Filters

digital

digital

Messages
1,180
Edit My Images
No
I'm aware of the basic pros and cons of filters and tend to lean towards the 'don't put another piece of glass between the sensor and the subject' point of view.

However, we're off to Antarctica (and then Iguazu Falls, for quite a contrast) and I don't want to return with a bunch of images and have someone say they would have been so much better if I had used a (insert your choice) filter. Is there a 'must have' filter for the kind of scenery I'm going to be shooting? Or is it best to keep it simple?
 
Keebsuk said:
If you only take one, take a decent circular polariser. I would go so far as to say a CPL is an absolute necessity for where you are going.

Andy
Click to expand...

^^^ Agree :)
 
Keebsuk said:
If you only take one, take a decent circular polariser. I would go so far as to say a CPL is an absolute necessity for where you are going.

Andy
Click to expand...

Thanks. Care to define 'decent circular polariser'? I wouldn't know what made one 'decent' if I fell over it! Any particular manufacturer recommended?
 
digital said:
Thanks. Care to define 'decent circular polariser'? I wouldn't know what made one 'decent' if I fell over it! Any particular manufacturer recommended?
Click to expand...

Best Hoya HD. Almost as good Marumi Super DHG. As tested in big comparison review in Advanced Photographer magazine.
 
digital said:
Thanks. Care to define 'decent circular polariser'? I wouldn't know what made one 'decent' if I fell over it! Any particular manufacturer recommended?
Click to expand...

There are 2 main manufacturers to consider. Hoya and B&W both make excellent CPL filters. Make sure that you buy a COATED filter and generally expect to pay in excess of £70.

There are lots of cheap CPL filters available but the old cliché of "you get what you pay for" is particularly relevant.

Don't skimp on this filter, it's really not worth it.

One point to mention that is often overlooked is the fact that CPL filters work at their best when used at 90• to the sun.

Hope this helps.

Andy
 
I think a decent circular polariser is the only filter I need to get.

Is the Lee 105mm coated?
 
markta said:
I think a decent circular polariser is the only filter I need to get.

Is the Lee 105mm coated?
Click to expand...

I don't think any Lee filters are coated. The best polarisers are screw-in.

If you only want say a polariser and maybe an extreme ND, screw-in is the best way to go. Square is the better option for using grads, though mixing the two is tricky.
 
HoppyUK said:
I don't think any Lee filters are coated. The best polarisers are screw-in.

If you only want say a polariser and maybe an extreme ND, screw-in is the best way to go. Square is the better option for using grads, though mixing the two is tricky.
Click to expand...

Thanks Richard, just what I suspected.

I currently own a 77mm Hoya Pro 1 which to be honest is pretty decent, so will stick with that for the time being. Just like the idea of having everything Lee, all together in the same place, since I already own 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 grads in both soft and hard edged graduations.
 
markta said:
Thanks Richard, just what I suspected.

I currently own a 77mm Hoya Pro 1 which to be honest is pretty decent, so will stick with that for the time being. Just like the idea of having everything Lee, all together in the same place, since I already own 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 grads in both soft and hard edged graduations.
Click to expand...

Hoya Pro-1 is good. Very similar to the Marumi Super DSG mentioned above, but the Super version of the Marumi has water resistant coatings, as does the Hoya HD, but the Pro-1 doesn't. If it gets wet, wipe it dry before the droplets are allowed to dry or they may leave a mark (not that they do any real harm).

B+W Kasemann MRC is also excellent, best coatings of all, but expensive. Advantage of the Hoya HD is that it only reduces exposure by 1.2stops, rather than the 1.7-1.9 of most others - handy if you're using it to cut reflections off a windscreen shooting motor sport.

I don't think there is any easy answer to mixing square and screw-in. I tend not to use grads, and prefer HDR technique for that kind of thing, so I only use screw-in these days.
 
digital said:
Is this the one: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/...ils?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1327318866&sr=8-1&seller=

I ask because prices seem to vary by huge amounts and the descriptions seem to hold subtle differences...
Click to expand...

That's the Hoya HD, yes. Those descriptions on Amazon/ebay are often confusing, or the pic is of the wrong filter etc. But there is only one Hoya HD.

There are also a few fake filters about, and they are very hard to spot until you get the two side by side. The only way a mail order buyer can ensure the real deal is to buy from a retailer that gets supply from an official importer.
 
The only filters I use now are CPL as I've given up with UV because of image degradation. I've got a Hoya Pro 1 CPL which works wonderfully with my 70-200 f4. It's not being used at the moment though, as I've just parcelled it up to sell as I'm after a 2.8 version, which I hope will be the same size as I've got now.
 
I know most peeps say "dont use uv / skylight filter" as it degrades the pictures, but has anyone actually done the comparson tests, ie stick camera on tripod and take pictures with and without filter.
Unless Im really pixel peeking the image at full zoom I really cant say I seem much difference ( old age really )

As soon as it stops raining I'll give it a proper go ( in about june this year then ! ) and see if I can spot anything significant.
 
vizzair said:
I know most peeps say "dont use uv / skylight filter" as it degrades the pictures, but has anyone actually done the comparson tests, ie stick camera on tripod and take pictures with and without filter.
Click to expand...
Yes. The effect tends to be worse the longer the lens - even assuming a "decent" filter. This is a Hoya Pro-1D on a 70-200F4L First without:

without-uv.jpg


second with:

with-uv.jpg


Very consistent results.
 
vizzair said:
I know most peeps say "dont use uv / skylight filter" as it degrades the pictures, but has anyone actually done the comparson tests, ie stick camera on tripod and take pictures with and without filter.
Unless Im really pixel peeking the image at full zoom I really cant say I seem much difference ( old age really )

As soon as it stops raining I'll give it a proper go ( in about june this year then ! ) and see if I can spot anything significant.
Click to expand...

There are loads of tests with/without filters.

The main problems are flare and ghosting, when bright lights (sunsets, street lights, bright reflections) bounce off the sensor and are then reflected back from the rear of the filter. You can't see this through the viewfinder.

The other one is loss of sharpness, but that tends to only show up with longer lenses that magnify optical shortcomings. Can cause strange bokeh patterns too.

Most of the time you won't notice anything, but don't kid yourself that nothing is happening - there is always something going on that shouldn't be, nibbling away at sharpness or contrast, and one day it will bite.

Use a protectioon filter by all means, but only with full knowledge. Salespeople are the worst advisers on this!
 
that will account some of the "softies" I have been getting:'(, ( I was also using the wrong F number on landscape and wondering why it wasn't sharp, but that's another story:bonk: )

so when the rain stops.....

old lancs's saying
" if you can see the hills its going to rain - If you cant it is "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top