Quantcast

Lens filters....

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
For or against?

If "for", what do you use?


I've been using crappy ones for a long time, and I noticed one really good reason to step up to decent ones - the crappy ones affect autofocus in dim light. Not drastically, but when it really counts the reduced transmission (who knows how much...1/3 of a stop or more?) can make even my better lenses hunt.

Did some research, and ordered a couple Hoya HMC UV(0) off eBay. They are supposed to be tops for visible light transmission, UV reduction, and are decently coated.
 

RUFUS

e-douche of the year
Dec 1, 2006
3,488
0
Denver, CO
I use UV filters only to protect my glass, that is it. I rarely use any other filter for any effects.

I would rather have a filter break or scratch than have my lens glass take the brunt.
 

Polandspring88

Superman
Mar 31, 2004
3,075
0
Broomfield, CO
It's a small price to pay for whatever measure of protection it provides the front elements. I'm willing to sacrifice a small measure of performance for the peace of mind. I'm purchasing B+W MRC filters these days.
 

narlus

Eastcoast Softcore
Staff member
Nov 7, 2001
24,658
25
behind the viewfinder
btw, filters can also cause ghosting.


just say no to UV filters. i've used tons of lenses in a lot of different conditions and have never ever had a front element problem. and if you get a problem, it's not all that expensive to fix.
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
CP only.

UV filters are for anal cvnts who don't use hoods.




or for people who may shoot in siroccos.
I am actually in the "use a hood/filter cause I often misplace lens caps" camp.

I am well aware of the possible flare and ghosting issues, hence I remove them in situations where things are backlit, etc.

But in many situations if it's a good filter and doesn't eff up the IQ, no reason not to leave it on. (plus it lends well to my dislike of actually having to clean the glass carefully)
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
BTW, when you're often in an environment where ghosting and flare are strong possibilities, (stage lights for example) I can see where a UV filter would just be a PITA.
 

narlus

Eastcoast Softcore
Staff member
Nov 7, 2001
24,658
25
behind the viewfinder
I am actually in the "use a hood/filter cause I often misplace lens caps" camp.

I am well aware of the possible flare and ghosting issues, hence I remove them in situations where things are backlit, etc.

But in many situations if it's a good filter and doesn't eff up the IQ, no reason not to leave it on. (plus it lends well to my dislike of actually having to clean the glass carefully)
cleaning the front element is also overrated. :D
 

ALEXIS_DH

Tirelessly Awesome
Jan 30, 2003
5,307
129
Lima, Peru, Peru
i was against them, until i scratched a lens.
now i rock a $7 filter.... some quality is lost, if i get anal about my pictures and review them at like 500% zoom... but i rather have that, than another damaged lens.
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,965
4
Trying to squeeze lenses+backwards hoods into a bag is a PITA. Ooooh...let's give all the big fast lenses 50-75% more volume than they already had.

But yeah, hoods are good.
 

RUFUS

e-douche of the year
Dec 1, 2006
3,488
0
Denver, CO
CP only.

UV filters are for anal cvnts who don't use hoods.


or for people who may shoot in siroccos.

I am both an anal cunt then and I use my hoods. I have had a few front elements break from rocks and debris while shooting DH and moto. Thank you USAA insurance for the free repairs!
 

Damo

Short One Marshmallow
Sep 7, 2006
4,604
20
French Alps
No filters here. I used to use UV ones to protect my front elements, but then I realised I take crap care of my equipment, took them off and one day will regret it.

I do want to get a neutral density (dark) filter so I can take long exposures in the daytime...

Otherwise, I'm a lazy modern git who adds filter effects in post processing.

There are very few filters that can't be added PP. ND and polarising filters are all I can think of.