Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-07-2017, 08:25 PM   #31
Pentaxian
BruceBanner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,198
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by beachgardener Quote
some of the hoyas might rate well, for me it is B+W or higher end Marumi, why do you want a skylight filter?
I don't lol, that was classic eBay and Bruce fails (I search for 27mm UV filter and eBay gives me that... and then I post it lol).

Yeh the video I linked earlier talked about how sky ones were for film, interesting stuff.

I managed to actually pick up a Marumi 27mm UV filter in a camera store today for $20 so will try that, I don't think its special coated or anything so I might do some testing with that, in fact will test with the Hoya's as well.

Well as you can tell I know very little about any of this, but I have been round the block a few times and I have known of other industries (audio for example) that have products that are 3-4x price of other similar priced products that have in reality very little difference. Placebo exists for real, and sometimes people just want to feel that extra level of comfort feeling that they have the best because they paid for the best.
Often in audio there's a diminishing return. Yes the $600 pair of IEMs are better than the $60, but 10x better? More like 10%! It really depends, case by case etc.

That reviewer seemed to put a few UV filters through the test, and in the end deemed the Hoya's superior to the B+W. Was he biased? Does this apply only to the 72 or 77mm thread Hoya vs B+W? I really don't know. I'm not made of money so where possible I look for ways out of spending what would have been $180 for 2x B+W and instead paid $50 for the two Hoyas... which are apparently as good if not better, and if they aren't actually better, I doubt they are terrible, and blind testing people to shots and asking them to guess which filter was used would prolly be quite entertaining (a little like ABX testing)

If a lens filter costs similar to a replacement cap then with negligible reduction in image quality, yet offers protection and possible some quicker shooting styles, then I think that's fair. But paying $90 for a filter is quite a lot more than a cap, and I think that's prolly my bail out decision for getting one.

We'll see tho, it could be that the $90 ease of clean B+W pays itself back tenfold compared to these Hoya if they are a PIA to get clean!

12-08-2017, 02:02 AM - 1 Like   #32
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,744
these days I don't use filters except on my 17-50, it came with the lens, a Marumi UV (not the first Marumi I've had) it performs really well so I leave it on. Lens hoods protect to a certain degree and omit extraneous light, their intended purpose.

lenses not in use have lens caps on.

For audio on my computer I'm using Asus Xonar STX sound card with Alessandro MS1 head phones, works well for the style of music I like. But recently came into a mid 70's early 80's Dual turntable with Denon amp and Kef speakers, I suppose we just try to get the best gear we can for our needs.

Next purchases for me I'm looking at the 50-135, Tair 11A 135 amongst other lenses.

Last edited by beachgardener; 12-08-2017 at 02:12 AM.
12-08-2017, 07:02 AM - 1 Like   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,332
QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
Well I googled and found an old Pentax thread as well as this link; UV filters test - Description of the results and summary - LensTip.com
That's a handy reference. They don't seem to test for the mirroring type of flare, see here for examples, which can be severely annoying. I had mid-low end filters that I took off when I noticed this, so it's something to be aware of if you shoot scenes with large dark areas and bright lights in the frame.

I also have an example to show just how much a nasty filter can degrade the sharpness of a good lens. It seems much worse on a telephoto compared to a wide angle (not pictured but degradation was faaaar les noticeable on my da14mm), and this is below the quality of a filter anyone in their right mind would use.
01-03-2018, 11:11 AM - 2 Likes   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 7,424
I use German made B+W filters, expensive yes, but they are very fine glass. As far as not using a filter because of degradation fears...as another said if you use an excellent filter...you will not notice any degradation. I've experimented...filter on...picture...filter off...picture...same lighting conditions, same subject....same lens. I'm a pixel peeper and could not discern any difference. Yes I used a B+W filter.

01-12-2018, 07:50 AM   #35
Pentaxian
angerdan's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,396
QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
I am concerned that buying a bunch of cheap UV filters will harm IQ.
Are multi coating or any other term on filters really worth it?
I did find this seller, the MRC Slim ones actually not too pricey compared to some others out there; UV FILTERS, MC-UV & MRC-UV CAMERA LENS FILTER PROTECTOR for CANON NIKON SONY etc | eBay
A good UV filter (leading brand, multicoated) does cost at least $15, depending on the filter diameter.
Well known brands delivering good quality are:
  • B+W (F-PRO, XS-PRO)
  • Heliopan (PMC, SH-PMC)
  • Hoya (HD, HD3, HD nano, FUSION)
  • Kenko (Pro1 digital, Realpro, Zéta, Zéta EX, Celeste)
  • Marumi (DHG, DHG Super)
  • Rodenstock (HR Digital, HR Digital pro)
  • Tokina (Pro Lens Guard, Hydrophilic)


QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
  1. I am suspicious of promaster, I get the feeling they are $5 filters with a 5x price hike.
  2. Protection is why I want it most. I was thinking some kind of protection is wise, especially if I am perhaps gonna ditch front capping for the day.
  3. I don't understand how this works. If the lens has multicoating then its not needed on the filter surely?
  4. wouldn't it save money and make more sense for lenses to be manufactured with the actual unit to not have any coating at all on the last piece of lens glass, but always to be parceled with a special filter that may have the coating and whatnot? Like... couldn't the last lens bit of lenses be removable like a filter?
  5. Good point about cleaning thumb prints off the filter tho...
  6. I've heard B+W are good.
  7. I've seen utube channels talk of UV filters even not degrading quality, I was wondering if tests have been done?
  8. A little like ABX testing for audio quality where some swear they can tell the difference between FLAC and 320kbps MP3 files, but when testing time comes actually they can't at all!
  1. Maybe the filter ring is good, but $5 for a few unce of brass are expensive anyway.
  2. Protection against what exactly? If it's only the fear of scratching the front lens, a clear/neutral/protection filter is enough. Protection agains flying objects (stones etc.) is harder to find, but Hoya HD has hardened glass to protect from stronger impacts (also Hoya HD3, Sigma Ceramic protector and Novo Sapphire).
  3. Every air/glass surface means around 8% loss of transmission (brightness). So the only way to build current lens designs with up to 30 elements is using high grade multicoating.
  4. Doen't make any sense, see 4. Would greatly increase the price for the lens, since it would become modular and more bulky. Also less people would buy a bigger lens which is more expensive, which makes it even more expensive. You can get the DA 560mm, which has a rear filter holder which is part of the optical design.
  5. Today's coating also have several functions for repelling water, dust and finger prints.
  6. B+W is a brand of german Schneider-Kreuznach and one of the leading filter manufacturers in the world.
  7. YouTube channels aren't specialized in filters, only good sources are in text (filterzone UV and Clear Lens Protection Filters Review HOYA HD Protector Filter Review Lens Rentals | Blog ).
  8. Many things can be measired, especially in optics. FIlters can be categorized by glass quality (thickness, hardness), coating quality (transmission, reflectance) and coating surface features (like anti-stain, anti-static, hydrophilic/water&oil-repellent)

Last edited by angerdan; 01-12-2018 at 08:08 AM.
02-12-2018, 05:27 AM   #36
Senior Member
JASMAZ77's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 204
Do you need to put a UV filter on a lens that has a HD coating?
02-12-2018, 10:27 AM - 2 Likes   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,893
QuoteOriginally posted by JASMAZ77 Quote
Do you need to put a UV filter on a lens that has a HD coating?
UV filters are not needed for digital sensors as they already have a UV and IR filter in front of the sensor. UV is useful for film.

Plain glass blocks all UV-B light and about 25% of UV-A. Uncoated glass typically allows 95% transmission of visible light, whereas coated glass allows approximately 99.5%. The better and more coatings, the higher the transmission. This results mostly in better contrast and more accurate color, and in many cases reduced flare.

So whether you use a UV, Haze, Skylight, or Clear filter, they are effectively in place for physical protection. There is some anecdotal examples where UV filters have both improved and degraded side-by-side compared images, but in general for digital, it will tend to degrade your image and the most significant thing you can do for protection AND improved contrast and reduced flare is to use a lens hood (without a filter).
02-12-2018, 10:33 AM   #38
Senior Member
JASMAZ77's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 204
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
UV filters are not needed for digital sensors as they already have a UV and IR filter in front of the sensor. UV is useful for film.

Plain glass blocks all UV-B light and about 25% of UV-A. Uncoated glass typically allows 95% transmission of visible light, whereas coated glass allows approximately 99.5%. The better and more coatings, the higher the transmission. This results mostly in better contrast and more accurate color, and in many cases reduced flare.

So whether you use a UV, Haze, Skylight, or Clear filter, they are effectively in place for physical protection. There is some anecdotal examples where UV filters have both improved and degraded side-by-side compared images, but in general for digital, it will tend to degrade your image and the most significant thing you can do for protection AND improved contrast and reduced flare is to use a lens hood (without a filter).
Ok then thanks for the help, I thought that a "UV" rated filter had a special coating on it that blocks out UV to the lens over and above a normal "clear" filter. I will just invest in a clear "protective filter" for my lenses then. Hoya have a special UV filter that is for digital camera lenses. How does a circular polarizing filter differ to a UV one?

