Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 16, 2006, 12:13 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 67
Default

Someone tell me what size filter and hood do I get to fit the nikon 18-55 af lens
jess russell is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 16, 2006, 1:37 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

The lens uses 52mm filters and the HB-33 lens hood ($12-$15). I wouldn't worry about getting filters right away. Filters should be used in specific situations to get specific results (ie polarizers or ND filters), and good ones will cost nearly as much as your lens. For someone new to DSLR's it's best to learn the basics before adding another variable to the mix. Protective filters are useless....they add nothing to the image and potentially can cause problems (flare and softness). Using the hood will protect your lens as well without any of the drawbacks. Unless you're shooting in tough conditions (ie the beach, on a boat, in inclimate weather), don't bother with UV or haze filters.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2006, 6:11 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851
Default

rjseeney wrote:
Quote:
Protective filters are useless....they add nothing to the image and potentially can cause problems (flare and softness).
I have to disagree completely with this statement. The *protective* filter (usually UV) does play an important role in protecting the front element of your lens. But not so much from knocks and dings (the lens hood does a better job), but from the dust, dirt, grime, smog and grease that is all too common in our air today.

When you are outside, it is not uncommon for there to be a breeze, or even a good wind. That rapidly moving air is impacting your lens when you are out taking photos. The contents of that air is being deposited on your lens. If you use the protective filter, it is being deposited on your filter, but if you are not using a filter, then it is being deposited on the front element of your lens.

Either way, you will need to clean the muck off. It is that muck that will degrage the quality of your images. After repeated cleanings you may find it gets harder and harder to get that muck off so the surface is spotless. At that point it is very cheap to toss the filter and buy a new one. If you do not use a protective filter, what will you do. Have the front element of your lens replaced. I don't think so.

So the protective filter is a cheap insurance policy for your lens. If you shoot exclusively indoors in a studio enviroment, then you do not need one. But if, like most people, you shoot outdoors, then it is a wise investment.

As you may gather, there are two schools of thought on this protective filter. The previous poster and I, obviously, are on opposite sides.

Bottom line it that it is your lens and your money. Which would you do, protect your lens investment, or worry about some minor image quality issues that may or may not appear.

And the presence of a filter can, under certain conditions, cause increased flare. But 99.9% of the time the presence of the protective filter will go completely unnoticed. If you start to see a problem, check the front surface of the filter to see if there is a layer of muck and grime that is the cause. Most likely there is.
amazingthailand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2006, 5:22 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
When you are outside, it is not uncommon for there to be a breeze, or even a good wind. That rapidly moving air is impacting your lens when you are out taking photos. The contents of that air is being deposited on your lens. If you use the protective filter, it is being deposited on your filter, but if you are not using a filter, then it is being deposited on the front element of your lens.
Perhaps my air quality is a bit better, but I shoot alot of sports (youth baseball, especially) and don't have any issues with muck or grime on my lenses. I don't think just using your camera outside is a dangerous, dirtyproposition. I also said, if you're going to be in an area where you might run into airborne problems (the beach is the first place that comes to mind) that in certain cases, filters are a good idea.

As was sid, this is a topic that has two sides with strong opinions. I used to use filters for protection until I realized I hadnever actually damaged anything. After struggling with flare, vignetting and inconvenience (needing to remove the protection to use a useful filter, as stacking filters is a bad idea) I took the leap several years ago, and haven't looked back. If using a filter gives you piece of mind, then by all means use one. Just don't get a cheap filter, and a good quality filter will cost good money and that adds up if you've got multiple lenses (unless you want to swap one flter between lenses with multiple step up rings). I just think you're money is better spent on other accessories.






rjseeney 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 10:28 AM.