Dumb Filter Question

northmole · 10-12-2012, 12:11 AM

Yes, very green here. Do I need a filter for my DA 50 1.4 and Da 55-300? And what kind? What size? I am thinking more for lens protection, but I don't want crappy ones that will wreck any pics. Just wondering! Thanks!!!

topace · 10-12-2012, 12:33 AM

There are no dumb filters ;-)

Seriously though, there are reasons to use filters and reasons not to use them. If you don't want to introduce some optical effect, they aren't an absolute requirement.

I use UV filters to keep my front elements in close to mint condition if I ever want to sell the lenses. Even with good ones, however, I do feel the need to take them off to reduce flares at night.

A hard lens hood will provide a degree of protection against scratches without affecting the image. You might want to look into that.

The front glass of a lens is generally harder to mark than you think, and it generally makes less of an effect on the image than you think. I know people with multi-thousand-dollar equipment who use neither filters nor lens caps (front or back),

calsan · 10-12-2012, 02:05 AM

The size you need is usually written on the front of your lenses. So for the 55-300, it's 58mm and the DA 50 (which oddly doesn't have it written on the front) it's 52 mm.
Hoya HMC filters are as good a place as any to start.
I mainly see the protection the filter offers as "protection against the need to clean your lenses".
Poor cleaning technique is the main risk to your lenses, more so than dropping them or walking into a wall.

You can tell the difference between a good multicoated filter (or lens) compared with an uncoated or cheaply coated filter by looking at reflections of lights in the filter.
The cheap filter will give bright reflections to any light sources, while the multicoated filter will give a very dull, often green or purple looking reflection.

ChooseAName · 10-12-2012, 03:58 AM

A polarizing filter is good for outdoor shooting in bright sunlight and will introduce contrast/saturation effects into photos that (for me!) would be a bit time consuming in processing.

If you really need to look up a filter size and the lens doesn't say what it is, check the lens database. If it's a modern lens still being sold online, the lens's listing page (on BH Photo, Adorama, etc) will list the filter diameter somewhere.

**rbefly** · 10-12-2012, 04:36 AM

Hello Northmole, Welcome to the Forum!
The ongoing debate between "Filter or Not?" rages on.
My view is that a lens HOOD is the absolute best protection for the front element in most conditions, and should only be taken off for lens storage or cleaning.
However, in very dusty, rainy or bad weather conditions, I will put a UV filter on and suffer the slight loss (if any) of perfect clarity.
So, I've invested in (1 each) UV's in every size to fit my various lens/filter sizes.
These are in a filter pouch, along with circular polarizers in matching sizes. The CPL's are very useful for bright. sunny days, high contrast or highly reflective surfaces like water, glass or chrome. They also "Pop" out white clouds from blue skies and pump up the colors in scenic shots.
Buy the best filters you can afford. I like Marumi's, others prefer B + W or other top brands. Cheap filters are worse than useless, they actually degrade the image.
With modern DSLR's and PP, "effect" filters like graduated, diffusion and color tints aren't needed, you can add these effects much easier in PP and still retain the raw image data.
Keep your filters as clean and dust-free as the lens and carry them with you always.
JMO,
Ron

Stone G. · 10-12-2012, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by topace

There are no dumb filters ;-)

- - - - - -

I use UV filters to keep my front elements in close to mint condition if I ever want to sell the lenses. Even with good ones, however, I do feel the need to take them off to reduce flares at night.

- - - - -

Same here. I feel much more comfortable with filters on when I am in harsh surroundings (like a windy day at the beach). It is much easier to clean and much cheaper to replace a filter than a lens. And I also agree: Filters can be taken on and off as the situation calls for.

Originally posted by northmole

- - - - - I am thinking more for lens protection, but I don't want crappy ones that will wreck any pics. Just wondering! Thanks!!!

Interestingly though, "crappy" doesn't necessarily mean "cheap". Someone (unfortunately, I don't remember who) here at PF posted this link recently:

http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html

Food for thoughts, isn't it?

10-12-2012, 12:11 AM	#1
northmole Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Minnesota Posts: 37	Dumb Filter Question Yes, very green here. Do I need a filter for my DA 50 1.4 and Da 55-300? And what kind? What size? I am thinking more for lens protection, but I don't want crappy ones that will wreck any pics. Just wondering! Thanks!!!

