Which filter - a few types!

littlemonster

littlemonster

Messages
1,179
Name
Gemma
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok before I write more, I don't need talking out of this or an argument :p


Anyhoo, amazon currently has the "Hoya 77mm Pro1 Digital UV Filter" at £34, the protector filter version is £30 - how I know in general you don't NEED UV protection on digital, is there *any* situation that makes it worth the extra £4?

Now at £49 there's the "Hoya 77mm HD Digital UV(0) Screw in Filter" - which says the HD is a harder coating, is it worth the money?

I doubt it'll be on constantly, more just in some situations (sandy beaches and such), although I may end up leaving it in place, I'll remove it in the sort of conditions degradation shows.

Of this is for my 80-200 by the way, so obviously the cheapest filter I can find is NOT the priority!


Also looking, amazon also do the B+W standard UV filter for £41, or their multi-coated for £66, but that's really pushing money..
 
Last edited:
Get a Hoya HD Protector. It's the best available. (If you must ;))
 
I too shall vouch for Hoya's HD range of filters having used several CPL and clear ones.

However I'm not too sure about the issue of UV vs non-UV..
 
The HD I can only find in UV, didn't know if the extra coatings was worth it, if it is Ill go for that, thanks :)
 
You don't need the UV part for digital cameras as the sensor has a UV filter in front of it. If you were shooting with film then the UV filtration would be useful. Other than minor cost increase I don't have a problem with having a UV filter rather than a "protection" filter for digital use. All of my "protection" filters are UV.

You do want multi-coated filters as the coatings reduce reflections and flare. This is more important for digital photography than for film because a digital sensor is more reflective than film and bounces more light back towards the front of the lens. You don't want those reflected rays returning a second time to the sensor.

Hoya HD filters should be more robust and easier to clean than the Pro-1D counterparts.

I only buy Hoya HD if available, or Hoya Pro-1D if there is no HD equivalent available. However, I do not use filters, especially UV/protection, unless there is a genuine reason to fit them for a specific purpose. The majority of the time the filters stay in the bag and the lens is used hooded but otherwise bare.

Flying sand, mud and salt spray are possibly good reasons to fit a UV/protection filter. A filter may also be required to complete weather sealing on some lenses. If shooting in rain I will fit a protection filter to the lenses that need one for their own safety. For general wandering about in a "safe" environment, with a hood fitted, I would not fit a UV/protection filter.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Tim, know all the arguments of when you do/don't/may need them, didn't know multi-coated helped though I've only had cheapish lenses before so didn't spend out so much on a filter! :)

Thanks Steve, didn't see those before! Blind as a bat!

On my shopping list it is :D
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I knew all weren't equal, just didn't know where to start to find the differences :) Thanks, have just had a read - the cheap filters especially are quite a scary difference!!!

I don't often tend to be shooting in situations you'd notice the difference with the multicoated (though I now see why they're better!) but the cheapies aren't so good for every day I'd guess anyway!

Thanks Tim :) If there was a thanks button I'd press it!
 
.
yet another wee read....''link''

based on the results on lenstip - quoted above - i fitted Hoya HMC UV(0) to all my film lenses...well pleased

you may need better for digital [as above] ---- I found Hoya HD to rich for me..... :LOL:
 
i use Marumi DHG 72mm on my digital Sigma 17-70

Super DHG 77mm ''here''
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top