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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 25, 2009, 8:13 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 20
Default UV haze Lens filter question

I plan on getting a UV Haze filter for my Canon XS for protection of the lens and also a planned beach vacation on the bright, sunny, coast.

My question is: do I have to remove the filter in "normal" shooting, and/or indoor photgraphy?

From what I've read. it's a good idea to have the filter as a protector. I'm worried that the filter will have an effect on the quality of indoor shots, and cloudy, overcast days while shootong?

thanks for the help,

cheers!
Homebrew5454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 25, 2009, 8:45 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Use of a UV filter is controversial with digital (since IMO, the only real benefit you'll see with modern digital cameras is that they'll help protect the lens, at the risk of image degradation from flare related problems if shooting in harsher lighting).

Here is a recent thread with a link to some reviews of popular UV filters. Some are much better than others (especially where loss of contrast from flare comes into the equation).

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/pe...lter-test.html

If you're not shooting into brighter light sources, you may not be able to see any difference with most of them, though.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2009, 8:56 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

For photos from a "beach vacation on the bright, sunny, coast", you might want to consider a Polarizing filter as well. It will cut down on glare.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2009, 9:44 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
John at the Beach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southeastern NC
Posts: 491
Default UV's in the bag...

Homebrew....
I was a die hard UV user for the longest time...After reading and thinking and reading more, I stopped using them...The main reason, the loss of 1 or more f stops...Not a big deal out side but inside I wanted the full use of my 2.8L lenses...Some will argue about protecting the lens...If you use a lens hood, which at the beach is a bigger help than a UV in my opinion, you wont be sticking your fingers on the lens or bumping it against something...Just get a quality lens cleaner and cloth and your good to go...75% of my shooting is on the beach or near the beach...Salt is my main concern so I also wipe the camera and lens down each time with a damp cloth or paper towel...I do agree with TCav though about a polarizer...If your planning on being around water a lot, this filter will amaze you...Even the clouds and sky will jump out of the picture..
Get ready though, depending on the lens size, they are not cheap...
John at the Beach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2009, 10:28 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

A UV filter shouldn't cause any significant loss of light (i.e., your "loss of 1 or more f stops" comment), unless the filter coatings are *very* bad and/or you're shooting into harsher lighting. Typical light transmission within the visible spectrum should be around 90% with most UV filters.

Now, a typical polarizer will cause significant light loss (usually a couple of stops, depending on how the filter is rotated). But, a UV filter should allow most of the visible spectrum to go through.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2009, 11:14 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Alan T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980
Default

I used a good quality UV filter to protect the lenses on all my still cameras, in the olden days, and it was there all the time.

Nowadays, with a motorised extending lens on my digital superzooms and compact, it would be a pain in the neck to have one, involving extension tubes, and so on. I just have to be very careful to protect the front element as best I can.
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2009, 11:28 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

There are arguments for and against the use of UV and other 'Protection' filters. If you're talking about a typical kit lens, if it gets damaged, you may be thankful for the opportunity to replace it with something better or more suitable.

And sometimes a broken filter will damage a lens anyway.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2009, 10:55 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

I have a high quality UV filter on my camera and keep it there because I photograph in the elements of fire and smoke and blood etc. Never really notice any downgrade or loss of light when doing any type of photos. I also have a good polarizing filter that I use when I am on the water and it helps a lot of flare and glare when shooting to and around water.

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2009, 12:28 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 20
Default Thanks everyone.

as always. a wealth of information.

Homebrew5454 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 9:47 AM.