Which Filter are better, to use or not use with Pentax K3, Pentax K3II and Pentax K1?

Genki · 05-27-2016, 10:00 AM

Recently I read some information about Filters in a Pentax DSLR Cameras. Some Filters Brands they say, is good to use to protect the sensor (Like Heliopan UV/IR - UV/IR BLOCKER IMPROVES COLOR/SHARPNESS) others just Protect the Lens (Like Heliopan Clear Protection). Some others say are better not use anything.
So, The question is: Which Filter are better, to use or not use with Pentax K-3, Pentax K-3 II and Pentax K-1?

Attached Images

Last edited by Genki; 05-27-2016 at 10:05 AM.

**jatrax** · 05-27-2016, 10:38 AM

Nothing, waste of money IMHO.

If you feel better with a filter on get a good quality protection filter, uv blocking does nothing on digital.

Genki · 05-27-2016, 10:41 AM

That's exactly what I think, for me made the picture worst and loose some sharpness.

**BigDave** · 05-27-2016, 10:44 AM

If you are working in a dirty or hazardous situation, then using a UV filter for protection is a good idea. I know someone who worked with the local fire department taking pictures (while they were working) and after one fire he looked at the front of his UV filter and noticed an odd streaking. It was the multicoating that had gotten so hot it started oozing down the filter! The same would have happened to his lens if the filter was not there.

Any place with windy conditions where dust can be thrown at the lens, or any other number of things can get on the front lens element, I would suggest a UV filter. Just make certain it is multicoated. Other than that, they are generally not necessary and can cause issues with sharpness by introducing another surface to catch light and create lens flair. If shooting into the light, I would not recommend a filter unless it is necessary for the image (polarizer, graduated ND, etc.).

PS- a good quality optical glass filter also filters a fair amount of UV, so clear and UV may do the same thing!

Regards,

BD

Last edited by BigDave; 05-27-2016 at 10:47 AM. Reason: Added content

Genki · 05-27-2016, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by BigDave

If you are working in a dirty or hazardous situation, then using a UV filter for protection is a good idea. I know someone who worked with the local fire department taking pictures (while they were working) and after one fire he looked at the front of his UV filter and noticed an odd streaking. It was the multicoating that had gotten so hot it started oozing down the filter! The same would have happened to his lens if the filter was not there.

Any place with windy conditions where dust can be thrown at the lens, or any other number of things can get on the front lens element, I would suggest a UV filter. Just make certain it is multicoated. Other than that, they are generally not necessary and can cause issues with sharpness by introducing another surface to catch light and create lens flair. If shooting into the light, I would not recommend a filter unless it is necessary for the image (polarizer, graduated ND, etc.).

PS- a good quality optical glass filter also filters a fair amount of UV, so clear and UV may do the same thing!

Regards,

BD

I agree. I tried to take some pictures with Heliopan UV/IR a night and I noticed some flair and loose some sharpness.

aoeu · 05-27-2016, 11:06 AM

Circular Polarizing filters make some sense in the digital age. So do neutral density filters.

There are some very strange color filters that make sense with film. Some work better with color film and some work better with B+W film.

IgorZ · 05-27-2016, 11:35 AM

The other question is price and quality. I have heard people say one should buy an expensive filter, otherwise one wastes the lens potential. Then I saw a review where there was no correlation between price and quality. More expensive filters were not consistently better, than cheap ones...

Genki · 05-27-2016, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by aoeu

Circular Polarizing filters make some sense in the digital age. So do neutral density filters.

There are some very strange color filters that make sense with film. Some work better with color film and some work better with B+W film.

To keep a filter everyday without changed, I believe protection filter are the best idea to keep your lens clean and protect the value against any environment moisture.

**clackers** · 05-27-2016, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by IgorZ

The other question is price and quality. I have heard people say one should buy an expensive filter, otherwise one wastes the lens potential. Then I saw a review where there was no correlation between price and quality. More expensive filters were not consistently better, than cheap ones...

Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green.

mee · 05-28-2016, 03:49 PM

Polarizer and Neutral Density are still useful on digital. UV are not since that was a film-only issue.

sherrvonne · 05-28-2016, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by clackers

Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green.

Hopefully I'm not asking a stupid question: Can you tell just looking at it on the camera review screen or is it necessary to look at it in raw from a computer view screen in Lightroom etc?

