[Suleeto]

I've been wondering about this... with digital imaging, post processing can do what filters used to do. I run filters on my lenses for a few reasons. It protects the lens from scratching, dust and debris, and UV. Beyond that...?


Right now I have Quantaray 1A UV filters on my Promaster (Tamron) 80-210mm AF and my Pentax-M 50mmF2, and a Rocketfish UV on my 18-55 WR.





But beyond lens protection... is there really much need for filters anymore?

[Docrwm]

There is certainly a case to be made for ND and CPL filters in the field. Post processing is all fine and good but capturing the image as close to your desired final goal should be part of your process IMHO. Not sure how you would capture, but am open to learning, the creamy white that a ND filter can help you get with longer exposures of running water for example. CPL can help in a high-contrast daylight situation capture a truer image IMHO as well.

[MadMathMind]

A polarizer is essential because it's one of the few things that cannot be recreated in post processing. You can simulate the effect but it's far from authentic. You cannot, for instance, reproduce the polarizer's ability to remove glare from reflective surfaces. If you want to see into water, for instance, you have to use a polarizer.

ND filters let you use really slow shutter speeds or low f stops in bright light. You may not need them unless you do really slow shutter speeds because you can crank down the ISO to get the shutter under the 1/8000 limit of your camera. It's when you want to do a 5s exposure time in daylight to make a glassy river that you will need an ND filter.

I like grad ND filters. You can recreate the effect by taking two images at different exposures and combining in post, but this can be a fair amount of trouble.

[hjoseph7]

The still use the Polarizer filter(CPL) to remove reflections from certain objects. I don't think I need it to darken the skies that much anymore, because I can get the same effect with my K-5 depending on the position of the sun and by increasing the saturation in PP. I sometimes use a ND filter when shooting waterfalls and things like that and I also have a set of SingRay graduated ND filters that I use very rarely, but they do come in handy on occasion.

[SpecialK]

Yes, we need to talk about this, again and again.

A) Digital sensors are not subject to UV problems.

B) I believe if you use a protective filter, you should also wear a helmet.

[abmj]

Polarizers and ND filters are still necessary as it is difficult or impossible to recreate the effects in post. UV filters are not necessary as modern sensors are not affected by UV rays as were films back in the day. However, despite what a few say here, a high quality clear protective filter on the front of a lens is cheap insurance. The key there is "high quality." Cheap filters are likely to degrade the image, at least to some extent. I don't recognize the filter brands you mention but have to wonder about anything called "Rocketfish." ???

I only put multi-coated glass filters on my lenses. Anything less is likely to flare or even degrade light transmission through the lens.

[promacjoe]

ND filters and circular polarizers are somewhat of a must have. As far as protective filters, that is a personal choice you make. I have had situations when they were a absolute lens saver. For instance I have had kids poking at my lenses, soda and beer splashed on them. While on vacation in Yellowstone my sister-in-law got too close to a geyser, and the hot spray burnt the coating on her filter. But the $2200 Nikon lens she was using was spared. There has been other situations where if I forgot to take them off, I would have problems. I make a point to keep a protector filter in my bag. It's like having a spare tire in your car, hopefully you won't need it, but if you do, you have it.

[Obin Robinson]

Yes, we need to talk about this, again and again.

A) Digital sensors are not subject to UV problems.

B) I believe if you use a protective filter, you should also wear a helmet.

If they're not subject to UV problems then why do UV filters make such a huge difference in astrophotography? The UV-IR cut and minus violet filters are quite expensive and are considered to be a necessity for imaging certain stars and nebula. Why also are there special UV CCD cameras adapted just for shooting UV (such as the clouds of Venus) if standard DSLR sensors can achieve the same sensitivity?


I use UV filters on my lenses because jet exhaust and rotor wash tends to throw tiny rocks at fairly high speeds. I've seen some lenses get badly etched by blowing sand and dust. The filters are cheaper than a new lens.


obin

[Suleeto]

Rocketfish and Quantaray are both accessory brands for a lot of little stuffs for cameras; Quantaray has been around for awhile. Still... Obin gets it. And I get what abmj is thinking about with cheap filters. And as they scratch or whatever.... but it takes me only a moment to replace one, and cheap filters are.... cheap.

Still... I'm not seeing any image loss with either "cheap" brand I'm using. And the Quantaray 1A is well reviewed.

Quantaray Product Reviews and Ratings - Round Lens Filters - Quantaray Skylight 1A Filter from RitzCamera.com

I just bought a DAL 35mm F2.4 and I'll be throwing one of these 1A's on it.

[Dave's clichés]

Nearly all uncoated filters will produce flare in certain strong light conditions, even good coated filters will have some effect even if it's very small!

Here's a link to Lenstips tests on a selection of well known UV filter brands complete with images!

UV filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

If you look there is also a further test supplement as well as Polarizer tests!

[Docrwm]

Nearly all uncoated filters will produce flare in certain strong light conditions, even good coated filters will have some effect even if it's very small!

Here's a link to Lenstips tests on a selection of well known UV filter brands complete with images!

UV filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

If you look there is also a further test supplement as well as Polarizer tests!

Ghosting, flare, and other issues are common with poorly made filters. The Lenstip reviews of CPL and UV filters gives clear evidence of the effects.

[Obin Robinson]

Ghosting, flare, and other issues are common with poorly made filters. The Lenstip reviews of CPL and UV filters gives clear evidence of the effects.

That's why the 50,000+ photos I've taken over the last few years are all with high quality filters on my lenses. I use Hoya almost exclusively. I actually will not start using a lens for outdoor photos unless they have a filter on them.


obin

[Dave's clichés]

Not to forget one thing; some lenses do lose a lot of sharpness with a UV filter even a top flight one, the FA*300 F4.5 with a filter loses a lot of sharpness, I tried a Hoya filter after reading Lenstips reviews, just the same, there have been posts to that effect about the DA*300 F4 also!

[Hamiltom]

I think people should consider hoods before "protection" filters.

It is important to remember filters were never made for protection in the first place. They were made to alter the wavelengths reaching the film.

If they were for protection, they would be hardened "Corning" or similar glass.

I get a laugh when I hear a salesperson trying to up-sell a customer a cheap, fragile filter as "protection".

[Obin Robinson]

Not to forget one thing; some lenses do lose a lot of sharpness with a UV filter even a top flight one, the FA*300 F4.5 with a filter loses a lot of sharpness, I tried a Hoya filter after reading Lenstips reviews, just the same, there have been posts to that effect about the DA*300 F4 also!

So take the filter off for those shots and put it back on to protect the lens later.


---------- Post added 01-12-15 at 07:51 ----------

I think people should consider hoods before "protection" filters.

It is important to remember filters were never made for protection in the first place. They were made to alter the wavelengths reaching the film.

If they were for protection, they would be hardened "Corning" or similar glass.

I get a laugh when I hear a salesperson trying to up-sell a customer a cheap fragile filter as "protection".

What lens hood do you recommend in this situation? Is there a nice and compact one that has a force field to deflect FOD before it scratches the front element?





obin