User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: U.V filters.

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Feb 2009
    Location
    Eaton w.a.
    Posts
    128
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    U.V filters.

    Hi Folks,
    Perhaps people may comment on this point of view I recently read on the net.
    The first thing I did when I purchased my Canon Camera and lenses was to buy UV filters.
    Why? (1) To protect my lens from dust and contaminates. (2) Protection from UV rays. I now have the filters on my two L series Canon lenses. The article on the net I read asked the question why buy top quality lenses and put what will possibly be inferior glass lenses in front of them. I haven’t mentioned the brand name not knowing if that’s allowed. The filters purchased were I believe of reasonable quality about $100.00 dollars per filter. Has the article a valid point to make?
    Regards Charliark.

  2. #2
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    09 May 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Not sure what brand you are referring to, nor what "article" you are referring to, but this UV filters vs non UV filters issue has been debated for eons Similar to Nikon vs Canon and 24-105L vs 24-70L there is no resolution

    There's many pros and cons of using UV filters (mostly cons), but the two you mentioned, I think are not the best reasons:
    1. You can always clean the front element, and even if you do put a UV filter onto it, you will have to clean the UV filter instead, so you will never get away with having to clean something...there will always be something there to attract dust and fingerprints etc that will require cleaning.
    2. This is irrelevant because Digital SLRs are not susceptible to UV rays.

  3. #3
    can't remember Tannin's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2007
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    2,299
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Which lenses, Charliark? In general, it's probably not a great idea: you always lose some quality, the question is how much. With good filters - at around $100 those you have should be OK, probably one of the medium-high spec Hoya ones - it's a very small loss.

    There are really only two reasons to use a UV filter:

    1: because you are working in bad conditions (e.g., sea spray).
    2: because the particular lens has an exposed front element that is not protected by a projecting hood.

    As examples, I never use a filter on my 60mm macro because the glass is a long way away from damage, protected by a long lens hood, which is always on. But I always have a filter on my 24mm tilt-shift, because the glas protrudes and would be easily damaged.
    Tony

    ‘Let's eat Grandma.’ Commas save lives!

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    08 Feb 2009
    Location
    Eaton w.a.
    Posts
    128
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    U.V. filters

    Thx for the comments. The filters I am using are Hoya that comes in the purple cases. I have only had my camera for eighteen months which makes me as green as grass as the saying goes. Reading on the net I had the idea that U.V. filters are a must to protect the lenses for all sort of reasons. Even to the point where a pro dropped his camera and the filter saved his lense but shattered the filter glass.
    Regards.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Take the filters off, take a shot, especially in harsh light, put them back on, take another shot

    See any difference ?

    Yes - take them off and stomp on them until they break
    No - leave them on, why not

    Schools of thought -

    They offer protection - maybe if you are in a sandstorm
    They offer UV protection ? - so what, so do most lenses natively now
    If you drop your lens UV filters will take the brunt of the impact - who knows, I doubt it, I think the glass shards of the filter is more likely to scratch your lens than the filter "take the brunt" personally

    There is no right answer, its a subject that polarises the world...talking of polarisers.....
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Aug 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think there are 2 reasons for getting a filter.

    1. Protect the front element from wear / accidental impact.
    2. Seal the lens from dust.

    UV on a digital IQ wise is irrelevant. Your better off getting a protector for about 1/3 the price.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    there are two types of people when it comes to UV filters (apart from film shooters). There are those that think they are a waste of money and just a good revenue source for dealers who pray on the uninitiated, and then there are those who don't know any better.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    there is the 3rd type like me

    who have used expensive filters and have had shots ruined by sun glare during a wedding shoot, took them off later and no problems

    after that 1 wedding, never had a filter on any lenses again and never felt the need to

  9. #9
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    09 May 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by charliark View Post
    Thx for the comments. The filters I am using are Hoya that comes in the purple cases. I have only had my camera for eighteen months which makes me as green as grass as the saying goes. Reading on the net I had the idea that U.V. filters are a must to protect the lenses for all sort of reasons. Even to the point where a pro dropped his camera and the filter saved his lense but shattered the filter glass.
    Regards.
    Please tell me you didn't pay $100 for the Purple Boxed Hoyas! :O

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Jul 2009
    Location
    Kew
    Posts
    133
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had these super cheap cheap UV filters on my prime once (got them free with lens) and gave HORRIBLE lens flare when wide open or shooting into a light source. Upgraded to a pro 1 KENKO *cheaper than Hoya, and so far no probs. Did some testing shooting into light with and without filter and didn't see much difference. So, been keeping it on for the moment.

    I use the filters for the "so called protection" and coz I hate touching the actual lens. Rather clean a filter than the actual optics

    Rog
    NIGH -KON

  11. #11
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    21 Jun 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I did some tests (using film) and did see a different in distance haze with the UV filter. However as with rogklee, the flare is horrible - though I live with it for the same reason as rogklee.

Posting Permissions

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