Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   Nikon Lenses (
-   -   Should I put some kind of filter and hood on my lenses? (

rcfuzz Jun 13, 2007 4:20 PM

Just got a D40 with the kit lens and the 55-200mm VR lens. Should I put some kind of filter to protect the front element or will that just be adding unnecessary glass? Also, should I get a lens hood for these lenses?

tjsnaps Jun 13, 2007 8:09 PM

The lenes should have came with a lens hood if you bought it new. If not it is a good idea to have one to shield the lens from stray light that can cause glare. Each hood is designed to match the lens. But if you get a generic one just make sure it is not too deep and causes vignetting .

A UV filter on left on each lens to protect it from dust scratches etc. is a good idea. Some people don't like doing this claiming the extra glass causes loss of image quality. But I don't think that's a problem as long as you get a good filter. And I have replaced a few filters where I would have had to replace the lens had the filter not been there.

rcfuzz Jun 13, 2007 8:27 PM

tjsnaps wrote:

The lenes should have came with a lens hood if you bought it new.
I just got the camera and lenses yesterday. The 55-200mm came with a hood and the D40 kit lens did not. I'll look into the UV filter. Thanks.

nexusworks Jun 15, 2007 7:38 AM

Absolutely you should protect your lens unless you are rich.

There are specialised DMC Hoya filters that acter for Digital camera lenses. They are thiner and suit for this purpose.

PeterP Jun 15, 2007 8:54 AM

You have asked one of those religous questons :G

Some people mount a UV filter on every lens and never take it off, feeling it protects the lenses.

Some people refuse to mount a UV filter because it adds another pair of air/glass interfaces to the lens and every lens/glass interface is a soucre of lens flair and image degradation.

I use a UV filter when I feel there is a high risk of troubles like blown sand or salt on a beach or other bad environment, otherwise I shoot without one.

If you do decide to use one make sure it is a good high quality brand, my 105mm filter for my 300mm lens cost just under 300$. Good quality filters are not cheep.

A filter I find much more usefull is a circular poalizer, but it comes with a 2-3 stop cost in light loss. Used right they knock out reflections nicely.
Here it took out all the surface reflections and allowd me to see the boats detailes.
My Flicker Photo stream

The lens hoods are another story, they are very usfull in knocking out stray light that may cause falir and they offer some protection for the front lens element.
I've noticed several manfacturers are no longer including a hood with the lens, and depending on the lens they are not exactly cheep to buy.

tjsnaps Jun 15, 2007 12:26 PM

Need a lens hood??

Check this out

link fixed

PeterP Jun 15, 2007 1:18 PM

That link is slightly defective, needs the trailing </a> removed.

But it is an interesting link indeede!
I paid 45$ to replace the hood on my old 100-300 USM lens, and it was just a little piece of expensive plastic.
Will have to try out these self made paper ones!

fewpics Jun 19, 2007 5:26 PM

If only for the protection of the lens, it's really worthwhile. Those pieces of glass don't come cheap but fingerprints, water, stones,insects and other forms of mess making matter do. It's easy to relpace a filter... Damned expensive to buy another lens.

WhenI first used my D80, I wanted to line up on a great shot and didn't take my eyes off the subject. I pulled up the camera, reached inside to take the lens cap off and "hello", no lens cap. It was in my pocket already.. Was there was though, was a fingerprint on my lens. I never took the shot either as I completely lost interst in it when I saw the cardinal sin on my lens.Once bitten, twice shy... From that moment onward I have put a good quality U/V filter on every lens, except the 60mm micro with its very recessed lens and the type of shots I take with it (up close, lots of sunlight and usually very sheltered).

Since then I have touched the U/V's but a few times and it's been an exercise and a half to "fully" remove the prints left behind, but that in itself is quite a worthwhile pursuit, just how stubborn they are to leave the scene of the crime. Yet, the first fingerprint I left on that lens, I competely got rid of and I can't remember what I did to get rid of it. In good sunlight I can't see any trace of a print at all, but I can see just the tiniest traces of a smudge on one of my filters. The best remover to date is the lens pen for me. It has completely gotten rid of 2 fingerprints.

The best cure is to not touch them at all... The best backup is a filter...

Many moons ago, when I was into shooting/hunting, I had quite a few telescopic sights which could cost as much as your DX40 or more and guess what,, they too have coated expensive glass in them. I did have a solution and a bunch of special wipes I used to completely get rid of most crud but for the life of Brian, I can't remember what it was called.

Photoshop can correct the image (IF needed)... Get a U/V filter....!!!!

nexusworks Jun 22, 2007 10:38 AM

Can I just ask what type of UV filter do you guys get?

Hoya HMC (n)?

Hoya Super Pro 1 UV (o)

Hoya Pro1 Digital UV


B + W which by the way I do not know why these are so expensive.

tjsnaps Jun 22, 2007 2:27 PM

Most of mine are just standerd Hoya filters

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2