly note that replacing the front element of even an expensive lens like the Nikon 70-200 is in the 120-150USD range. Looking at B&H, a decent quality 77mm UV filter will cost in the range of 70-130USD.

    Filters break far more easily than front elements and filter shards increase the chance that a fall will damage the front element.

    If you're going to add a UV filter to protect your lens, I'd also recommend that you strap a Picasso to the front of your Porsche to protect the bumper from scratches.
    So here is where i am at and I would LOVE some form or proof... I keep a UV on 24/7 for protection as much as not having to deal with a lens cap, call me lazy just being honest here...

    Someone SHOW me the same shot with and without a cheap UV filter and SHOW me what I am loosing in IQ with my UV, cause TBH, I cannot see it when i do this myself... I just can't. I want to make an educated choice with my gear, i wanna protect my gear, but i feel like there are two side and NEITHER has ever shown me compelling HARD OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE either way that they are right or the other is wrong....
    Nikon D40
    Nikkor 18-105 VR
    Promaster 7500EDF speed light
    If your struggling listen to this!

  4. #14
    Shokinen's Avatar
    Shokinen is offline Always ready
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    581

    Default

    To me it's all about going out with peace of mind. I tried on several occasion to go out without leaving my filters at home on, and for some reason, all I keep thinking is: "Carefull with this", "Carefull what that"... Even with the hood on. It's to the point that I'm not enjoying the session.

    I think a filter is a personnal thing. There is arguments for both side of the story and quite frankly, I too have never seen a real difference (except when a lightsource his hitting sideways. The filter create more flares) under normal use. But I prefer having one.

    I actually use a clear protector on my lenses instead of a UV. Camera's sensors are now protected for UVs so your kind of blocking something that will be block by the sensor anyway.

    So, if you decide to point one, like I said previously, don't go with the el cheepo. Get one from a know brand.

    My 2 cents
    Life is simple: do it, then live the consequenses.
    My Flickr
    Nikon D800, D300, 16-35mm f/4, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR, 2 x SB600

  5. #15
    OsmosisStudios's Avatar
    OsmosisStudios is offline Don't Panic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Toronto / Ottawa
    Posts
    12,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigben6 View Post

    Someone SHOW me the same shot with and without a cheap UV filter and SHOW me what I am loosing in IQ with my UV, cause TBH, I cannot see it when i do this myself... I just can't. I want to make an educated choice with my gear, i wanna protect my gear, but i feel like there are two side and NEITHER has ever shown me compelling HARD OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE either way that they are right or the other is wrong....
    The point isnt necessarily that a filter will degrade image quality (thought cheap, uncoated filters do tend to flare in bright direct light more), its that you dont NEED the protection and are wasting money.

    As I said though, cheap uncoated filters WILL hurt image quality, specifically when you have light directly hitting the lens. Lenstip did a great comprehensive test: UV filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

    As you can see, the higher-priced Hoya filters do pretty good and compared well to the B+W, winning out by virtue of a lower price: UV filters test - Hoya 72 mm HMC UV-0 - Lenstip.com. The filter is still blooming a bit in places, notably brighter flare on the bottom image set.

    However, the cheap Tiffen they tested was.... uninspiring. UV filters test - Tiffen 72mm UV - Lenstip.com

    Clearly the filter is doing SOMETHING, and you'll note that while the good filter is considerably better, it's still not as good as without. It also comes down to cost: Who wants to buy a $75 filter to put on a $100 lens if all it's going to do is (albeit marginally) affect image quality AND cost you more. Oh, and if you drop the lens or otherwise break it, you're out another $75, and possibly more if shards get into the lens or onto the front element.
    I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
    adammontpetit.com
    Gear List
    500PX | Graphic Design

  6. #16
    bigben6 is offline Still learnin'
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Thanks osmosis those are GREAT links I will definitely go over them and get my learn on, i looked at the #1 and #15 ranked UV filters and man on the worst ranked one you can see a TON of difference, i cannot tell a darn thing on the winner. This is the kind of thing I had been looking for as a comparison!!!!
    Nikon D40
    Nikkor 18-105 VR
    Promaster 7500EDF speed light
    If your struggling listen to this!

  7. #17
    ceremus's Avatar
    ceremus is offline aperture science to do
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Posts
    888

    Default

    Well if this guy just wants anecdotal evidence then he can take this from a friend of mine,
    I still have the shattered UV filter from my old 18-55 when the tripod fell over and landed directly on the lens.

