Canon 17-55 ways to keep dust at bay

T

tris101

Messages
670
Name
Tristian
Edit My Images
Yes
A little guidance if you would be so kind.

I have just purchased a canon 17-55 f2.8 :love: and would like the try and keep it as dust free as possible. Doing a little searching on the net it appears adding a uv filter or protection glass can help reduce air movement around the front element and reduce dust ingress.

Obviously I don’t want to detrimentally affect the lens optics so what do you guys and girls suggest?

I have seen a Hoya 77mm HMC UV(C) Filter at WEX for £25.99

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy...8_1321003839_8014c253a53d3979c1b3ab2bb039f81c

and a Hoya 77mm Pro1 Digital Protector Filter on amazon for £22.01

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hoya-77mm-D...7CZC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1321003699&sr=8-2


Would this be any good? or can you suggest another option? or maybe there is no problem?

I see there are options to clean the dust out but prevention is better than cure, I also understand a few little specs of dust should not be visible in the taken images.
 
Last edited:
Agree with POAH on this one. I have a 17-55 and dont have a dust issue at all. Yes it has a protective filter on the front when I use it outside to protect the front glass from the elements NOT to stop dust getting in (it wouldnt anyway the front elements are well sealed). Indoor studio work I dont use a filter.

All this talk of dust issues makes me laugh, do you know how much dust would be needed to affect a photo ? Tons of the stuff liberally coated across the entire surface probably or they would need to be such big pieces of debris they'd be way past being called dust. I definitely wouldnt be put off purchasing a used lens either because it had a few tiny barely visible specks of dust.

"Which you can see if you hold the lens up to a bright light at a certain angle and squint a little and really look you can see them there LOOK, LOOK!! OMG I cant use this lens now" :eek::eek:
Click to expand...

:LOL::LOL::LOL:

Just as an afterthought, when you are shooting outside on a windy day (especially at a seaside location for instance) have a look at the filter on your lens after your shoot and look at te crap that has accumulated on it (unavoidable) Are your photos ruined ? Do all those tiny motes of outdoor debris show up on the photos? Nope.

Stop obsessing about stuff like this and get out and have fun taking piccies. (y)
 
As stated I know the dust will not show up in the photos (y)

I was just asking for any advice for stopping it getting there in 1st place. The type of lens construction is always going to have air movement but it appears that adding filter may reduce the air movement past the front element, granted this will probably move air travel to the zoom rings but hopefully these are filtered in some way.

Maybe this is not an issue at all :shrug: but some lens seam more affect than others. I'm waiting for mine to be delivered so no experience yet.

All comments welcome
 
I guessed I would get a response like don’t use it then... :p

I'm not overly worried about it but if there is a way to reduce it it’s got to be a good thing, if not never mind.

If you don’t ask you will never know....

I take it I have touched on a nerve with this question.
 
Last edited:
you can probably reduce it by not abuse it and some general knowledge on lens changing etc.

Put the cap back on when you not using it? etc

To behonest, even if you careful treat each lens you will get dust anyway. Their are plenty of dust that we can't see when going out or at home, once you open the cap on your lens, dust will get in anyway ......
 
badboy1984 said:
To behonest, even if you careful treat each lens you will get dust anyway. Their are plenty of dust that we can't see when going out or at home, once you open the cap on your lens, dust will get in anyway ......
Click to expand...

I guess I should stop working in a class 100,000 clean room :LOL:

Maybe I wont bother with the filter then and spend my pennys on something more intresting.
 
many of us uses filter in many different way. Alot use their UV filter as lens protection if anything happens, the filter breaks but not your lens.

Can consider buy a filter for that purpose actually ....
 
tris101 said:
Maybe I wont bother with the filter then and spend my pennys on something more intresting.
Click to expand...

The filter is a good purchase for the reasons stated above by myself and other members and I wouldnt say either way if this was a wasted purchase or not, thats for you to decide but the point is that I wouldnt be telling anyone that asked, that to stop dust getting into a lens you will HAVE to fit a filter.

Its a great lens otherwise and you will come to love it and hardly take it off your camera, trust me. (y)
 
Thanks for that.

So if I was to buy a filter for protection are the ones I highlighted above any good or should I be looking at others.

I dont want to spoil a great lens by fitting a rubish filter.

Thanks all for your comments (y)
 
i use a cheap ebay filter on my lens and i can't see any quality different during normal condition, maybe their is a different on the higher end ones that actually does what it says lol.

But at night shot i take filters off simply because i don't want any glare on my image.
 
Here is a page I found a while back which not only is a very thorough test of UV filters but provides some eye opening test shots which really shoiw the difference between a good and bad filter. I will post the link to page 4 of the total review entitled

4. Description of the results and summary

http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html

Now on that page you will see a table with the best to worst on test. On the right side is a red "test" tab next to each filter which takes you to the testing carried out on each. Just for fun look at the test images of the top rated filter ( Hoya 72 mm HMC UV-0 ) and the bottom rated filter (Tiffen 72uv) Now you get an idea of why making the right choice is important,after all you are fitting in on your expensive cherished lens.