**Kerrowdown** · 05-28-2016, 11:41 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Genki

Which Filter are better

The one you leave at home...

Apart from occasional specialist uses, likes of ND or polarisers.

For protection and improved contrast, lens hoods are the way to go.

**newmikey** · 05-29-2016, 12:07 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Kerrowdown

The one you leave at home...

Apart from occasional specialist uses, likes of ND or polarisers.

For protection and improved contrast lens hoods are the way to go.

+1

UV and so-called "protection" filters are expensive nonsense.

silvershoes · 05-29-2016, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by clackers

Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green.

True enough, although that's usually easily fixed during RAW processing using the eyedropper.

Personally, filters were more useful when shooting film. Digitally I find ND grads and polarizers the most useful, "protective" filters like the UV a waste of time and money, and certain specialty filters like the blue-gold useful only when going for a specific effect. (Watch early episodes of CSI Miami and it's obvious somebody fell in love with the tobacco filter hee) So to the OP, don't spend money on any filter unless you can name what you hope to achieve by using it.

MadMathMind · 05-29-2016, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by silvershoes

certain specialty filters like the blue-gold useful only when going for a specific effect. (Watch early episodes of CSI Miami and it's obvious somebody fell in love with the tobacco filter hee)

Much of this can be accomplished in camera with clever use of white balance. If you want to make a forest seem like night on an overcast day, set to Tungsten and underexpose a stop or two. Watch the magic

05-27-2016, 10:00 AM	#1
Genki Forum Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72	Which Filter are better, to use or not use with Pentax K3, Pentax K3II and Pentax K1? Recently I read some information about Filters in a Pentax DSLR Cameras. Some Filters Brands they say, is good to use to protect the sensor (Like Heliopan UV/IR - UV/IR BLOCKER IMPROVES COLOR/SHARPNESS) others just Protect the Lens (Like Heliopan Clear Protection). Some others say are better not use anything. So, The question is: Which Filter are better, to use or not use with Pentax K-3, Pentax K-3 II and Pentax K-1? Attached Images Last edited by Genki; 05-27-2016 at 10:05 AM.

05-28-2016, 11:41 PM - 1 Like	#12
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,804	Originally posted by Genki Which Filter are better The one you leave at home... Apart from occasional specialist uses, likes of ND or polarisers. For protection and improved contrast, lens hoods are the way to go. Last edited by Kerrowdown; 05-29-2016 at 12:15 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
(Update) Use of Pentax mount SIGMA interchangeable lenses when attached to the K1	OoKU	Pentax News and Rumors	202	04-13-2017 04:28 AM
Which Lens are better to K3:Pentax 43 - Pentax 55mm - Sigma 35mm Art - Sigma 30mm Art	Genki	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	20	05-13-2016 12:15 PM
Which Support for K3II Astrotracer or Pixel Shift Feature Use	C_Jones	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	33	11-25-2015 12:40 PM
Which camera/brand did you use before switching to Pentax and why?	axelm7	Pentax DSLR Discussion	105	11-25-2014 10:18 PM
Advice on which to purchase, Pentax K-5IIs or Pentax K3	DCphotog	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	16	08-19-2014 07:26 AM

05-27-2016, 10:38 AM	#2
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Nothing, waste of money IMHO. If you feel better with a filter on get a good quality protection filter, uv blocking does nothing on digital.

05-27-2016, 10:41 AM	#3
Genki Forum Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72 Original Poster	That's exactly what I think, for me made the picture worst and loose some sharpness.

05-27-2016, 10:44 AM	#4
BigDave Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Hudson Valley, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,626	If you are working in a dirty or hazardous situation, then using a UV filter for protection is a good idea. I know someone who worked with the local fire department taking pictures (while they were working) and after one fire he looked at the front of his UV filter and noticed an odd streaking. It was the multicoating that had gotten so hot it started oozing down the filter! The same would have happened to his lens if the filter was not there. Any place with windy conditions where dust can be thrown at the lens, or any other number of things can get on the front lens element, I would suggest a UV filter. Just make certain it is multicoated. Other than that, they are generally not necessary and can cause issues with sharpness by introducing another surface to catch light and create lens flair. If shooting into the light, I would not recommend a filter unless it is necessary for the image (polarizer, graduated ND, etc.). PS- a good quality optical glass filter also filters a fair amount of UV, so clear and UV may do the same thing! Regards, BD Last edited by BigDave; 05-27-2016 at 10:47 AM. Reason: Added content

