General Photography

ToxicBunny said:
Starting to think about getting myself a few filters... they can pretty much go on any lens correct?
Click to expand...

Mostly but there are a few things to looks out for. The size of the front element, and if you have any ultra wide lenses, the front element may be too large. Another thing to look out for with wider lenses, is that filters with a thick frame can introduce some vignetting. I get this on my Sigma 10-20mm with my circular polariser.
 
Yeah, I thankfully at least figured out the front element bit :).... got me puzzled for about 10seconds i will admit...


Front elements for me are 55 and 58.. so nothing out of the ordinary thankfully.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Mostly but there are a few things to looks out for. The size of the front element, and if you have any ultra wide lenses, the front element may be too large. Another thing to look out for with wider lenses, is that filters with a thick frame can introduce some vignetting. I get this on my Sigma 10-20mm with my circular polariser.
Click to expand...

Cokin filter system, bracket fits on any lens and you can stack or quick swop filters without having to unscrew (specially if you like keeping your basic filter on as lens protection)
 
ToxicBunny said:
I was thinking about Hoya since they don't seem to be too expensive, and Polarising and UV to start with..

My bank balance is a bit thin atm so I can't splash out on all the toys I want...
Click to expand...
Polarising are useful - UV . . well that's debatable for some for me they're a pretty much cut and dry waste of money.
 
Glad I'm not thinking about buying Canon filters... they're stupid money if you ask me...
 
Yeah... as much as I'd like to get the best... thats just not possible...
 
koffiejunkie said:
Given that TB said his bank balance "is a bit thin" I didn't think the Cokin system is relevant.
Click to expand...

I agree but it is an expandable system, which in the long run is cheaper, If I recall the bracket was was expensive the filters where reasonable as they are simple one piece, no threads etc.
 
I wouldn't bother with a UV - I have a couple (good ones too) and never use them. I agree with bwana - they do little more than increase your chances of getting flares.

With respect to protecting your lens, this, as far as I'm concerned, is a myth. It comes from the many pictures of dropped lenses where the filter shattered, leaving people thinking, "If I didn't have the filter, that would have been the front element." The think is, the front element is tough as nails. You need to whack it pretty hard and deliberately against something sharp. Part of the reason for this is the quality of glass - it has to be near perfect, leaving hardly any weaker areas to crack along.

Where a filter would protect you is if you drop a lens without a lens hood on, the filter frame would absorb most of the impact on its frame, limiting damage to your filter thread.

So to summarise, get a lens hood.
 
Well yeah, looking at the Cokin system.. it is slightly more expensive up front.. but the actual filters are quite a bit cheaper... hmmm damn.. this has given me something to think about...
 
koffiejunkie said:
With respect to protecting your lens, this, as far as I'm concerned, is a myth. It comes from the many pictures of dropped lenses where the filter shattered, leaving people thinking, "If I didn't have the filter, that would have been the front element."

So to summarise, get a lens hood.
Click to expand...

I think... that the issue is (not from a prosumer or snapshooter - with a lot of money, point of view) not one of actually breaking the front element (I think that dropping your lense is bad for hundreds of other components and after a fall your "glass is the least of your worries- I should think considering all the bells and whistles that these new lenses have)
but the protection is there for anyone venturing out into the world to keep the environment off of ones coating for one.
 
sorry after re reading my post I realize that it could be interpreted in an offensive way, I am not suggesting that any of us forumites are "snapshooters" but rather that the myth might have been propounded by such people.
 
Saalocin Rekked said:
Scuse my daft question, but what filters do you use as a permanent protection for your front element if not UV?
Click to expand...
Lens hood.

I have one lens - the canon ef 16-35mm f/2.8 L - where the manufacturer recommends a uv filter for protection (against the elements) . . and that's the only one.

I'm less worried about having to clean the front element from time to time than I am about worrying about stray light flaring up my shot.
 
bwana said:
I'm less worried about having to clean the front element from time to time than I am about worrying about stray light flaring up my shot.
Click to expand...

Sorry for my Ignorance but, a lense hood does not protect your coating. and one pays between 4 and 75k for a lense?
seems pretty important to keep one coating intact considering the cost?
problem though is, to some it is more important to keep flare out of our expensive film (granted)
but isnt the primary purpose of a lense hood to combat flare?

that's my reasoning.
 
I know of too many photographers who have had to clean their primary on site with the disastrous effect of scratching it, only need one tiny virtually invisible grain of sand to &*%$ up your bottom of the range 6.5k f5.6 300mm...
 
koffiejunkie said:
I wouldn't bother with a UV - I have a couple (good ones too) and never use them. I agree with bwana - they do little more than increase your chances of getting flares.
Click to expand...

I use Hoya's single coated G-UV (cheapest one I think) filter on my camera. I payed R130 for it and have not found any problems.
 
Saalocin Rekked said:
Sorry for my Ignorance but, a lense hood does not protect your coating.
Click to expand...

Put your lens hood on and make the lens stand on the hood. How far is the front element from the surface that it's standing on? On my 24-105, it's a good 2 inches. And unless you use lens hoods made of metal, the hood's elastic properties will absorb more shock if you drop it than a filter ever will.

Saalocin Rekked said:
but isnt the primary purpose of a lense hood to combat flare?
Click to expand...

Yes but a welcome side effect is that it effectively acts as a bumper for your lens (except for ultra wides, which tend to have very short lens hoods).

ldmelsa said:
I use Hoya's single coated G-UV (cheapest one I think) filter on my camera. I payed R130 for it and have not found any problems.
Click to expand...

I had a Hoya Pro UV for my 24-105L. Granted, this only happened once, but shooting at one of my best mate's wedding (outdoors) I had horrible flaring (I stupidly didn't take the hood). Removing the filter reduced the flaring considerably. Fortunately I wasn't the official 'tog for the wedding, I just took my camera along to get some pictures of my own.

I'm not saying UV will necessarily give you flares, but in the right conditions (or the wrong conditions, depending on your view), even a good one can make things bad.

I guess if the 24-105L was designed in such a way that one could easily remove the filter without removing the hood, it wouldn't have bothered me, but I tend to need my CP more than the UV, and the CP, being thicker, is actually easier to screw on with my finger tips without removing the hood. Although using it is a different matter :)

Pentax has the right idea there. The hood has a little door that opens at the bottom that allows you to easily rotate the CP with the hood on.
 
A quick blast of compressed air and a swipe with rolling paper and its done and dusted ... Literally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X