10-12-2012, 04:36 AM	#5
rbefly Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Denver, Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 2,030	Filter or Not? Hello Northmole, Welcome to the Forum! The ongoing debate between "Filter or Not?" rages on. My view is that a lens HOOD is the absolute best protection for the front element in most conditions, and should only be taken off for lens storage or cleaning. However, in very dusty, rainy or bad weather conditions, I will put a UV filter on and suffer the slight loss (if any) of perfect clarity. So, I've invested in (1 each) UV's in every size to fit my various lens/filter sizes. These are in a filter pouch, along with circular polarizers in matching sizes. The CPL's are very useful for bright. sunny days, high contrast or highly reflective surfaces like water, glass or chrome. They also "Pop" out white clouds from blue skies and pump up the colors in scenic shots. Buy the best filters you can afford. I like Marumi's, others prefer B + W or other top brands. Cheap filters are worse than useless, they actually degrade the image. With modern DSLR's and PP, "effect" filters like graduated, diffusion and color tints aren't needed, you can add these effects much easier in PP and still retain the raw image data. Keep your filters as clean and dust-free as the lens and carry them with you always. JMO, Ron

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ok, my first dumb K-5 question	ukwoody	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	15	11-25-2011 06:40 AM
probably a dumb question	WDWmom	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	10-06-2011 12:56 AM
Dumb question...	Paleki	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	5	01-29-2011 01:02 PM
dumb question	dankoBanana	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	11-07-2010 04:38 PM
Dumb question about starburst effects	jct us101	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	8	04-10-2010 07:40 AM

10-12-2012, 12:33 AM	#2
topace Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Stockholm Posts: 198	There are no dumb filters ;-) Seriously though, there are reasons to use filters and reasons not to use them. If you don't want to introduce some optical effect, they aren't an absolute requirement. I use UV filters to keep my front elements in close to mint condition if I ever want to sell the lenses. Even with good ones, however, I do feel the need to take them off to reduce flares at night. A hard lens hood will provide a degree of protection against scratches without affecting the image. You might want to look into that. The front glass of a lens is generally harder to mark than you think, and it generally makes less of an effect on the image than you think. I know people with multi-thousand-dollar equipment who use neither filters nor lens caps (front or back),

10-12-2012, 02:05 AM	#3
calsan Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,549	The size you need is usually written on the front of your lenses. So for the 55-300, it's 58mm and the DA 50 (which oddly doesn't have it written on the front) it's 52 mm. Hoya HMC filters are as good a place as any to start. I mainly see the protection the filter offers as "protection against the need to clean your lenses". Poor cleaning technique is the main risk to your lenses, more so than dropping them or walking into a wall. You can tell the difference between a good multicoated filter (or lens) compared with an uncoated or cheaply coated filter by looking at reflections of lights in the filter. The cheap filter will give bright reflections to any light sources, while the multicoated filter will give a very dull, often green or purple looking reflection.

10-12-2012, 03:58 AM	#4
ChooseAName Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southeast USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 390	A polarizing filter is good for outdoor shooting in bright sunlight and will introduce contrast/saturation effects into photos that (for me!) would be a bit time consuming in processing. If you really need to look up a filter size and the lens doesn't say what it is, check the lens database. If it's a modern lens still being sold online, the lens's listing page (on BH Photo, Adorama, etc) will list the filter diameter somewhere.

10-12-2012, 04:38 AM	#6
Stone G. Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Zealand, Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,516	Originally posted by topace There are no dumb filters ;-) - - - - - - I use UV filters to keep my front elements in close to mint condition if I ever want to sell the lenses. Even with good ones, however, I do feel the need to take them off to reduce flares at night. - - - - - Same here. I feel much more comfortable with filters on when I am in harsh surroundings (like a windy day at the beach). It is much easier to clean and much cheaper to replace a filter than a lens. And I also agree: Filters can be taken on and off as the situation calls for. Originally posted by northmole - - - - - I am thinking more for lens protection, but I don't want crappy ones that will wreck any pics. Just wondering! Thanks!!! Interestingly though, "crappy" doesn't necessarily mean "cheap". Someone (unfortunately, I don't remember who) here at PF posted this link recently: http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html Food for thoughts, isn't it?