So in summary fit the best filter you can afford and always, always fit a lens hood for flare and extra protection, but do read the other pages it makes good reading.
 
Last edited:
A filter wont stop dust it'll apparently stop the front element getting scratched or shattering as the filter will be hit first, my thinking is anything to destroy the filter will do a danm good job at taking the front element for a ride to.

With the 17-55 and other lenses built like it there a push pull design so when they extend they suck air in and dust yes it's designed to not allow that much crap inside (forgetting the name o-ring or something) but over time a few bits of dust will enter even if you keep the lens on the camera for its entire life.

Its part of photography but a couple of specs of dust wont degrade a photo nor will you be able to see it if it really bugs you, there is always a service option available but that cost's money.
 
I think the only lenses that get better weather (dust) sealing by adding filters are some of the L series such as the 17-40mm. They move everything internally, as mentioned the 17-55 extends and will suck dust in as it moves. I really wouldnt worry about it though. The 100-400 is nicknamed the dust pump and i dont think ive every heard anyone say its caused a problem with the images taken.

So you couldnt resist the 17-55 eh! How you finding it vs the Tamron?
 
Yeah, it's something that inevitably happens to some lenses more than others. To be honest after you first get your lens I don't know how often I'd actually bother checking to see for dust until it came to selling. If it's having no effect on pictures than why worry?
 
Thanks for that, that is the type of info I was looking for...

Gazamonk said:
Here is a page I found a while back which not only is a very thorough test of UV filters but provides some eye opening test shots which really shoiw the difference between a good and bad filter. I will post the link to page 4 of the total review entitled

4. Description of the results and summary

http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html

Now on that page you will see a table with the best to worst on test. On the right side is a red "test" tab next to each filter which takes you to the testing carried out on each. Just for fun look at the test images of the top rated filter ( Hoya 72 mm HMC UV-0 ) and the bottom rated filter (Tiffen 72uv) Now you get an idea of why making the right choice is important,after all you are fitting in on your expensive cherished lens.

So in summary fit the best filter you can afford and always, always fit a lens hood for flare and extra protection, but do read the other pages it makes good reading.
Click to expand...
 
Yes I'm still in two minds if I have made the right choice but the next option was canon 24-70 f2.8. and more money I don’t have, So I will see how I get on with it... there were 4 of 17-55 for sale on here and they were calling to me.

Its not here yet hopefully it will be making an appearance Saturday.

yes the internal focus lens don’t tend to suffer dust issues as much, I have canon 70-200 f4 IS and canon 100 macro. And the L glass has o rings to seal them which also helps.

Its mainly the zoom action blowing and sucking in air from outside. I have seen quite a few comments that you can feel air being drawn in around the front element as you zoom which in turn pulls in dust, some say fitting a filter reduces the air entering at this point which reduces the dust intake. Air still enters around the zoom rings but some say this is filtered with a foam ring.

I have no idea as I have not dismantled one to understand the air movement.

Just trying to work out if a filter is a good idea or not :thinking:


Euan said:
I think the only lenses that get better weather (dust) sealing by adding filters are some of the L series such as the 17-40mm. They move everything internally, as mentioned the 17-55 extends and will suck dust in as it moves. I really wouldnt worry about it though. The 100-400 is nicknamed the dust pump and i dont think ive every heard anyone say its caused a problem with the images taken.

So you couldnt resist the 17-55 eh! How you finding it vs the Tamron?
Click to expand...
 
i think you think too much about this dust thing, as long as the lens take good photo then thats all it matters ......
 
badboy1984 said:
i think you think too much about this dust thing, as long as the lens take good photo then thats all it matters ......
Click to expand...

You might be right it’s the curse of being an engineer working with naked die and optics in a clean room :(
 
I had a hoya pro 1 on mine and never seen any adverse effects. also used a hood too but not the canon one far too expensive for a bit of plastic lol
 
Dust in mine and a 1mm scratch on the front element (admittedly near the edge) never noticed it affect any photos though
 
17-55 will be more usable on your 50D APS-C sensor than a 24-70. I used a 28-135 on my 50D for a while and the short end frustrated me so many times and I had to put on the 17-55 anyway so I ended up selling it.

also:
You might be right it’s the curse of being an engineer working with naked die and optics in a clean room
Click to expand...

I hear you but your not using it at work lol.
 
Too true but it’s a mind set thing, I know I need to get out more.... you should see the DIY only sub mm will do...

I also have 10-20 sigma so the lower ranges are covered, I find quite a few pic’s of my daughter or dogs are around 40-50mm or 70mm which is why I was thinking 24-70 might be a good bet. But like you say most say the 17-55 is the best on a crop sensor so I thought I would try it 1st.

When I get hold of a sigma 50mm f1.4 it mybe my lens of choice, but we will see.


