Filter advice for 100-400 L

birdy961

birdy961

Messages
4,071
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Courtesy of Kerso I have a nice shiny new 100-400 L
Unfortunatly it's at home and I am at work :bang:

After advice on whether I should use a filter to protect the front of the lens or would the lens hood suffice.
Also read that a filter can mess with the quality?

Also if the advice is for a filter any recommendations?

Thanking you all (y)
 
I'd say a lens hood would be enough really - no real need for a UV filter.
 
birdy961 said:
L
after advice on whether I should use a filter to protect the front of the lens or would the lens hood suffice.

Also if the advice is for a filter any recommendations?

Thanking you all (y)
Click to expand...

personal choice really , no more than that

i choose to always have a filter on & twice i've been glad of it having dropped a lens and smashed said filter , it does leave you wondering :thinking:
what if there was no filter on.

i use hoya pro1 digital uv on mine & cant say as i notice any drop in IQ compared to no filter .

i'm guessing on that lens filter thread will be in the region of 77mm so a quality filter wont be cheap expect to pay circa £ 40-50

for said filter.
 
I think its not worth buying a cheap UV filter and wacking on it an expensive lens with good optics. For this reason, I've stopped using filters.

However I'm sure that buying the Hoya Pro filters will match the quality of the lens
 
I use a hoya uv on mine, and would highly recommend using one! I've not seen any issues with image quality using the filter.
 
Insurance, get protection without the filter!
Use the lens hood!
Wipe the butter off the fingers, use the straps/tripods/beanbags!
Jim
 
I've taken my filters off after a discussion on here, especially as I use a lens hood with them. The only ones I use now are polarising ones.
 
I had a close shave with a lens, ended up cracking the filter but it saved the front element! Thank god.

Personal choice really, but I would never take my filter off to leave the front element exposed. Never really had any issue with image quality (all my shots are rubbish ;))

Hoya professional are recommended by me as they are so thin!
 
Thanks all (y)

Shall see how I get on with just the lens hood, may invest in a decent filter once tha bank has got over the shock :LOL:
 
It depends on what you are shooting I suppose. I shoot a lot of motorsport, and a UV is essential in my opinion.

This shot, the car was doing over 100mph coming towards me, and a few stones were kicked up, hopefully a filter would stop any damage (don't think a lens hood would..)

 
I'd only use a filter if its to protect it from a definite environmental threat like above with the stones.

I've seen a lot of photos posted online with strange flare and reflections caused by filters on this lens.

I just use the lens hood on mine.
 
Congrats on the new lens Robin (y)
I have a UV Hoya pro on the front of my 70-200 cost about £30 IIRC
Seems OK to me
But I still use the lens hood to take those little "unaviodable knocks"
 
Cobra said:
Congrats on the new lens Robin (y)
I have a UV Hoya pro on the front of my 70-200 cost about £30 IIRC
Seems OK to me
But I still use the lens hood to take those little "unaviodable knocks"
Click to expand...


Cheers Chris

Can't wait to get home and have a play

Shall have a look around and see what I can find (y)
 
As I said earlier.... UV Filter = Satan

Maybe if you spend a stupid amount of money on it then it might be ok, but that is more than the excess on my insurance policy, so stuff it :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top