02-12-2018, 11:07 AM - 1 Like   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,893
QuoteOriginally posted by JASMAZ77 Quote
I thought that a "UV" rated filter had a special coating on it that blocks out UV to the lens over and above a normal "clear" filter. I will just invest in a clear "protective filter" for my lenses then. Hoya have a special UV filter that is for digital camera lenses. How does a circular polarizing filter differ to a UV one?
Yes, a UV filter does block out more UV then just a clear filter. As I mentioned, roughly 99.5% vs. only 95% on a clear filter.

Yes Hoya does make a "UV Pro 1 Digital Filter", that has extra anti-reflective coatings and reduces the bluish cast from daylight. However, if it is in the visible spectrum, it isn't UV, so I'd love to see someone other than Hoya show a comparison of with and without that filter for improved results. I think it's marketing for the UV filter crowd going from film to digital.

Yes, a clear protective filter is your best bet, but do get one that is multicoated.

Polarizers are different than UV filters in that:
a) With most, you lose roughly 1-2 EVs of light.
b) They are used to reduce glare (not flare) and reflected light and improving color saturation.
c) They are rotated to increase or decrease the amount of polarization.
02-12-2018, 11:11 AM   #40
Senior Member
JASMAZ77's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 204
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
Yes, a UV filter does block out more UV then just a clear filter. As I mentioned, roughly 99.5% vs. only 95% on a clear filter.

Yes Hoya does make a "UV Pro 1 Digital Filter", that has extra anti-reflective coatings and reduces the bluish cast from daylight. However, if it is in the visible spectrum, it isn't UV, so I'd love to see someone other than Hoya show a comparison of with and without that filter for improved results. I think it's marketing for the UV filter crowd going from film to digital.

Yes, a clear protective filter is your best bet, but do get one that is multicoated.

Polarizers are different than UV filters in that:
a) With most, you lose roughly 1-2 EVs of light.
b) They are used to reduce glare (not flare) and reflected light and improving color saturation.
c) They are rotated to increase or decrease the amount of polarization.
Ok then thank you for the information
02-12-2018, 03:59 PM - 1 Like   #41
Pentaxian
BruceBanner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,198
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
Yes, a UV filter does block out more UV then just a clear filter. As I mentioned, roughly 99.5% vs. only 95% on a clear filter.

Yes Hoya does make a "UV Pro 1 Digital Filter", that has extra anti-reflective coatings and reduces the bluish cast from daylight. However, if it is in the visible spectrum, it isn't UV, so I'd love to see someone other than Hoya show a comparison of with and without that filter for improved results. I think it's marketing for the UV filter crowd going from film to digital.

Yes, a clear protective filter is your best bet, but do get one that is multicoated.

Polarizers are different than UV filters in that:
a) With most, you lose roughly 1-2 EVs of light.
b) They are used to reduce glare (not flare) and reflected light and improving color saturation.
c) They are rotated to increase or decrease the amount of polarization.
I posted this link earlier in this thread; UV filters test - Description of the results and summary - LensTip.com I went off that and ordered some of the Hoya, I feel they've been alright.
Sound advice by yourself tho.

I think I was the OP on this thread? I was really looking into the idea of ditching lens caps for the day during a wedding shoot, so I could swap primes quickly, and not all my primes have lens hoods (or they are rubber, collapse too easily or are clip ons and would ping off lol). I wanted a cheap protective filter and thought UV was the way to go.

QuoteOriginally posted by JASMAZ77 Quote
Ok then thank you for the information
I watched this vid just yesterday, found him actually very useful;
02-13-2018, 12:12 AM - 1 Like   #42
Senior Member
JASMAZ77's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 204
QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
I posted this link earlier in this thread; UV filters test - Description of the results and summary - LensTip.com I went off that and ordered some of the Hoya, I feel they've been alright.
Sound advice by yourself tho.

I think I was the OP on this thread? I was really looking into the idea of ditching lens caps for the day during a wedding shoot, so I could swap primes quickly, and not all my primes have lens hoods (or they are rubber, collapse too easily or are clip ons and would ping off lol). I wanted a cheap protective filter and thought UV was the way to go.



I watched this vid just yesterday, found him actually very useful; Polarizing Filter - Circular v Regular and How to Use - YouTube
Thanks Mr Hulk good stuff lol I'll give the video a go soon.
From now on I will just but a clear "protector" filter on my lenses
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!
bunch, filters, mrc, tripod, uv
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Filters I think I know NOW why they matter... gm4life Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 87 02-20-2017 05:41 PM
Cityscape Size does matter! Peter Nutkins Post Your Photos! 41 12-23-2016 05:05 PM
For Sale - Sold: 2 Rare Pentax Filters: 49mm UV ghostless and Pentax SMC UV 77mm (Worldwide) knyghtfall Sold Items 11 11-17-2010 06:41 PM
To use UV filters or Not to use UV filters?HELP NEEDED Softsoap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 02-20-2010 04:50 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:25 PM. | 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