Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,986   Posts: 1,524,025   Online: 876
      

View Poll Results: Do you generally leave a filter on lenses for the purpose of protection?

Voters
103. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I do.

    53 51.46%
  • No, I don't.

    50 48.54%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54
  1. #21
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,171
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    I will not propose a magic marker test, Keith, but will be the wise guy who asks the "No"-faction if they have tried to see the amount of image degradation a filter causes?

    And yes, i have.
    So i have no qualms whatsoever about putting a filter on the lens.
    I have too, and I'm absolutely convinced that an unneeded multicoated filter of excellent quality still adds unneeded flare and potential for ghosting, and a lesser quality filter adds more of the same and worse.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    74
    I treat my UVs as lens caps, removing them when I'm shooting (by screwing them in only a half-turn or so it's no big deal). If conditions are rough, I leave them on. I suspect I could just leave them on most of the time with no noticeable loss of quality, but removing them has become a habit, especially since I'm putting on a Cokin holder for a grad ND half the time anyway. So I don't know whether that's a yes or no vote, but there it is.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,531
    I leave a good quality UV or skylight on all the time...I suppose I just feel more comfortable cleaning a filter than the front lens element, but I guess that's just me being me.

    I don't have any issues with image deterioration thru this "clear" filter use, or use of a suitable colored one for B&W as when appropriate.

  4. #24
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    I will not propose a magic marker test, Keith, but will be the wise guy who asks the "No"-faction if they have tried to see the amount of image degradation a filter causes?
    The answer will inevitably be: sometimes it makes a huge difference (overall loss of contrast, multiple ghosting etc.), and sometimes it's totally unnoticeable. I simply don't enjoy having to think about whether there will or won't be ghosting from my filter and wondering I will be able to see it in the viewfinder or on the ground glass. These things have a way of not presenting themselves until you're just about to make a print. :o

    And yes I do have top notch b+w filters for when they're warranted. N.b. if you do need a filter, then you need a hood as well. (I hood almost all the time anyway, but my point is that a filter makes a hood all the more important)

    Any way you slice it, a filter- multicoated or not- introduces two extra reflecting surfaces between yourself and your subject. Also, if you are going to use a filter all the time, then you will want to put a multicoated b+w on each and every lens. You won't want to be screwing the things on and off all the time, sharing between lenses, because sooner or later you will cross threads and have to do a circumcision.

    I don't get the logic that a filter is cheaper than a new lens. So? Being careful doesn't cost anything at all. Just to be annoying, I think I will start saying that every time these discussions pop up. Nah, better not, I am annoying enough already :rolleyes:
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  5. #25
    eddym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    26
    Condoms are much better protection than filters.
    Or were you talking about taking pictures...?
    Eddy McDonald
    www.fotoartes.com
    Eschew defenestration!

  6. #26
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    I don't use them because they seem to be a magnet for dust, fingerprints, and glare, which cause more of an effect when suspended half an inch or so from the front element than they do if on the front element itself. I use a lens hood instead. My only damaged front element happened when a filter shattered in a collision that would have just hit the rim of the lens if the filter was not there. The broken glass was jammed into the front element, and caused one large scratch and two smaller ones. I use them when there is mist in the air, if I happen to have one, but no other time.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    The answer will inevitably be: sometimes it makes a huge difference (overall loss of contrast, multiple ghosting etc.), and sometimes it's totally unnoticeable. I simply don't enjoy having to think about whether there will or won't be ghosting from my filter and wondering I will be able to see it in the viewfinder or on the ground glass. These things have a way of not presenting themselves until you're just about to make a print. :o
    Well, if you just remember that filters don't 'ghost' (they can make things worse, yes), but that it is light bouncing off glas surfaces that is doing that, and that your lens consists of nothing but glass surfaces, you'll also know that you should be watching for that without filters too.

    Which leads to:
    N.b. if you do need a filter, then you need a hood as well. (I hood almost all the time anyway, but my point is that a filter makes a hood all the more important)
    Think about it:
    You are using a hood all the time. Because a hood is very important (it indeed is).
    The downside of using a filter is that it makes using a hood important, and you then must use a hood all the time.

    Hmm...

    (You noticed how i glossed over "almost". That's because it's hard to comprehend how one can worry about filters on a lens, and not use a hood all the time).

    Any way you slice it, a filter- multicoated or not- introduces two extra reflecting surfaces between yourself and your subject.
    That is undeniably true.

    Also, if you are going to use a filter all the time, then you will want to put a multicoated b+w on each and every lens. You won't want to be screwing the things on and off all the time, sharing between lenses, because sooner or later you will cross threads and have to do a circumcision.
    So buy filters for each one of your lenses. Where's the problem?

    I don't get the logic that a filter is cheaper than a new lens. So? Being careful doesn't cost anything at all. Just to be annoying, I think I will start saying that every time these discussions pop up. Nah, better not, I am annoying enough already :rolleyes:
    "Being carefull costs nothing at all" ...

  8. #28
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    :rolleyes:
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  9. #29
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    I've heard the idea that "a filter introduces two more glass-to-air surfaces, therefore adding to the possibility of increased flare, "ghosting" (? hard to see how, with fairly decent geometry), decreased contrast ... and a number of other optical disasters.

    There IS a parallel: it is common in our perception of "quality" to link the number of elements in a lens to overall quality. A six-element lens will be "better" than a five-element lens ... even though there ARE two additional glass-to-air surfaces. The argument could be made that the prestigious lens manufacturers take more care in manufacturig, use more well-defined glasses, but I think all that is offset by the complexity of a
    cohrently curved surafes, and its integration into an optical design.

    Bottom line: elements MAY be added to improve the overall performance of the lens, with due consideration of their negative effects. They are usually well worth it.

    One thing puzzling...

    A few here have responded that they will only use a protective filter if it is misting, foggy, or raining.
    Uh...
    wouldn't condensation occur equally readily on the front element of a lens as it does on the front surface of a filter?
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  10. #30
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Sukach View Post
    One thing puzzling...

    A few here have responded that they will only use a protective filter if it is misting, foggy, or raining.
    Uh...
    wouldn't condensation occur equally readily on the front element of a lens as it does on the front surface of a filter?
    I am not worried about condensation. That happens from changing temperature, and aside from making gradual shifts in temp, there is nothing you can do about it. I have never run into it except in my viewfinder when shooting in the snow after getting out of a warm car. I use filters in foul weather to physically keep water off of (and *out of*) the lens.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin