Filters

brad28

brad28

Messages
749
Name
bradley
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Is it worth using a polarised filter or a UV filter?

I guess its a good idea to protect the lens.
 
Don't think a polariser would be 1st choice as lens protection ... UV might but many consider filters unnecessary for protection; a polariser is to reduce reflection/glare and highlight colour.
 
but i still don't have an answer, ok people mainly use filters as protection which i agree with. ok some people say they may affect quality of images. Should I just stick to my hood? or have the hood and a polarising filter??
so much confliction between opinions, who do i believe? A filter must have some purpose
 
A polarising filter is not used for protection, it is used for certain effects as already mentioned. It's very useful for landscapes amongst other things.

A UV filter would only ever be used for physical protection (on digital cameras at least). Think of them as simply putting a bit of glass in front of the lens as they will do nothing for you in terms of effect. Because you're putting another piece of glass in front of your lens, there is potential to degrade your images if you use a poor quality filter.

I don't use UV filters and would rather spend my money elsewhere but it's a personal choice.
 
brad28 said:
but i still don't have an answer, ok people mainly use filters as protection which i agree with. ok some people say they may affect quality of images. Should I just stick to my hood? or have the hood and a polarising filter??
so much confliction between opinions, who do i believe? A filter must have some purpose
Click to expand...

It's personal preference...I use UV filters as protection if taking stormy seas, public events like carnivals etc ....situations where the lens is likely to get splattered up with silly string, sea spray, dirt etc.
If I'm out alone taking say a landscape shot or portraits then I'll remove the filter.
As for polarising filters...only ever used them to help reduce glare when shooting cars or objects with high reflection.
There is debate over image quality...again it is down to your own personal preferences.
Lens hoods do generally offer a reasonable amount of protection.
 
any other reason for using a hood rather than protection?
 
I use Nikon's NC filters on my lens's which to me is a personal preference.. But what also gets me is that when you sell a lens there's the question asked of "has it had a filter attached" with the usual how long have you owned it, was it from new, hoiw many owners, is it a UK model etc etc

What lens are you thinking of plonking one on :shrug:
 
I've got a 18-55 canon with a polarised filter, the lens is mainly for landscape photography and a 55-250 canon with a UV filter which is normally for wildlife photography

I done have a hood for either of them, should I?
 
brad28 said:
I've got a 18-55 canon with a polarised filter, the lens is mainly for landscape photography and a 55-250 canon with a UV filter which is normally for wildlife photography

I done have a hood for either of them, should I?
Click to expand...

If you're getting flare on your photos then I would suggest yes, but if your happy with the results you're getting then no point buying something that you don't need.

No one can tell you what you need in regards to gear.....people can only offer advice.

Depending what you are wanting to shoot or what issues you are experiencing will dictate the feedback you recieve from other members but ultimately they can only offer help based on their own experiences ....after that it is down to you to make a decission
 
brad28 said:
I've got a 18-55 canon with a polarised filter, the lens is mainly for landscape photography and a 55-250 canon with a UV filter which is normally for wildlife photography

I done have a hood for either of them, should I?
Click to expand...

Yes.

The uv thing is very much a personal choice - I nearly always use one, others don't - but I think we all agree that a hood is pretty much a must. It cuts down flare and gives protection.
 
After spending a few hundred pounds on various UV filters and CPL filters I was on the verge of returning my 7D because of poor quality photos. I took the UV filter off one lens and tried it again and the result was nothing short of amazing.. I only ever use UV filters if it's really poor weather or dusty and only ever use the CPL when I'm after certain effects. A dslr is not affected by UV light meaning there's no use for a filter to cut it out. The hood is always on for protection for me, but this is only my opinioin but since I stopped using the UV filters my photos have become much better.
 
brad28 said:
any other reason for using a hood rather than protection?
Click to expand...

Yes - a hood isn't designed for use as lens protection, it reduces flare and also can improve the contrast in your shots, if you want the best from your shots you should use one all the time, the bonus is that it does also happen to provide some protection too.

