[35mmfilmfan]

If your doing most of you work with the camera its a skill if your edit and rearange the composition of a photo its a skillful trick.

May I very respectfully point you towards this :

The Two Ways of Life

[35mmfilmfan]

They clip in, so can't jam your threads the way a screw in filter might, either.

I currently have a Sigma 70-300 lens, with a UV filter and a lens cap on. By some means, the filter and lens cap have become irretrievably wedded (or welded) together, so that the only way to use the lens is to unscrew the filter ! I have tried filter wrenches, and a little judicious poking with a set of jewellers screwdrivers, but they remain most firmly 'an item' !

[mikesbike]

I often use protective filters, due to some mishaps in years past. So it seems logical to always employ those with multi-coatings, the more the better, to be in line with the quality of the good glass they are protecting. Then, during a shoot, they can still be temporarily removed when in a safe and stable environment, if needing to be especially attentive to any possible quality issues or any possible unwanted reflections.

However, with some of my lenses, including some of my best, since they have especially good lens hoods, and/or a design making them less susceptible to trauma, I never use a protective filter.

[aslyfox]

I currently have a Sigma 70-300 lens, with a UV filter and a lens cap on. By some means, the filter and lens cap have become irretrievably wedded (or welded) together, so that the only way to use the lens is to unscrew the filter ! I have tried filter wrenches, and a little judicious poking with a set of jewellers screwdrivers, but they remain most firmly 'an item' !

hmm

divine intervention perhaps

English Standard Version

" What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate. ”

Mark 10:9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate."

[jddwoods]

I carry my camera ready to shoot once I arrive at the area where I will be taking photos, so I don't have a lens cap on all the time

the damage was to the physical threads on the front of the lens itself check out the thread linked below if interested

I don't know when it happened so I don't know if I had the lens hood extended or not when it happened, I found the break after I got home

there is a thread showing the damage and what happened if interested. ( with photos of damage )

oops, my lens has a boo boo - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com

as a result of the damage I could not attach another filter to the lens, it would fall off until I had the " repair " done.



I now use " Tiffen digital ultra clear filters " as protection for the threads and front glass of all of my lenses

in the film days I used a skylight or uv filter but as I understand it, with digital cameras a skylight or uv filter is not needed for corrective purposes

I recall your thread about the damaged filter threads on your 16-85. I have the same lens and use the same Tiffen Digital Ultra clear on it since I do not always use the petal shaped hood with it. This is especially with the cold gray winter days we are getting into, its one less thing to bring along. I think the main purpose of the ultra clear is protection for the plastic filter threads, not so much the glass. As careful as I am, I am getting old and bump into things more than I used to. For all of my other lenses which are DA* 200 & 300 and DA limiteds, I just use their built in hoods for protection, and for when the bright sunny summer weather comes back in May, a polarizing filter for bright outdoor conditions. One thing I always use is the pinch or screw in cap with each lens while it is not in use. This is the most important piece of lens protection.

---------- Post added 12-20-17 at 05:57 PM ----------

Polarizers are great, Kombivan, and here in Australia with our strong sunlight a lot of photography benefits from their use, they're not just for landscapers.

If you shoot water a lot, like the one with your pelicans, you should use them.

On a scorching afternoon, light being thrown everywhere, the colours are still good here:

I always use them near the seashore or any large body of water. Also on a bright sunny day after a good snowfall. They do a great job of increasing contrast and depth in clouds seashore scenes and snowscapes.

[clackers]

I currently have a Sigma 70-300 lens, with a UV filter and a lens cap on. By some means, the filter and lens cap have become irretrievably wedded (or welded) together, so that the only way to use the lens is to unscrew the filter ! I have tried filter wrenches, and a little judicious poking with a set of jewellers screwdrivers, but they remain most firmly 'an item' !

Yeah, screw-ins can be finicky, 35mm - a number of things can go wrong.

All part of the reason Pentax abandoned the M42 mount and went bayonet with K-mount.

Santa says, give up on that glued combo, he'll bring you some new ones.

[PDL]

I started shooting film with SLR's in the early 70's and I put either 1A filters or UV filters on every lens I owned. Please note: my home town was at 7,165 feet (2,184 m) which means that there was a lot of UV scattered around. Jokes aside I remember Ralf Nader claiming something about safe radiation levels -- come to find out living in that town put everyone above what he considered "safe". Whoda thunk it.