05-27-2016, 10:50 AM	#5
Genki Forum Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigDave If you are working in a dirty or hazardous situation, then using a UV filter for protection is a good idea. I know someone who worked with the local fire department taking pictures (while they were working) and after one fire he looked at the front of his UV filter and noticed an odd streaking. It was the multicoating that had gotten so hot it started oozing down the filter! The same would have happened to his lens if the filter was not there. Any place with windy conditions where dust can be thrown at the lens, or any other number of things can get on the front lens element, I would suggest a UV filter. Just make certain it is multicoated. Other than that, they are generally not necessary and can cause issues with sharpness by introducing another surface to catch light and create lens flair. If shooting into the light, I would not recommend a filter unless it is necessary for the image (polarizer, graduated ND, etc.). PS- a good quality optical glass filter also filters a fair amount of UV, so clear and UV may do the same thing! Regards, BD I agree. I tried to take some pictures with Heliopan UV/IR a night and I noticed some flair and loose some sharpness.

05-27-2016, 11:06 AM	#6
aoeu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Oregon Posts: 496	Circular Polarizing filters make some sense in the digital age. So do neutral density filters. There are some very strange color filters that make sense with film. Some work better with color film and some work better with B+W film.

05-27-2016, 11:35 AM	#7
IgorZ Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Ottawa Posts: 1,735	The other question is price and quality. I have heard people say one should buy an expensive filter, otherwise one wastes the lens potential. Then I saw a review where there was no correlation between price and quality. More expensive filters were not consistently better, than cheap ones...

05-27-2016, 11:37 AM	#8
Genki Forum Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by aoeu Circular Polarizing filters make some sense in the digital age. So do neutral density filters. There are some very strange color filters that make sense with film. Some work better with color film and some work better with B+W film. To keep a filter everyday without changed, I believe protection filter are the best idea to keep your lens clean and protect the value against any environment moisture.

05-27-2016, 11:58 PM	#9
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,395	Originally posted by IgorZ The other question is price and quality. I have heard people say one should buy an expensive filter, otherwise one wastes the lens potential. Then I saw a review where there was no correlation between price and quality. More expensive filters were not consistently better, than cheap ones... Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green.

05-28-2016, 03:49 PM	#10
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Polarizer and Neutral Density are still useful on digital. UV are not since that was a film-only issue.

05-28-2016, 08:26 PM	#11
sherrvonne Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,975	Originally posted by clackers Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green. Hopefully I'm not asking a stupid question: Can you tell just looking at it on the camera review screen or is it necessary to look at it in raw from a computer view screen in Lightroom etc?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-29-2016, 12:07 AM - 1 Like	#13
newmikey Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,287	Originally posted by Kerrowdown The one you leave at home... Apart from occasional specialist uses, likes of ND or polarisers. For protection and improved contrast lens hoods are the way to go. +1 UV and so-called "protection" filters are expensive nonsense.

05-29-2016, 06:29 AM	#14
silvershoes Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: TN Photos: Gallery Posts: 58	Originally posted by clackers Check shots you take in RAW of a white surface with a cheap ND filter. You don't want a colour cast, such as green. True enough, although that's usually easily fixed during RAW processing using the eyedropper. Personally, filters were more useful when shooting film. Digitally I find ND grads and polarizers the most useful, "protective" filters like the UV a waste of time and money, and certain specialty filters like the blue-gold useful only when going for a specific effect. (Watch early episodes of CSI Miami and it's obvious somebody fell in love with the tobacco filter hee) So to the OP, don't spend money on any filter unless you can name what you hope to achieve by using it.

05-29-2016, 04:08 PM	#15
MadMathMind Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Houston, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,717	Originally posted by silvershoes certain specialty filters like the blue-gold useful only when going for a specific effect. (Watch early episodes of CSI Miami and it's obvious somebody fell in love with the tobacco filter hee) Much of this can be accomplished in camera with clever use of white balance. If you want to make a forest seem like night on an overcast day, set to Tungsten and underexpose a stop or two. Watch the magic