You'll need to decide yourself on UV filters - they don't provide any image benefits. Polarisers are another matter and are an excellent filter for landscapes adding saturation and sometimes reducing haze

Simon
 
If you fancy a bit of "blue peter" there are two websites that "supposedly" provide printable lenshood for FX abd DX lenses. But the one I tried was to big, don't know if i picked the wrong size or printed it wrong..:(

But... it may look a bit naff when you make one:nuts:, at least you can see if there is any benefit for you by having something on the end of your lens.
 
Last edited:
vizzair said:
If you fancy a bit of "blue peter" there are two websites that "supposedly" provide printable lenshood for FX abd DX lenses. But the one I tried was to big, don't know if i picked the wrong size or printed it wrong..:(

But... it may look a bit naff when you make one:nuts:, at least you can see if there is any benefit for you by having something on the end of your lens.
Click to expand...

At the same time, why not draw a red line on a sheet of white paper and wrap it around you lens for that authentic 'L' look? :lol::lol::lol:
 
gramps said:
A hood is protection.
Click to expand...

thre primary purpose of a hood is not protection; it's to act like the peak of a cap to prevent flare when you are shooting into the sun.
 
Last edited:
simonkit said:
Yes - a hood isn't designed for use as lens protection, it reduces flare and also can improve the contrast in your shots, if you want the best from your shots you should use one all the time, the bonus is that it does also happen to provide some protection too.

You'll need to decide yourself on UV filters - they don't provide any image benefits. Polarisers are another matter and are an excellent filter for landscapes adding saturation and sometimes reducing haze

Simon
Click to expand...

Hoods ARE designed to protect the lens (hense the toughened plastic used by the OEM manufacturers)!
 
Last edited:
jon ryan said:
At the same time, why not draw a red line on a sheet of white paper and wrap it around you lens for that authentic 'L' look? :lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...

The idea of the paper one is to see if a lens hood helps with the flare and contrast, not to make it look good, if it works , go buy a plastic or metal one that fits, or even the branded ones.
 
vizzair said:
The idea of the paper one is to see if a lens hood helps with the flare and contrast, not to make it look good, if it works , go buy a plastic or metal one that fits, or even the branded ones.
Click to expand...

Umm, a hood does help reduce flare. Well known fact.
 
odd jim said:
Hoods ARE designed to protect the lens (hense the toughened plastic used by the OEM manufacturers)!
Click to expand...


Glad you edited your original reply as it looked like the thread was about to turn into a panto:lol:

As others have already mentioned too lens hoods are definitely useful for protection but it's not the reason lens manufacturers supply them - their primary purpose is flare reduction, the protection is an added bonus. I'm guessing here but I'd say that plastic is now used as it's cheaper/lighter and easier to manufacture than the metal hoods that used to be supplied with lenses.
 
simonkit said:
Glad you edited your original reply as it looked like the thread was about to turn into a panto:lol:

As others have already mentioned too lens hoods are definitely useful for protection but it's not the reason lens manufacturers supply them - their primary purpose is flare reduction, the protection is an added bonus. I'm guessing here but I'd say that plastic is now used as it's cheaper/lighter and easier to manufacture than the metal hoods that used to be supplied with lenses.
Click to expand...

Lol!

Indeed, their primary aim is to reduce glare (and I'd never be without one) but they've certainly helped maintain good condition of the business end of my lenses over the years (I think they've been up against every inch of Silverstone's catch fencing!). But they are destined to take impact as well, which is why I'm always reluctant to buy cheapo ebay ones even though OEM hoods are frankly a rip off!
 
Last edited:
Ok, ive made up my mind that I want to get a UV filter
Should I get a cheepo £5 one or a Hoya one?
 
redddraggon said:
If you going to put a filter on get the most expensive you can afford. Flaring is nasty on the cheaper ones.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't bother with any type of UV filter. But put a £5 one on and you may as well be shooting through the bottom of a bottle.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top