Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 4, 2004, 8:51 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 71
Default So I found this 62mm UV filter...

But I just spent my lifes savings on a Digital Rebel (along with everybody else on this forum ). I dont have a penny to spend on new lenses currently (in fact, I am stuck using a 64 meg CF card for now, cause I sold my 256 meg CF card to help buy the camera!) but I am wondering if there is some way to utilize this filter on the lens that comes with the DR kit...

I only ask because I looked online and this lens is worth something like 63 bucks. This might sound sort of tackey, but I have never even used a UV filter and dont really know what they do.. BUT I would like to experiment because after all, I am learning

Thanks
shoelessone is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 4, 2004, 10:07 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

The kit lens uses a 58mm filter. You could buy a step up ring, but it's not the best method. Adding a UV filter only adds another layer of glass to your lens, and unless it's a optically superior filter, it will usually degrade your lens clarity. There are those that advocate a UV/skylight filter for protection, but I find the lens cap much more suitable for that.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2004, 7:07 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

And never take of the lens cap???

A good UV filter protects the lense without interfering the quality. For instance B+W UV filters. Price also depends on filter diameter.

In Shoelessone case it is indeed doubtfull if investing in a high quality a 'odd' size filter 58mm makes sense.
I rather advice to look around for secondhand UV filter and save up for better memory card. If the filter sucks you can always take it of for extreme quality photo moments (and leave it on in the street/party or other uncontroled scenes)
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2004, 10:04 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

Mathilde:

Quote:
A good UV filter protects the lense without interfering the quality.
This is what I said when I said:

Quote:
Adding a UV filter only adds another layer of glass to your lens, and unless it's a optically superior filter, it will usually degrade your lens clarity
Obviously, I take off the lens cap. I just don't think that you're gaining much putting a piece of glass between your lens and the scene unless that filter is providing a specific photographic need (such as a polarizer, or a UV filter when strong UV is present). I might put on a filter if I was in conditions that may damage my lens while using it, such as on the beach (although a polarizer makes more sense here) or when I'm doing a closeup of children with curious greasy fingers. For normal use, I prefer to shoot naked (lens, that is). Others, such as yourself, disagree and buy expensive, and very profit oriented, filters to add another layer of glass to their lens. That's OK. Whether you use a protective filter or not is up to you. If it gives you peace of mind, then thatís a valid enough reason.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2004, 12:30 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 71
Default

thank you both for your advice. I will NOT be buyiing a step up ring, but I now understand the merirts of UV filters
shoelessone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2004, 1:24 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8
Default

Gotta disagree with ohenry here (although I love his candy bars)...

A good UV filter does not degrade image quality. It improves image clarity and contrast in 90% of shooting situations. And the idea that a piece of glass deters the performance of a lens doesn't follow... a lens is a series of pieces of glass.

And while a lens cap protects the lens when the cap is on, it doesn't do anything when you are shooting and the cap is off. I've had various debris strike the camera when shooting both indoors and outdoors and I'd rather replace a $15 UV filter than my $500+ lens!

shoelessone should just buck up the $15 for a properly fitted UV filter (and change his username, since the Digital Rebel does have a hotshoe).
bdos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2004, 1:39 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 71
Default

Ok, now, I hate to do this to make all of your hard work typing a waste, but it turns out its auctually a POLARIZING lens!

SO, does that change anything?


and btw, thank you all for your input
shoelessone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2004, 1:43 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8
Default

It's probably a polarizing filter (not lens) :?

And that makes a big difference. Polarizing filters are for very specific applications. (Usually direct sunlit scenes) They kill a stop or two from your exposure and should only be used selectively. But they can be expensive (so a step-up adaptor may be a good investment).

But you still want to get that UV filter to protect the lens.
bdos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2004, 2:53 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 71
Default

yes, sorry, i meant filter. Ok I was looking online and it looks like i can get a 58mm to 62mm step up for about 9.50 SHIPPED, which isnt to bad, and for a 70 dollar polarizing filter it might even be a good investment, even if I dont know EXACTLY what it does

Thanks, as always
shoelessone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2004, 8:14 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 259
Default

My thoughts on using a UV filter for protection: I shoot in NYC, where the air, especially downtown, is kind of grimy with dust combined with smoke, car exhaust, etc. At the end of a day's shooting I am very relieved that the gunk I clean off my protective filter is not on the front element of my $1400 lens!

And when I shoot from a sailboat with salt spray in the air, or on the shore when a wind blows small particles of sand through the air, I also don't want to expose the front element of my lenses to that.

Maybe if I were a professional I would be able to replace my lenses after tax depreciation over five years, but for me, these lenses represent great financial sacrifice. I gotta make them last as long as I can!
WalterK is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:00 PM.