Filter For Ultra Wide Angle Lens

For what purpose? I use Tiffin HT clear for the rare situation that requires it. But I would consider just using a cheap uncoated glass filter if it is for blowing sand.
 
Which Sigma UWA? Their 10-20 DC lens has a 77mm filter thread IIRC but the 12-24 has no front filter fitting. Other than extreme conditions, a protection filter is unlikely to do much and adds the risk of extra flare and other degradations, especially with smaller apertures on a UWA.
 
If I was off to the Grand Canyon I'd be taking a polariser to A) get a nice deep sky and B) stop the shutter speed going off the charts at wide apertures (yes I know using a polariser can be awkward on a UWA but it still has its uses).

I wouldn't bother with a protection filter as in that sun the potential for glare will be sky high and any sort of filter will exacerbate this. If I HAD to have a protection filter I'd just get the most expensive protection/UV filter I could (they're essentially the same thing).
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the comments - it is the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 DC ultra wide lens which is definitely given as 82mm. The points about the bright sun (is there any type?) is s fair one but though I understand the difference between UV and polariser I'm not sure which would be the better + of wider (no pun intended) use at other times?

I have always used a filter for protection of the lens and unfortunately there have been times when it saved the lens from damage - as they say, old habits die hard. Furthermore, I usually had a UV filter but that was with film cameras - I understand such use is not always necessary with digital. I also hope to use the lens for astrophotography, which is in fact my main photography. For this purpose I would not want such filters. Of course they do come off but I don't wan't to be swapping filters on and off all the time and would prefer a more permanent solution.
 
Nowadays, for most people UV filter = protection filter and vice-versa.

Interesting about the astro stuff but surely for that you would remove the filter anyway?
 
I would avoid a polariser on a UWA.
It will make the large amount amount of sky in the shot very uneven.
Just my opinion.
 
Nawty said:
Nowadays, for most people UV filter = protection filter and vice-versa.

Interesting about the astro stuff but surely for that you would remove the filter anyway?
Click to expand...

Most of my work is prime focus with a telescope and I use internal filters for light pollution and and narrow band light spectrum e.g. Ha and OIII light.

https://watchthisspaceman.wordpress.com/

However, I am now branching out into basic wide field imaging of the sky i.e. DSLR + lens on a tripod using a lightweight Vixen Polarie tracking mount. For this purpose I want the light (photons) as they arrive and certainly not taking out the UV but with a clear protector filter on the front of the lens for when the dew comes down, as it inevitably does.
 
All modern cameras have built in UV filters over the front of the sensor anyway so it doesn't make much difference if you have a UV filter or clear protector, hence the terms are often used interchangeably.

I'd love to live somewhere this type of photography is possible, it's just too bright around me and every time I've travelled somewhere dark in the UK it's been cloudy :LOL:
 
groberts0 said:
However, I am now branching out into basic wide field imaging of the sky i.e. DSLR + lens on a tripod using a lightweight Vixen Polarie tracking mount. For this purpose I want the light (photons) as they arrive and certainly not taking out the UV but with a clear protector filter on the front of the lens for when the dew comes down, as it inevitably does.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't recommend putting a filter on the front to combat dew, any filter will seriously distort the lightpath from the stars around the edges and corners.
A better option is to use a heater, gel hand warmers work surprisingly well as a cheap and cheerful method. There are plenty of tutorials online on how to make a lens heater from resistors and a couple of batteries, not mustered the enthusiasm yet to build one as the gel's work well for me.
 
Nawty said:
All modern cameras have built in UV filters over the front of the sensor anyway so it doesn't make much difference if you have a UV filter or clear protector, hence the terms are often used interchangeably.

I'd love to live somewhere this type of photography is possible, it's just too bright around me and every time I've travelled somewhere dark in the UK it's been cloudy :LOL:
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised - I live on the outskirts of London near Gatwick airport so there's no shortage of light but a good light pollution filter, long exposures and processing sorts it out. However, a good dark sky is better!
 
groberts0 said:
I'm off to the Grand Canyon = sand!
Click to expand...
It's not very windy there though!

I went in 2013, just used a lens hood (lots of sun!) and had no issues with a Canon 10-22.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top