Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-30-2013, 09:16 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 161
77mm lens -which UV filter?

I want a simple clear UV filter.

From what I see online I need to make sure its made for wide angles with this lens. the sigma 17-50mm 2.8 fixed. The one on adorama is 30 bucks and people complain that the lens cap doesnt grab the filter well.

Who else makes a good UV filter? I only know of tiffen.

Just looking for some extra protection.

thanks!



07-30-2013, 09:26 AM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
Hoya, Marumi and B+W are well respected. But keep in mind that all brands have a range of quality in their offerings. It is not enough to buy a Hoya for example, you should check to see which line from Hoya suits you as most companies make both 'value' lines and 'premium' lines.

In general terms a thin filter is recommended for UWA lenses so you do not get vignetting but these often have no threads on the front side to reduce the depth and thus may not catch the lens cap.

Also, there is not much need for a UV filter on digital, so if you are looking for one because you used to use it on film that is no longer the case. If you are just looking for protection for the glass then there are also clear filters designed just for that purpose. I prefer a lens hood over a filter for protection of the glass but that's up to you.
07-30-2013, 11:16 AM   #3
Veteran Member
abmj's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Central California
Posts: 600
+1.

You don't need a UV filter. Actually, the phrase "clear UV filter" is an oxymoron. What you want is a "clear protection filter." Hoya's premium offering is the "Pro-1" line. As mentioned above, other high-end filters come from B+W and Marumi. Tiffin makes some pretty good stuff as well but avoid their economy line.
07-30-2013, 12:02 PM   #4
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Lietuva, Vilnius
Posts: 627
Best UV filter - no UV filter.

1. You have to be very irresponsible to scratch the front element with the hood attached.
2. You have to scratch it really bad for it to have an effect on your photos. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/the-apocalypse-of-lens-dust
3.The new coatings are very good.
4. Good UV filters are not that cheap. Cheap ones are absolute waste of money and lens potential.
5. No matter how good the filter is, it is still another piece of glass in front of your lens.

If I were you, I would better spend that money on some fine Lasagne at the Italian restaurant


Last edited by Apapukas; 07-30-2013 at 12:15 PM.
07-30-2013, 12:11 PM   #5
Veteran Member
mrNewt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON, RH
Posts: 2,179
Another vote for no UV filter on digital cameras - better spend the money on a good hood if you don't have one.
07-30-2013, 01:21 PM   #6
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,982
Without getting into the filter/no-filter debate, I'll suggest the following multi-coated,Hoya UV Filter that I bought for $30 from B&H for my Tamron 10-24. Works fine for me, and I use it to protect the front element. I don't always like to use the hood because it's so frickin' big on the Tammy.

Hoya 77mm Ultraviolet UV (C) Haze Multicoated Filter A77UVC B&H
07-30-2013, 01:26 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 698
The only downside I've found to high quality (Hoya Super/HD, Marumi Super, Kenko Zeta) protect filters is when taking pictures at night with point source lights in the frame, which tend to ghost on the mirror flip part of the image, though sometimes it is so subtle I have to look for it to see it. When I do night pictures, I typically take the protect filters off. Cleaning the coated glass of the high end filters is often easier than my lens front elements, too. With greater than 99% light transmission I'm not seeing any significant degradation.

I'd also like to point out the contradiction of those who say on the one hand that it takes a lot of damage to a front element to negatively impact a picture, yet on the other say protect filters shouldn't be used because they'll degrade picture quality. I can always remove a filter anytime I like, but I can't remove damage from a front element!

07-30-2013, 02:00 PM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Perrineville, NJ
Posts: 1,373
QuoteOriginally posted by nater Quote
With greater than 99% light transmission I'm not seeing any significant degradation.
I don't think the problem is darkening; rather it is a question of how flat the glass is, internal reflections as you pointed out, etc. Not trying to take sides in the argument, just wanted to point out that distinction.

Not sure how cheap a filter one needs to get for such "degradation" to become obvious.

My only personal experience is that I do have a cheap wide angle converter that I use on a video camera, and when I go to the telephoto end with the converter in place, the image becomes noticeably distorted and low in contrast. But that is a different application.

QuoteOriginally posted by nater Quote
I'd also like to point out the contradiction of those who say on the one hand that it takes a lot of damage to a front element to negatively impact a picture, yet on the other say protect filters shouldn't be used because they'll degrade picture quality. I can always remove a filter anytime I like, but I can't remove damage from a front element!
I didn't see a contradiction here. I think the idea is that having a few small scratches on the front element is actually better than having a cheap filter covering your entire front element. I won't try to qualifies how one defines "a few small scratches", or a "cheap" filter, though.