Gazamonk said:
17-55 will be more usable on your 50D APS-C sensor than a 24-70. I used a 28-135 on my 50D for a while and the short end frustrated me so many times and I had to put on the 17-55 anyway so I ended up selling it.

also:


I hear you but your not using it at work lol.
Click to expand...
 
It's designed to suck air in around the front element, which keeps it away from more sensitive/delicate areas that are hard to clean and expensive to repair.

It's an easy 10mins DIY job to clean - google.

If you must ;) the best protector filter is Hoya HD (I wouldn't take much notice of that LensTip site).
 
I purchased a very dusty one for good monies, it even had small animal hair behind the front element. Gave it a clean out and fitted a HD front filter, the lens stayed dust free after this for many months until I sold it myself as I moved to FF. cracking lens !!!

Just keep the barrel as clean as possible to prevent dust building up around the focus grip and you shouldn't have a problem as IMO this is how the dust makes its way in in the first place.
 
HoppyUK said:
If you must the best protector filter is Hoya HD (I wouldn't take much notice of that LensTip site).
Click to expand...

Based on what ? There test looked like it was well considered and fairly thorough and the results definitely show that there are differences between brands. Like any review or test whether it be cameras, lenses, filters etc. there are many testing variables and you can find alternate results and opinions of similar products on different sites. That is why doing your research is good when considering a purchase. I still think it is one of the only sites who have taken the time to carry out this kind of testing on a subject that confuses many photographers re. the uv filter question. Anything that sheds some light and a little more clarity on the subject is in my opinion welcome. I posted the link to let the op make up his own mind based on what I thought was an interesting review/test.

If your'e going to make a statement like that at least qualify it.
If we are to take no notice of there opinion then you have to say why yours is the only one we should listen to. You may be right and the HD filter by Hoya (not included in the test unfortunately) is definitely considered a very good filter and LensTips tests already show that the Hoyas rule supreme but if all the others are no good you need to say why. There opinion and findings are every bit as valid as yours and certainly less biased.
 
Last edited:
Thats an excellent price.
Your amazon link doesn't appear to work though. :thinking:
 
Gazamonk said:
Based on what ? There test looked like it was well considered and fairly thorough and the results definitely show that there are differences between brands. Like any review or test whether it be cameras, lenses, filters etc. there are many testing variables and you can find alternate results and opinions of similar products on different sites. That is why doing your research is good when considering a purchase. I still think it is one of the only sites who have taken the time to carry out this kind of testing on a subject that confuses many photographers re. the uv filter question. Anything that sheds some light and a little more clarity on the subject is in my opinion welcome. I posted the link to let the op make up his own mind based on what I thought was an interesting review/test.

If your going to make a statement like that at least qualify it.
If we are to take no notice of there opinion then you have to say why yours is the only one we should listen to. You may be right and the HD filter by Hoya (not included in the test unfortunately) is definitely considered a very good filter and there tests already show that the Hoyas rule supreme but if all the others are no good you need to say why. There opinion and findings are every bit as valid as yours and certainly less biased.
Click to expand...

I've done that many times before ;) They need less pseudo-science and more practical relevance.

UV is just not an issue with digital. The sensor has a very efficient UV filter over it. Sharpness with any decent quality glass filter is not a problem, nor non-mechanical vignetting.

The relevant factors are flare and double-image ghosting where bright areas reflect off the shiny surface of the sensor and are bounced straight back from the rear of the filter. This is the main reason why protection filters degrade image quality. Their tests for that are poor, inconsistent and uncontrolled, and can't be used as a meaningful comparison.

The other important thing, which they admit to not evaluating, is how robust the glass is and how easy to keep clean. With most filters, if you let rainwater dry on it, it will leave permanent marks.

Hoya HD has very tough glass, and excellent easy-clean water resistant coatings. There are others, such as B+W MRC, Marumi Super DHG, but I haven't tested them all.

My advice is not to listen to shop sales people and to only use a protection filter in extremis, like sea spray, but always a lens hood. If you must, then take it off whenever there are very bright areas, like shooting into the light, sunsets, street lights etc.

Lens coatings are surprisingly tough and meant to be cleaned. I've been doing it for 40 years and never had a problem. Don't be frightened of it, wipe off water before it dries, use a blower to get rid of debris, use a microfibre cloth and a bit of breath to remove finger marks. Greasy smears are death to image quality, but if you always use a hood chances are you won't touch the lens accidentally.
 
Last edited:
Now that's more like it :clap: dont you feel better now. :naughty:

FYI Richard I am also a believer in giving lenses and filters a good clean when needed and i do think that an awful lot of people think that lenses etc are very fragile. 30 - 40years ago the early multicoated lenses were a revelation for reducing flare and improving contrast but the coating on some manufacturers glass was very prone to scoring and coming off. Happily those days are long gone and equipment really doesn't need pampered and babied the way a lot of people think. They are working tools and can put up with a lot of abuse before it would be detrimental. And yes the HD filters are very tough, its one of there best qualities and its reflected (pardon the pun) in the price.
 
Last edited:
No problem Tris, its why these forums are such good resource for all. Glad to have been of some help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top