Worth buying filter for kit lens?

Hightreason · 07-07-2010, 09:57 PM

Hello all,

I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter.
Most of the good filters that I've seen cost $30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than $50.

Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter?

Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring?

Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

Last edited by Hightreason; 07-07-2010 at 10:15 PM. Reason: meant to write 77mm there

JeffJS · 07-07-2010, 10:02 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Hightreason

Hello all,

I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter.
Most of the good filters that I've seen cost 30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than 50.

Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter?

Should I instead buy a 49 or 72mm filter with a step down/up ring?

Are there any 52 mm gems that I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

I Personally wouldn't waste the money buying ANY filters (other than perhaps a Polarizer) until you have other lenses and see a need. The largest filter size lens you are likely to own (based on the Pentax line) is a 77mm. Even still, you can replace that kit lens twice for what a good CPL costs in 77mm.

All meaning, save your money for now, get your lenses, THEN decide what to attach to the front of them. Your money would be better spent on a Hood rather than a filter.

northcoastgreg · 07-08-2010, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by Hightreason

Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring?

Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

Many of the old manual focus K series prime lenses use 52mm filters, and many of those lenses are in fact gems. Moreover, a 52mm filter can easliy be used on a 49mm thread via a step down ring. So I think it would be worth getting a 52mm polarizer (that kit lens needs all the help it can get). But I wouldn't purchase any other 52mm filters unless I had my heart set on collecting some of those K series primes.

**Aristophanes** · 07-08-2010, 08:00 AM

+1 on the cicrcular polarizer. It really helps. Read up (Google is your friend) on how to use one. get a good brand, not el-cheapo eBay stuff.

KxBlaze · 07-08-2010, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

+1 on the cicrcular polarizer. It really helps. Read up (Google is your friend) on how to use one. get a good brand, not el-cheapo eBay stuff.

+2. A polarizer is your best friend against reflected sun light and will make any lens (no matter the kit or a limited) better in certain conditions.

Marc Sabatella · 07-08-2010, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by Hightreason

Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter?

Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring?

See the many existing threads on the subject of UV "protective" (as in, protects the camera store profit margin) filter and then decide for yourself if you believe the people who say they provide little protective benefit and lots of image degradation or the people who claim preciely the opposite.

**Aristophanes** · 07-08-2010, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

See the many existing threads on the subject of UV "protective" (as in, protects the camera store profit margin) filter and then decide for yourself if you believe the people who say they provide little protective benefit and lots of image degradation or the people who claim preciely the opposite.

If you plan on shooting in a dusty place a lot they can really help keep dust off the front element and are much easier and less risky to clean regularly than the front element itself.

RioRico · 07-18-2010, 05:52 PM

I don't use UV-block filters because I sometimes work with actinic (UV-violet-blue) light, which is all that early photo emulsions saw. If you are in a windy and dusty, dirty, sandy, muddy or bloody environment, a Skylight filter WILL protect the lens somewhat. Otherwise, don't bother. Always use a lens hood, which provides some physical protection without degrading the image.

Some filters are almost necessary. Yes, a polarizer, maybe two (which together function as a variable Neutral Density filter). A set of ND filters, for long exposures. A graduated ND filter -- half is dark, half is light, just what you need to shoot dark foregrounds against bright backgrounds or vice versa. Those are the basics.

I like spectrum-slicing, using different colors of light. I use violet or blue-violet filters for actinic light, and IR-pass filters for infrared. I use plain old B&W colored filters (red, green, orange, yellow) for certain monochrome effects. And a yellow filter when shooting garish neon-lit darkness in color adds a nice touch.

Be sure to pick up and discard any filter tips you see laying around, eh?

SpecialK · 07-18-2010, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by Hightreason

Hello all,

I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter.
Most of the good filters that I've seen cost $30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than $50.

Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter?

Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring?

Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

Digital cameras are not susceptible to UV. Adding more cheap (or expensive) glass in front of an inexpensive kit lens makes little sense.

A lens hood and cap will provide all the protection you should need, except perhaps blowing sand at the beach or similar conditions.

A polarizer (CPL) or graduated neutral density (GND) can be handy, though, for special uses.

subeeds · 07-19-2010, 07:07 PM

I live on the coast and love taking water pictures. I have a CPL filter if I want to cut the glare-and I often do. I am also attempting to get some shots of lightening and since that seems to happen lately only in the heat of the day, I got a 6ND filter for the clouds.

