|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Staffordshire, UK
Posts: 99
|
![]()
Might be a silly question, but what is the advantage of using these?
Examples of when you would use them? any pictures to compare? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
UV Filters were useful in the days of film because they would filter out excess glare and haze. They're not necessary today because all image sensors already have UV filters on them. Many people continue to use them as simple protection. (Let something damage an inexpensive filter instead of the front element of an expensive lens.) The problem with that is that filters, especially cheap filters, degrade image quality.
__________________
Last edited by TCav; Jan 2, 2013 at 6:23 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Staffordshire, UK
Posts: 99
|
![]()
ahhh yes makes sense, thanks, i did not think they would make any difference to the newer cams, i've always been more than happy with my pictures, but i see so many discussions on UV filters and wasn't sure why.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,397
|
![]()
There are a lot of discussions on them because the highly unknowledgeable sales staff in the shops always try to get people to add them in to up the total amount of their sales.
Cheap filters of any kind degrade the performance of the lens/camera they are attached too. Expensive filters can cost almost as much if not more than the kit lenses that come with most consumer cameras. As TCav mentioned there is little optical use for a UV filter with digital. And regular use of a lens hood offers decent protection for the front element as well as better optical performance for the lens as well. I don't use UV filters at all since I went digital, but I do use ND's and polarizers, a top end Singh-Ray 77mm thin ring polarizer runs in the 240$us range. http://singh-ray.com/polarizers.html
__________________
Photography a fading pastime Last edited by PeterP; Jan 4, 2013 at 10:32 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia, New South Wales central coast
Posts: 3,645
|
![]()
G'day Sarah
When I go to the beach to do some surfer photography, I always have the UV on the main lens - cos it needs wiping so often to get the salt spray off it [and then when I get home the whole camera gets a wet wipe or two overall to get the salt spray off the whole camera] Regards, Phil
__________________
Has Lumix mirrorless & superzoom cameras and loves their amazing capabilities Spends 8-9 months each year travelling Australia Recent images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,380
|
![]() Quote:
Did you ever try pol filters (others are senseless) for $4.99-$7.99 from China? EACH filter degrades photo - even most expensive filters ... haha, pol filter for $ 180 ... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]() Quote:
The Glass in Front of Your Glass: All About Filters Good Times with Bad Filters
__________________
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,397
|
![]()
Said me, I do not know your other friends.
To you they may be senseless, try looking at what the real world pros are using in front of their lenses to get those wonderful images you see them produce. Polarizers, ND's and grads are still used often. And as for buying from China NO I buy local, Singh-ray are US made and Lee are UK made. Quote:
Yes it is true every extra bit in front of your lens scrambles the light to a greater(cheap) or lesser(not so cheap) extent it is what that piece of extra glass does that makes it worthwhile. A polarizer is useful, a UV rarely is (what this thread was originally about) As for the costs I am willing to pay the price for top end pro equipment, you may not be, that is a personal choice much like using or not using UV filters .
__________________
Photography a fading pastime |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
The thing that's important to remember about CPLs is that they are actually two filters, one rotating on the other. That means there are not 2 air-to-glass transitions as with other filters, but 4. So a cheap CPL will degrade image quality much more than any other kind of cheap filter.
It's your money and your images. Do what you want.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,380
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|