Lens protection filter

mikew

mikew

Messages
5,548
Name
mike
Edit My Images
Yes
This is not a should i or shouldn't i question as i am a filter user and have been for over 40 years, what i would like to know is a few suggestions as to the best ones out there,

At the moment ime using a Hoya on my Leica 100-400 and its the first time i have ever questioned the use of a filter,i bought it from my local dealer so i know its not a cheap copy.
 
mikew said:
This is not a should i or shouldn't i question as i am a filter user and have been for over 40 years, what i would like to know is a few suggestions as to the best ones out there,

At the moment ime using a Hoya on my Leica 100-400 and its the first time i have ever questioned the use of a filter,i bought it from my local dealer so i know its not a cheap copy.
Click to expand...

What are you actually questioning about the filter? Are you seeing image degradation/focusing issues? That's generally the main issue with additional filters over telephoto lenses.
 
stevelmx5 said:
What are you actually questioning about the filter? Are you seeing image degradation/focusing issues? That's generally the main issue with additional filters over telephoto lenses.
Click to expand...

Wondering if i am seeing image degredation if so its the first time as i say in 40 years,i mainly use a coastal area and a lake where the water birds are often close and splashing about so i am not willing to go as many times as would be needed to run tests.

Many years ago i took i new expensive Nikon lens out for the first time and got something on the front element which left a mark so there are no circumstances that will make me try it again.
 
mikew said:
Wondering if i am seeing image degredation if so its the first time as i say in 40 years,i mainly use a coastal area and a lake where the water birds are often close and splashing about so i am not willing to go as many times as would be needed to run tests.

Many years ago i took i new expensive Nikon lens out for the first time and got something on the front element which left a mark so there are no circumstances that will make me try it again.
Click to expand...

I guess the easy test is to try similar shots in a different location without the filter on to see if you see the same image degradation. I agree that the effect is generally minimal on shorter focal lengths (with high quality filters at least) but everything I've read has shown impact to longer focal lengths. On M4/3rds you're basically shooting at 200-800 equivalent so even more likely to show it. I take it you wouldn't be happy with the protection offered by a lens hood on its' own?
 
stevelmx5 said:
I guess the easy test is to try similar shots in a different location without the filter on to see if you see the same image degradation. I agree that the effect is generally minimal on shorter focal lengths (with high quality filters at least) but everything I've read has shown impact to longer focal lengths. On M4/3rds you're basically shooting at 200-800 equivalent so even more likely to show it. I take it you wouldn't be happy with the protection offered by a lens hood on its' own?
Click to expand...

No a lens hood would not stop splashes,sand ect on windy days.
 
I have never seen the sense of putting a £30 filter in front of a £500 + lens.....:)
 
I believe some Canon lenses arent deemed water resistant unless a front filter is fitted, so to choose or not would seem to be out of one's hands in that case :)
Appreciate that may not be relevant in your case but might stop the do you/dont you debate.

Dont Hoya do a range of filters i.e. from cheap(ish) to expensive? Which did you purchase? Is it a Pro 1 Digital filter, which, according to their blurb is what you should be using. Although their nano hd seem to be more expensive.

Alternatively you could get a manufacturer's filter, can you still get Leica new? If not I believe Canon do their own.
And is this purely a lens protecting piece of glass or is it a filter in the sense of 1A/1B Skylight?

Matt
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
I guess the easy test is to try similar shots in a different location without the filter on to see if you see the same image degradation. I agree that the effect is generally minimal on shorter focal lengths (with high quality filters at least) but everything I've read has shown impact to longer focal lengths. On M4/3rds you're basically shooting at 200-800 equivalent so even more likely to show it. I take it you wouldn't be happy with the protection offered by a lens hood on its' own?
Click to expand...

Problems with filters often show up on longer lenses, but not on others. Loss of sharpness and odd bokeh issues. Maybe you've been unlucky - try top of the range B+W or Hoya protectors with multi-coating and easy-clean surface.
 
MatBin said:
I believe some Canon lenses arent deemed water resistant unless a front filter is fitted, so to choose or not would seem to be out of one's hands in that case :)
Appreciate that may not be relevant in your case but might stop the do you/dont you debate.

Dont Hoya do a range of filters i.e. from cheap(ish) to expensive? Which did you purchase? Is it a Pro 1 Digital filter, which, according to their blurb is what you should be using. Although their nano hd seem to be more expensive.

Alternatively you could get a manufacturer's filter, can you still get Leica new? If not I believe Canon do their own.
And is this purely a lens protecting piece of glass or is it a filter in the sense of 1A/1B Skylight?

Matt
Click to expand...

I am easy uv/skylight or clear, i fully understand i dont need a uv/sky light, just checked and have to say age is a b*****d :( its not a Hoya its one of the latest Sigma range.
 
HoppyUK said:
Problems with filters often show up on longer lenses, but not on others. Loss of sharpness and odd bokeh issues. Maybe you've been unlucky - try top of the range B+W or Hoya protectors with multi-coating and easy-clean surface.
Click to expand...

Thanks

Interesting i didnt know you could get easy clean.
 
