Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 28, 2009, 6:23 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Interesting practical twist. I use my DL with the FA 50mm when we go to family gatherings and Annette was (understandably) afraid that I would scratch some table tops with the hard metal hood. So off came the metal hood and on went an A1 Skylight filter and a soft rubber hood. I need the filter because the rubber hood doesn't protect the front lens element from fingers and other objects as the deep metal one does. As for filter flare, if I find myself in the right conditions I will remove the filter.

Sometimes practical matters have to supersede ultimate image quality.
__________________
Ira
Riverview, NB, Canada
http://aicphotography.blogspot.com/
_______________________________
Current equipment
Pentax K5, K3:
FA 35mm f2, FA 50 f1.4, FA 28-70mm f4, FA 28-80mm f3.5-5.6, FA 80-320mm f4.5-5.6, F 50mm f1.7, Tamron SP 70-200mm f2.8 Di, DA 10-17 f3.5-4.5, DA 14 f2.8, DA 16-45mm f4, DA 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 WR, DA 50-200mm f4-5.6 WR, AF-540FGZ

Olympus E-P2, E-P5, OM-D E-M1: 9mm to 150mm lenses

_______________________________
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2009, 6:44 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

Count me in the "dont use" Group. I prefer to use a lense hood
Black Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2009, 7:21 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default

Even though I consider my self a pixel peeper,with the exception of seeing flare I have a hard time telling the difference in images with and without UV filters. I'd be interested to see samples of what folks consider to be degraded images as a result of using a UV filter.

Similar to Ira, if I am in a situation where flare or ghosting is a problem, I remove the UV filter. On the other hand, some times a flare can add an artistic touch to an image.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2009, 7:52 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Keltech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Andover, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,178
Default

I am also one who does not use UV filters. I rely on the lens hood and lens cap to protect my lens.

On my Tokina 80-400mm the lens hood is quite deep and the lens cap did not come with a center pinch cap so in order to remove the lens cap I had to first remove the lens hood and then put it back on again and it became cumbersome.

I solved the problem by permanently removing the lens cap and in its place I use a product that I bought at the supermarket called Cover Mate. They come in small medium and large sizes. The picture below illustrates the product better than words.

I find this to be a nice solution for keeping my lens clean and quickly ready to use. Unlike a lens cap if I lose it no biggie there cheap.

Lou

Keltech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2009, 10:38 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,076
Default

I'm trying a different filter with my latest lens...a Pentax 50 mm F2.8 Macro. Instead of a B+W UV filter, I have a B+W Clear filter.
lesmore49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2009, 5:13 AM   #26
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: South-Eastern Minnesota
Posts: 40
Default

I hope this helps manteiv, I found this and was quite interested in it myself http://forums.steves-digicams.com/pe...eflection.html
AZK6er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2009, 7:05 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
bilybianca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hassleholm, Sweden
Posts: 3,435
Default Not a scratch in 23 years

I'm the one who diverge from the majority here. I do use (high quality) filters on my lenses. It's not that I'm very afraid of bumping into something and damage the front lens. It's more got to do with my undisciplined way of cleaning the front lens with my t-shirt or whatever. After 20+ years my premium lenses still don't have even a tiny scratch. The filters do have, but I can replace them every odd ten years without selling my house.
When in an "Ira" situation i can temporarily dismount the filter.

Kjell
bilybianca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2010, 12:50 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default Forgot to remove the filter from the FA50

The image tells all. Compare the blue/green dots to the lights on the tree. Expensive multi-coated filters may work well but the mid range Hoya I used just doesn't cut it. I put a Cokin adapter with plastic hood on the lens after this. It doesn't scratch tabletops and protects the front element.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Ira
Riverview, NB, Canada
http://aicphotography.blogspot.com/
_______________________________
Current equipment
Pentax K5, K3:
FA 35mm f2, FA 50 f1.4, FA 28-70mm f4, FA 28-80mm f3.5-5.6, FA 80-320mm f4.5-5.6, F 50mm f1.7, Tamron SP 70-200mm f2.8 Di, DA 10-17 f3.5-4.5, DA 14 f2.8, DA 16-45mm f4, DA 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 WR, DA 50-200mm f4-5.6 WR, AF-540FGZ

Olympus E-P2, E-P5, OM-D E-M1: 9mm to 150mm lenses

_______________________________

Last edited by Monza76; Jan 2, 2010 at 12:53 PM.
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2010, 4:24 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
penolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
Default

Case in point: I just received a used Sigma 17-10 Macro - sold at a good price - with some spots on the lens surface, which the seller didn't want to try removing. Since it was returnable, and a lens so highly praised on this forum, I took a chance, and a little warm breath and a swipe with lens paper later, I had an LNIB lens. Had the seller used a filter, he probably never would have wanted to sell the lens, or if he did, someone else might have gotten to it before I did. I don't know what the spots were, but had they been something damaging, or if he tried to clean them off improperly, the coating - or worse, the lens surface - could have been damaged. An ounce of prevention . . . .

Incidentally, I hadn't known the lens barrel would be marked with magnification ratios that appear as the barrel extends, which means it has been optimized for the near field, rather than being just another "macro" zoom lens with a close-focusing distance. I am a happy camper - and there is now a Hoya filter on the lens.
__________________
.
.
If life brings you lemons, you can make lemonade.

Last edited by penolta; Jan 2, 2010 at 4:29 PM.
penolta 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 10:53 AM.