Apparently there is a test where you can take a marker or piece of tape and cover part of your lens and you don't even see it there. I would try this but my camera isn't with me.

I did see a test somewhere where someone completely cracked the front element, even took a couple pieces out -- and you couldn't even tell in the images! Something about the way the light comes in from all parts of the lens.
07-30-2013, 02:42 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 698
QuoteOriginally posted by Tanzer Quote
I don't think the problem is darkening; rather it is a question of how flat the glass is, internal reflections as you pointed out, etc. Not trying to take sides in the argument, just wanted to point out that distinction.

Not sure how cheap a filter one needs to get for such "degradation" to become obvious.

My only personal experience is that I do have a cheap wide angle converter that I use on a video camera, and when I go to the telephoto end with the converter in place, the image becomes noticeably distorted and low in contrast. But that is a different application.
I have UV, protection, polarizing, ND, and IR filters, but have shot mostly with the UV and protection filters. Initially I went with UV because they are useful when shooting film, but I shoot film less and less these days. Tests I've done comparing nighttime point source light worst-case scenarios with UV against protection filters has shown a bit more ghosting with the UV filters, so in the last few years my purchases have been protection filters. The best tests I've seen were done a few years ago by LensTip because they used both a spectrophotometer to measure transmissiveness across the light spectrum, and they did real-world testing in a few different conditions:

UV filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

UV filters test - supplement - Introduction - Lenstip.com

Polarizing filters test - Introduction - Lenstip.com

Polarizing filters test - supplement - Introduction - Lenstip.com

QuoteOriginally posted by Tanzer Quote
I didn't see a contradiction here. I think the idea is that having a few small scratches on the front element is actually better than having a cheap filter covering your entire front element. I won't try to qualifies how one defines "a few small scratches", or a "cheap" filter, though.

Apparently there is a test where you can take a marker or piece of tape and cover part of your lens and you don't even see it there. I would try this but my camera isn't with me.

I did see a test somewhere where someone completely cracked the front element, even took a couple pieces out -- and you couldn't even tell in the images! Something about the way the light comes in from all parts of the lens.
You're probably thinking of this LensRentals article:

LensRentals.com - Front Element Scratches

The cheap filter vs. front element scratches is a false dichotomy for someone like me, because neither is acceptable. This is what's acceptable to me:

1. Shoot with a hood always. Not for protection, but to keep light that doesn't need to enter the lens from entering the lens and causing flare and a decrease in contrast (and it is unfortunate that zoom lenses only get hoods optimized for their widest focal length and that most full-frame lenses don't come with hood adapters for APS-C).
2. If using a UV/protection filter, only get one that has the least impact on image quality. Determined through a combination of cross-referenced empirical tests and personal tests in a variety of shooting conditions.
3. Remove filter whenever appropriate, and don't use a filter if it's not needed. The FA 100mm Macro has such a recessed front element I don't see a need for a protection filter. Likewise my Sigma 50mm Macro, which I keep the screw-in hood always in place and have purchased a larger cap that fits into the threads at the end of the hood perfectly, which leaves the front element recessed at all times.
07-30-2013, 03:38 PM   #10
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Perrineville, NJ
Posts: 1,373
OK, I think we are on the same page. But for other readers, just to be clear, it's not just light transmission that causes degradation. (e.g., ND filters.)

It wasn't the LensRentals article, that's quite extreme, I don't think anyone is suggesting that amount of damage is a fair tradeoff for not using some form of protection. Nor would a hood or filter do much to prevent that kind of damage either.
07-30-2013, 03:43 PM   #11
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
This is easy. Hoya HD2 clear protector. Used it while shooting my daughter with the 77 last weekend: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/232809-people-all-eyes.html#post2464795
07-31-2013, 04:03 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,920
Watch out for "thick " filters, some times the rim of the filter can lead to vignetting, nut the down side of thin filters is they may not have threads to engage the standard lens cap. I have a polarizing filter that comes with its own cap, I think it was a B&W from Germany, but the cap provided is not well retained either. This is more of a problem with polarizing filters, than UV
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
filter, lens, tripod, uv
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Pentax 18-135mm lens, Which UV Filter? Driline Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 02-23-2013 02:00 PM
Which 62mm UV Filter For My 18-250? seachunk2 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 07-22-2012 07:04 PM
For Sale - Sold: 77mm Tiffen UV Filter heliphoto Sold Items 4 12-14-2008 07:21 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top