    $600 Lens and Camera - Fine. $20 UV filter - shattered. Totally worth it.
    Not to mention Canon weather-sealed L lenses technically aren't fully sealed unless there's a filter in place. And if you are shooting in adverse conditions where weather-sealing is a factor, consider also what happens if some sort of grime gets on your lens. Are you more comfortable cleaning gritty mud off of your lens's front element, or off a replaceable filter?

  8. #18
    inkista's Avatar
    inkista is offline Gear Geek Girl
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    San Diego CA, USA
    Posts
    11,148

    Default

    Whether you're replacing the front element or a filter: the front element replacement generally requires a trip to the service center, and a two week wait (if you're lucky. Could be longer). A filter replacement takes a few seconds, and you can do it in your own home.

    I prefer trashing the coatings on a moderately-priced UV filter, and replacing it every year or so, rather than trashing the coatings on the front element of my lens every year or so. I shoot outdoors a lot in dusty, or beach-like (salt water) environments. I'm also unhandy with lens caps, lose them a lot (and yes, I've tried leashes), and I tend to wipe things off with a dry microfiber cloth or a shirt tail--whatever's handiest.

    No, having a UV filter on the front may not be ideal for physical protection. I use my hoods, too. But given what and how you shoot, a filter may not be a bad thing, either. If you get a good multi-coated one, the effect probably won't reach your level of awareness, as long as you watch out for flare, in which case, you can remove it.

    I shot for two decades with an Olympus OM-10. It only had one lens: a 50/1.8. I never had a lens cap on it the entire time. I used one grubby skylight filter all that time. The coatings on it are mostly intact, my images looked good, and the front element of that lens is pristine.

    When it comes to resale value, nobody wants to be told "oh, that scratch on the front element shouldn't affect picture quality." or "It only costs you a little over $100 to replace the front element." They want to be told "the front element is flawless."

    Whether or not to use a UV filter as protection is a personal matter. There is no absolute that holds for everyone. Just because you, personally, feel no need for one doesn't mean there aren't good logical reasons for the other side of the debate. Just as there's no reason anyone should tell you that you HAVE to have one on the front of the lens all the time. Make up your own mind about this. I know I'm a happier shooter with them on the front of my lenses. That's why I use them.
    Last edited by inkista; 12-15-2011 at 08:08 PM.
    I shoot with a Canon 5DmkII, 50D, and S90, and Pansonic GX-7. flickr stream and equipment list

  9. #19
    bigben6 is offline Still learnin'
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    232

    Default

    I think everyone is making good points and i LOVE threads like this because it allows the next generation of new DSLR users to find this and it has plenty of information for the next reader to make a solid informed decision based on THEIR circumstances. Given the constant back and forth controversy stuff like this should be stickied i think.

    I have decided I will buy nice filters and keep them on and here r my reasons;

    I like the utility of picking it up switching it on and being ready to shoot I tend ot meave my camera out around the house cause with a 3yo you never know when a great photo opportunity will arise. Lens caps stall that process and get lost.

    I FEEL better know it is on there, it may be misplaced confidence, it may not be, but perception is reality and i PERCEIVE a larger margin of safety from a drop or fall.

    I can clean it with whatever I want. Tshirt, kleenex, what ever I want where ever i want.

    And lastly i cannot tell a difference in my photos with or without the filter.
    Nikon D40
    Nikkor 18-105 VR
    Promaster 7500EDF speed light
    If your struggling listen to this!

  10. #20
    mbrobich's Avatar
    mbrobich is offline Moments in my life !
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Congrats on the purchase. You have everything to make the most beautiful shots you will ever need !!

    Quote Originally Posted by dwhanson View Post
    Below you'll find the results of the advice and schooling I got here. I purchased:

    Nikon D7000 with Nikkor 18-105mm kit lens
    Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
    Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
    Nikon SB-400 Speedlight Flash
    Rode VideoMic Pro Compact shotgun mic
    MC-DC2 Remote Release Cord (1 meter)
    SanDisk Extreme Pro 64GB SDXC UHS-I Memory Card
    SunPak Pro Carbon Fiber Pistol Grip Tripod
    Fancy case to carry it all in

    A little over the original budget. I decided to go for it now. One last question- what are the cheapest brand of UV and Circular Polarizing filters can I get some good use out of? I pretty well broke the bank on the rest of it.

    Thanks again for all the guidance!
    Nikon D7000-AA filter removed, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Sigma 50-150 OS f/2.8, Nikkor 300mm f/4, 2x SB600, Tokina 10-17mm fisheye.

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in