[Peter Zack]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Like Ira I also like the Cokin system, I have a couple of P holders and 3 hood sections. Several filters (Grad ND's ND's CPL etc) and a set of filter ring adapters. So it works on all my lenses (although I don't own the 14mm). But the Z series should fit.

The setup is much more economical. Just by one holder, hood and filter, then use it on every lens you own.

[wlachan]

NEW PENTAX DA 14mm f2.8 WIDE DIGITAL LENS f/K-7 w/ 8 YR on eBay.ca (item 310209376590 end time 31-Mar-10 17:35:37 EDT)
NEW HOYA 77mm HD Circular Polarizing Digital Filter | MaxSaver.Net (hvStar)

[fractal]

Without second guessing your decision to use a filter, please be aware of the following findings:

UV filters test - Description of the results and summary - Lenstip.com

This is the order or the first and second place winners:

1. Hoya 72 mm HMC UV-0
1. (tie) Hoya 72 mm Pro1 Digital MC UV-0
2. Hoya 72 mm HMC Super UV-0

Thanks for posting this.

[Itai]

Sorry to say but you probably just did not notice.

I teach a photography class and last time on the evening when we were doing night shots a lot of people had UV filters on (of different grades and brands) and they ALL caused problems. The students really had their eyes opened when they took the same photos with an without filters.

Protective filters should only be used when the lens is in eminent danger such as near salt-water or flying sand. Other filters should be used only when needed, no more.

- Itai
Digital Camera Buying Guide, Photography Articles and Reviews | NeoCamera.com

[Ratmagiclady]

Protective filters should only be used when the lens is in eminent danger such as near salt-water or flying sand. Other filters should be used only when needed, no more.

- Itai

I'll tend to agree, here. The only thing about it is that quite often that's been exactly when I'll want to deploy a lens like that, and wides are more vulnerable than others cause you can't have much of a hood on there.

I would suggest, with a lens like that, get a decent quality UV for protection, and remove it whenever that makes sense. Which may be most of the time, but you didn't spend all that on that lens to be afraid to use it.

This also goes for polarizing filters, ... a nice one is very pricey of itself, so have a cheaper one around for if you're just knocking about and wouldn't want to risk anything precious.

The way I see it is, the wider the lens, the more likely you are to need the protection, want a filter, or suffer from a lousy one. So that's where, if you want to spend some money, do that.

Your mileage may vary of course, but on longer lenses I'm usually either wanting to put some diffusers on anyway, if anything, or the air is much messier than any filter. So I suggest the wides may be where you want the best to be. (And I'm not even a big wide-angle fan. )

[ajuett]

I had the DA14 in 2008 and didn't use any filters. I'm not a fan of UV filters as they just aren't needed. UV filters have more use on film SLRs. If the camera was around my neck and not being used the lens cap was on and the hood was on. Protection-wise you can't get better than that. The cheap UV filters are a waste of money and in my opinion the expensive ones are just that: too expensive.

Polarizers on an ultra-wide lens like the DA14 can make the sky uneven in color. You should point the camera at least 90 degrees to the left or right of the sun when shooting skies.

My DA-L 18-55 with polarizer at 18mm about 80-90 degrees right of the Sun still, uneven sky:



As for the DA14, I have many examples here; Pentax K200D & K100D Super Photo Gallery by ajuett at pbase.com that look like a polarizing filter was used. The lens is amazing, you'll like it.

DA14, no Polarizer, towards the Sun;