07-07-2010, 09:57 PM	#1
Hightreason New Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York, NY Posts: 2	Worth buying filter for kit lens? Hello all, I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter. Most of the good filters that I've seen cost $30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than $50. Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter? Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring? Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking? Thanks! Last edited by Hightreason; 07-07-2010 at 10:15 PM. Reason: meant to write 77mm there

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Worth buying an adapter for this lens?	magnum1	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	04-30-2010 05:34 PM
Are any of these lenses worth buying?	CrossStealth	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	02-11-2010 12:50 PM
Aperture - Worth Buying?	PeteyJ	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	9	07-18-2009 09:47 AM
K20d kit lens, worth it?	Mindflux	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	10-10-2008 10:45 AM
k10 is it worth buying?	emptydam	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	11-11-2007 04:55 AM

07-07-2010, 10:02 PM - 1 Like	#2
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by Hightreason Hello all, I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter. Most of the good filters that I've seen cost 30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than 50. Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter? Should I instead buy a 49 or 72mm filter with a step down/up ring? Are there any 52 mm gems that I'm overlooking? Thanks! I Personally wouldn't waste the money buying ANY filters (other than perhaps a Polarizer) until you have other lenses and see a need. The largest filter size lens you are likely to own (based on the Pentax line) is a 77mm. Even still, you can replace that kit lens twice for what a good CPL costs in 77mm. All meaning, save your money for now, get your lenses, THEN decide what to attach to the front of them. Your money would be better spent on a Hood rather than a filter.

07-08-2010, 07:46 AM	#3
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,175	Originally posted by Hightreason Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring? Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking? Thanks! Many of the old manual focus K series prime lenses use 52mm filters, and many of those lenses are in fact gems. Moreover, a 52mm filter can easliy be used on a 49mm thread via a step down ring. So I think it would be worth getting a 52mm polarizer (that kit lens needs all the help it can get). But I wouldn't purchase any other 52mm filters unless I had my heart set on collecting some of those K series primes.

07-08-2010, 08:00 AM	#4
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	+1 on the cicrcular polarizer. It really helps. Read up (Google is your friend) on how to use one. get a good brand, not el-cheapo eBay stuff.

07-08-2010, 08:20 AM	#5
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	Originally posted by Aristophanes +1 on the cicrcular polarizer. It really helps. Read up (Google is your friend) on how to use one. get a good brand, not el-cheapo eBay stuff. +2. A polarizer is your best friend against reflected sun light and will make any lens (no matter the kit or a limited) better in certain conditions.

07-08-2010, 11:01 AM	#6
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by Hightreason Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter? Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring? See the many existing threads on the subject of UV "protective" (as in, protects the camera store profit margin) filter and then decide for yourself if you believe the people who say they provide little protective benefit and lots of image degradation or the people who claim preciely the opposite.

07-08-2010, 11:45 AM	#7
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella See the many existing threads on the subject of UV "protective" (as in, protects the camera store profit margin) filter and then decide for yourself if you believe the people who say they provide little protective benefit and lots of image degradation or the people who claim preciely the opposite. If you plan on shooting in a dusty place a lot they can really help keep dust off the front element and are much easier and less risky to clean regularly than the front element itself.

07-18-2010, 05:52 PM	#8
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I don't use UV-block filters because I sometimes work with actinic (UV-violet-blue) light, which is all that early photo emulsions saw. If you are in a windy and dusty, dirty, sandy, muddy or bloody environment, a Skylight filter WILL protect the lens somewhat. Otherwise, don't bother. Always use a lens hood, which provides some physical protection without degrading the image. Some filters are almost necessary. Yes, a polarizer, maybe two (which together function as a variable Neutral Density filter). A set of ND filters, for long exposures. A graduated ND filter -- half is dark, half is light, just what you need to shoot dark foregrounds against bright backgrounds or vice versa. Those are the basics. I like spectrum-slicing, using different colors of light. I use violet or blue-violet filters for actinic light, and IR-pass filters for infrared. I use plain old B&W colored filters (red, green, orange, yellow) for certain monochrome effects. And a yellow filter when shooting garish neon-lit darkness in color adds a nice touch. Be sure to pick up and discard any filter tips you see laying around, eh?

07-18-2010, 09:32 PM	#9
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Originally posted by Hightreason Hello all, I'm the proud owner of a brand new K-x. I didn't buy the 50-200mm with it and as far as I can tell there aren't many other K-mount lenses that use a 52mm filter. Most of the good filters that I've seen cost $30+ and the kit lens can't be worth more than $50. Given these circumstances, do you think it would be worth it for me to buy a 52mm clear/UV filter? Should I instead buy a 49 or 77mm filter with a step down/up ring? Are there any 52mm gems that I'm overlooking? Thanks! Digital cameras are not susceptible to UV. Adding more cheap (or expensive) glass in front of an inexpensive kit lens makes little sense. A lens hood and cap will provide all the protection you should need, except perhaps blowing sand at the beach or similar conditions. A polarizer (CPL) or graduated neutral density (GND) can be handy, though, for special uses.

07-19-2010, 07:07 PM	#10
subeeds Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Camden County, Ga. Photos: Gallery Posts: 333	I live on the coast and love taking water pictures. I have a CPL filter if I want to cut the glare-and I often do. I am also attempting to get some shots of lightening and since that seems to happen lately only in the heat of the day, I got a 6ND filter for the clouds.