During this time I was shooting Fujica SLR's with EBC lenses and when I went to Yellowstone National Park there were warnings in the entry literature warning camera owners about getting steam and water condensation on "coated" camera lenses as the chemicals would literally eat away the coatings. When I went to the beach in Southern California the surf was up with a heavy on shore breeze. The front of the lenses, both my glasses and cameras, got covered in salt crystals. If I had wiped my lenses like my brother did, I too would have scratched the lens surface - coating or not.

On some of my digital lenses I use UV filters, mostly out of habit since I live within a few hundred fee of sea level. Lots of air to filter out UV down here. I always use a lens hood and most of them have bumps and scratches in them. Then again, both my brother and my old friends are not around anymore so I don't have to worry about them intentionally putting their fingers on my lenses and laughing as they run away. I have had quite a few UV filters get scratched having them do that. I am consistent as I get older. On my 8mm fisheye and 16-50mm I do not use filters, and I have been in some pretty heavy downpours with the 16-50mm, on my 50-135mm it came with a UV filter and I have just never taken it off.

Do UV filters protect your lens? In some cases yes they do, blowing sand, dust and Yellowstone vapors etc. Do they reduce your IQ (image quality - not intelligence) not that I have seen, as long as you buy the expensive ones. If you are out and about, use a lens hood, but be forewarned, a lens hood will not stop your brother from "being funny".

[Kombivan]

Good post PDL I have never thought the seabreezes etc would have such effects.

Unclevanya you were talking about (Quote)Flare isn't all sun induced. Internal flare can occur due to poor coatings and even the dreaded fungus. Anything that scatters light inside the lens can be at fault. I can't recall if you used a filter - if so - ditch it and try again. See with your own eyes if it works better or worse don't take our word for it. Be sure to look at it in 100% zoomed in mode and do some A/B testing. The tests I have done and seen show that particularly at longer focal lengths filters can be a real negative to the overall IQ of a lens system. Really good ghostless multi coated filters are VERY expensive. And even those can cause degradation. The problem seems to be less noticed on shorter focal lengths but still a problem at times. The only filters I will use (other than the edge case I mentioned in micro 4/3 - is a polarizer or a close up lens and technically only one of these is a filter the other is an auxillary lens.)(quote)

And I would like to know more about Close up filters/lens as well I have some in the mail i think and do they have limits of use or will they work the range of a zoom lens or are they a fixed lens item?

[savoche]

I'd say do whatever you're comfortable with.

as long as you buy the expensive ones

My reasoning for skipping filters is exactly this. Cheap filters will ruin the image quality, and if I should buy expensive filters for all my lenses they would quickly add up to more than the cost of replacing a lens. So I prefer to go without a potentially protective filter (that may still have degraded the IQ anyway) and will take the hit should I one day ruin a lens. Nothing broken so far, so I'm still ahead of the game.

I always use a hood, and I always use lens caps when stowing the camera. (Well, sometimes I skip the lens cap if I stuff the camera into the bag with the hood still on.)

Oh, and if I know I'm entering a "hostile" environment I'll rather bring my little Oly Tough camera anyway. Not the best image quality to start with, but also no need to worry about breaking it.

[35mmfilmfan]

Santa says, give up on that glued combo, he'll bring you some new ones.

Since I remove the filter when shooting, I just treat the entire thing as a screw-in lens cap ! Works for me. Lens will soon be sold anyway, as my Chrissie pressie from me to me was the latest APO DG version, which passed tests with flying colours.

[clackers]

Since I remove the filter when shooting, I just treat the entire thing as a screw-in lens cap ! Works for me. Lens will soon be sold anywa.

I hope the new buyer also gets the stuck lens cap/filter as an entertaining challenge.

A bit like King Arthur and the sword in the stone.

[Kombivan]

My K5ii returned it the mail today, purchased another safe case from supercheap only $29.97 be 26c x 24c x17.7c watertight with foam in it.

[Kombivan]

My K5ii is working really well now along with the x's converter I may have also had the camera in the wrong mode bright instead of landscape and it's possible I may have also gone out of the exposure range but i am not certain about this. The camera definitely needed resetting and this is what it captures images like now.

It is far more sensitive than the k5 and I don't think I would call this a camera for snap shots as its very sensitive I think every photo will need settings checked. Where as the K5 I feel comfortable snap shooting with it. and no editing required any more yes every photo In the past since I got it I had to edit every photo to get them to look in the ball park, now I need to get in the game.