![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Do i need a lens filter?
- Thread starter dslrjunky
- Start date
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 20,939
When you do get a more expensive lens, why would you put a cheap filter on it? You are paying for high quality glass, then slap some $50 piece of glass over it.
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 20,939
Lens hood and lens cap are all you need, and some common sense.
It depends on how vigorously you hike and, hit the back country. I have clear filters from Nikon for my lenses. Here in Az if I didnt have them on I would have already worn my coatings off from dust removal. Some of the dust here even gets under your lens caps when they are on. This year hasnt been too bad for me because we in the northern half of the state have recieved alot of rain this year. Also I have scratched one filter while rock climbing even with the hood on. That would have been my lens instead of the filter.
Quality, multi coating to prevent reflection.
I have a few filters and depending on the shots you are after they can be usefull. (Kit xsi at the moment as well)
I have my UV filter on it all the time just for added protection. I have an ND (Polerized) filter if I want to over expose a day shot and keep it balanced. Also helps reduce some color issues from indoor lighting but I have never seen it work for that. Lastly an FLD one which can add some skin tone / color into the shot even though its made to reduce glare / reflections from metal / water.... These came in a kit I got for my G7 lens's but they fit and work much better on the SLR.
Filters can help you get some cool shots that otherwise would require some touch up in post but they will never replace good shooting practices.
I have my UV filter on it all the time just for added protection. I have an ND (Polerized) filter if I want to over expose a day shot and keep it balanced. Also helps reduce some color issues from indoor lighting but I have never seen it work for that. Lastly an FLD one which can add some skin tone / color into the shot even though its made to reduce glare / reflections from metal / water.... These came in a kit I got for my G7 lens's but they fit and work much better on the SLR.
Filters can help you get some cool shots that otherwise would require some touch up in post but they will never replace good shooting practices.
Justintoxicated
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Messages
- 14,519
I have a B+W, Hoya Super HMC, and Sigma UV filters (I'm taking my camera to the desert, and on boats etc where lens protection should be used). Common sense is not going to stop my lens from getting salt water spray or offer protection from sand in the windy desert.
Despite reviews I have read I think I like the B+W the least. The ring is nicer, but it also binds with other filters if I toss a polarizer over it. (only needed to do this once). The Hoya seems to reflect less light off the surface the B+W meaning more if the light is probably making it through the lens. The pro1 version should be even better. Also you can look into Kenko which is rebadged Hoya.
The thing I didn't like about my Hoya filter is that it was harder to clean than any of the others.
My Favorite so far is the sigma! It reflected the least light from the glass (no scientific testing used just my eyes looking at the glass as I move it around) . I didn't compare it to the Pro1 hoya though, but the one my friend brought in seemed to do very well. It was the second easiest to clean as well (B+W cleaned up the easiest from my experience). It just appeared to be the most transparent glass out of the filters I have. I'm currently looking for another Sigma 67mm UV EX DG filter, but I'll probably end up with a Kenko due to price.
if you don't feel you really need protection from more extreme environments, they don't bother using the filter at all.
Despite reviews I have read I think I like the B+W the least. The ring is nicer, but it also binds with other filters if I toss a polarizer over it. (only needed to do this once). The Hoya seems to reflect less light off the surface the B+W meaning more if the light is probably making it through the lens. The pro1 version should be even better. Also you can look into Kenko which is rebadged Hoya.
The thing I didn't like about my Hoya filter is that it was harder to clean than any of the others.
My Favorite so far is the sigma! It reflected the least light from the glass (no scientific testing used just my eyes looking at the glass as I move it around) . I didn't compare it to the Pro1 hoya though, but the one my friend brought in seemed to do very well. It was the second easiest to clean as well (B+W cleaned up the easiest from my experience). It just appeared to be the most transparent glass out of the filters I have. I'm currently looking for another Sigma 67mm UV EX DG filter, but I'll probably end up with a Kenko due to price.
if you don't feel you really need protection from more extreme environments, they don't bother using the filter at all.
Justintoxicated
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Messages
- 14,519
You can always take the filter off for important shots 
hungryduck
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2005
- Messages
- 1,530
A cheap $30 UV filter saved a lens of mine after I fell on it and smashed it during a mountain climb...
I've seen pictures with low end filters on and the lens glare is ridiculous, especially with low light/night photography and the light source is visible in the photos. Even with the good filters (ie Hoya, B+W), flare is an issue. It's just worst with the low end ones (ie Tiffen).
Well, I don't know about you, but I didn't spend an average of of $2k per lens to have any image degradation because I'm too lazy to put the lens cap on.
Trackside motorsports or heavy salt spray - sure, there is a genuine threat and to approach such an environment without taking precautions would be foolhardy. But for laziness, clumsiness or plain old paranoia - forget it. I spent a lot of money to get the best equipment so I can get the best possible images.
Trackside motorsports or heavy salt spray - sure, there is a genuine threat and to approach such an environment without taking precautions would be foolhardy. But for laziness, clumsiness or plain old paranoia - forget it. I spent a lot of money to get the best equipment so I can get the best possible images.
Justintoxicated
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Messages
- 14,519
I like my sigma more and more every day, you can hardly tell its there. But I don't have any 2k lenses either
I have sceen the glare from my B+W in some night shots with larger lens but nothing so far from my sigma on my 50mm prime.
I have sceen the glare from my B+W in some night shots with larger lens but nothing so far from my sigma on my 50mm prime.
I use my B+W UV filter on my main glass all the time. My IQ does not suffer at all, looks the same with or without my filter, even when I am pixel peeping. It helps when I am in dusty environments or when kids tend to touch my lens element. The only time I take it off my main lens is when I am taking pictures at night when I notice lens flare.
Justintoxicated
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Messages
- 14,519
This is what I noticed as well.
B+W seems to reflect the most light, mostly noticed at night, very easy to clean
Hoya/Kenko pro1 or super HMC reflects very little but is very heard to clean, seems to attract dust.
Sigma EX DG, seems most transparent (also smaller filter though in my case) not as easy to clean as B+W, but not as hard as the Hoya either...Still my favorite.
I'm trying to decide between the Keno Pro1 UV, or Sigma 67mm's right now. The sigma costs twice as much for me right now, although it retails less....Otherwise it would be a very easy decision for me.