filters

mtracerz

mtracerz

Messages
903
Name
Rikki
Edit My Images
Yes
Just a quick question,
Away to get first lens for my 40d (nifty fifty what i settled for)

Sure I read that having a lens filter on will protect it. Is this good practice?
Or is it just some peoples preference? Obviously I want to keep my lens in top nick.

Cheers in advance :thumbs:
 
I went through this stage, I say down to personal preference,

I personally only use filter the I require for an image...e.g. ND filters.

protection filters as you are on about like UV or just 'clear' I have never used, but depending where you are shooting etc, windy, mucky, a UV would be good.

The hud its self i feel provides the styles of shooting I do with the protection.

its a near 50 50 split as I done a poll on who used UV filters etc.

Basically its down to how you feel, your shooting environment and if dont want to take any risk on your lens.

hth
 
Thanks for the reply Robbo,

Can you tell me what you mean by 'hud'?

So I guess it probably wouldnt hurt to have a UV filter in the bag, just in case conditions were poor? Though then again, I doubt I would ever be shooting in those kind of conditions with a50mm..
 
It probably wouldnt hurt to carry one if you think yours going to be in them conditions, but depending on the quality of the filter and how many lenses you need to cover can get expensive.

Hud I mean the cover that goes around your lens at the front to shield from sun light etc. Protects in the sense off if you fall, the hud would 'hopefully' hit the floor or brick etc first, and not the lens.

like I say its personal shooting environment and choice and how much you want to spend etc.

Im sure some one else can give you better info on actually using one in their envonments etc
 
Ah ok, iv its not too much extra il get one just to have in the bag.

Do the lens come with the hud attatched? Or is that also an additional add on?
 
I no longer bother with a filter on the 50mm. Figure it's cheap enough to replace on the very small chance the lens should get damaged. A decent filter would cost you half the price of that lens anyway.

Edit: should add the lens on the 50mm is fairly well recessed into the body.

As has been said it's all down to personal preference and I don't think using one can be classed as either right or wrong.
 
dlh said:
A decent filter would cost you half the price of that lens anyway.
Click to expand...

By decent one, do you mean one thats actually doing what the filter is intended on doing. Or do you mean one thats not going to have a negative effect on the image quality? Would a cheaper lens (if one exists, i havn't looked at filters yet) detriment the quality?
 
a good filter in uv any were from £40 to £60 ish. decent being for image quality etc some cheap ones can cause reduction in quality.

lens is most £99 ish (if its a canon)

So i would say your best bet to leave the UV and save the money, if its a canon it wont come with a hud but will about around 10-15pound.
 
mtracerz said:
Is the hud worth having?
Click to expand...

they can come in handy especially if your shooting outdoor

Check to see how big the hood (thats the correct spelling haha I get moments like that) is on amazon or some were to see how big it is, for a 50mm it may only be small.

this is were some one else can answer as I have never used the 50mm etc so cant give experience on that bit mate
 
I think the jury is out on how much a given filter will affect IQ, but I was always lead to believe you shouldn't be looking at anything less than the Hoya Pro1 or equivalent and lower quality filters could cost you a stop or two exposure.

Talking purely from a protective filter/UV POV.

I'm sure someone will come along to tell me I'm talking b*****ks :)
 
haha... now I would of understood a lens hood.
I feel rather silly now :bonk:
Think il leave the filter for now then, but may look into the hood.
Thanks for the help guys, appreciate it :thumbs:
 
Is it ready for the HuD ... ??

MrDoovde.jpg


:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top