I know you don't really want to hear it but I think you're mad using a filter on the PL100-400.

The more you magnify the image the better a filter needs to be as you magnify the imperfections in the filter too, you are shooting at 800mm FFE which is some serious magnification. I'd be willing to bet you are getting some decrease in image quality along with all the other issues they can bring.

The PL100-400 cleans up fine and has a decent hood so unless you are at the seaside in salty misty spray I wouldn't use a filter. Mine's been all over the world in all types of conditions and is perfectly fine (mostly without a lens cap too, I keep leaving them in the bottom of pockets).
 
Last edited:
Nawty said:
I know you don't really want to hear it but I think you're mad using a filter on the PL100-400.

The more you magnify the image the better a filter needs to be as you magnify the imperfections in the filter too, you are shooting at 800mm FFE which is some serious magnification. I'd be willing to bet you are getting some decrease in image quality along with all the other issues they can bring.

The PL100-400 cleans up fine and has a decent hood so unless you are at the seaside in salty misty spray I wouldn't use a filter. Mine's been all over the world in all types of conditions and is perfectly fine (mostly without a lens cap too, I keep leaving them in the bottom of pockets).
Click to expand...

You see after damaging a lens front element on its first outing as i said above i dont think i am mad, most of my time is spent on a eastcoast shoreline with winds on most days,i will settle for the least if any IQ loss i can get.
 
You may have to get used to a different way of working - leave the filter off, and only use when necessary. That's what I do, but sea spray is always a very bad idea.

The hood on your lens looks like it's been cut down for practical reasons. For better protection, it could take a longer one without problems, and a much longer one at max focal length.
 
If you're going to use one, I'd suggest UV or 'protector' (not skylight, which has a slight tint) and go for one of the higher grade Hoya or B+W filters with multicoating and an easy-clean layer - e.g. Hoya HD, Hoya Fusion (aka Evo), B+W MRC Nano (in the thin XS-Pro mount) or MRC (in the standard F-Pro mount). Hoya Pro-1 (mentioned above) is an earlier Hoya version that works well but lacks the easy-clean layer. Both companies also make uncoated filters you should avoid - most visible image degradation by filters is due to flare.
 
Last edited:
What size? I used to use filters all the time and purchased some rather expensive Hoya HD ones that no longer get used.
 
JJ! said:
What size? I used to use filters all the time and purchased some rather expensive Hoya HD ones that no longer get used.
Click to expand...

Thanks but i think i am going with B+W from wex, hoping to be sure its not a copy
 
I use a Hoya HD UV filter and find it cleans well when needed. (y)
JJ! said:
I used to use filters all the time and purchased some rather expensive Hoya HD ones that no longer get used.
Click to expand...
What sizes do you have, I might be interested in a 72mm one if it's mint, and maybe a 77mm one too?

Oh, and before any members of the 'filter police' say anything, I use my lenses on film SLR bodies too, so that should save you the trouble of delivering a lecture! ;)
 
Mr Badger said:
I use a Hoya HD UV filter and find it cleans well when needed. (y)

What sizes do you have, I might be interested in a 72mm one if it's mint, and maybe a 77mm one too?

Oh, and before any members of the 'filter police' say anything, I use my lenses on film SLR bodies too, so that should save you the trouble of delivering a lecture! ;)
Click to expand...

That helps - but not much... :D ;)
 
Retune said:
If you're going to use one, I'd suggest UV or 'protector' (not skylight, which has a slight tint) and go for one of the higher grade Hoya or B+W filters with multicoating and an easy-clean layer.
Click to expand...
I don't use filters, but I've acquired a few when buying second hand lenses. All the UV filters I have are slightly yellow tinted. It was hard to see the yellow tint until I had one of my cataracts removed. That has greatly improved the colour vision of that eye. Suddenly the UV filters have a quite obvious and distinct tint. The other eye still has a slightly yellowed cataract in it. Looking through a UV filter it looks as though its slight yellow cast is close to the slight yellow cast of my remaining cataract. It doesn't look as though it would have much effect on colour vision, but it subdues the far blues quite a bit.

Based on this experience I wouldn't use a UV filter for lens protection. I'd want clear filters for lens protection, and UV filters for UV. I suppose if I was mostly a landscape photographer who always wanted a UV filter to bring out distant detail then I might not be bothered by the difference.
 
I was using Hoya HD digital ones. They are not cheap at all but now have had lens swap around I don’t use them but they were a better filter than the standard Hoya ones.
 
Retune said:
I wonder if you're actually seeing a little beyond the normal visual spectrum? Depending on the lens implant, some people can apparently see into the near UV range after surgery, which would presumably be perceived as far blue/violet:

http://www.komar.org/faq/colorado-cataract-surgery-crystalens/ultra-violet-color-glow/

It's a superpower!
Click to expand...
Very interesting! After reading that article I suspect I may be seeing a bit into the ultraviolet now. Gas flames on the cooker for example have become brighter and more violet, with a bright red fringe that's completely absent to the vision of my as yet untreated eye. I shall keep an eye open :) for some more scientific evidence on this question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top