Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-09-2010, 02:47 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex00 Quote
Both the DSLR sensor and and uv coating the lens block UV light. You don't need to throw in yet another UV filter on top. If you google this UV filter image quality topic you will find an overwhelming number of sites talking about image quality and softness using UV filters.

Should you use a UV filter on your lenses ? - Photo.net Casual Photo Conversations Forum
UV Filter causing soft images.: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

B+W clear filter offers the World's best optical glass, Highest possible polishiing technique and no degradation, veginating, softining of your photos. I was honestly surprised when i couldn't tell there there is a glass inside the ring. I even put the filter up to the light and i took me a while to see it. That's what i call quality. The filter will not degrade quality or change speed of the lens and stated by B+W and from my experience using the filter. The Multi Resistiant Coating reduces moisture, dust, and other dirt particles, as well as significantly increases the scratch resistance of its surface.

Lastly, Using common sense it makes more sense to to use clear filter since a UV filter is not needed.
I may just have been unclear in my previous postings, so I try to make my real question even clearer:
1. we all agree, that any filter will degrade the IQ of a lens. It might be unnoticeable small degradation, it might be visible.

2. we all agree, that it is sensible to use a high quality filter to minimize this degradation

3. I am not only convinced, but am pretty sure, that the property of the filter, that is responsible for that degradation, is the plano-parallelism (or lack of) and the surface smoothness (or lack of).

4. I cannot see, why a UV filter would be more degrading than a clear filter, if we suppose, that B+W will use the same glass substrate and apply same production process, including polishing to both filters.

So, I only asked, why a UV filter would lead (as you wrote) to more severe image degradation, than a clear filter. And ofcourse I meant not to compare a poor quality UV with a high quality clear, but both off the same source.

Ben

02-09-2010, 02:52 PM   #17
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,898
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
Dust simply does not get into a lens through the front element. This is really one thing, where a filter does not do any good at all.

Ben
I think it does because when you zoom in and out, the inside element compartments zoom in and out which contracts and retracts sucking in air, which sucks up dust that is in the air. That's why some lenses have a reputation for being a vaccuum cleaner such as the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS. They have poor sealing between the gaps of the lens, which allows dust to easily suck inside. Putting a filter on top significantly reduces the amount of dust that could get inside and acts as a dust filter/blocker.


Last edited by LeDave; 02-09-2010 at 03:03 PM.
02-09-2010, 02:57 PM   #18
Senior Member
Alex00's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 294
I don't understand, my answer was very clear. Why use it if you don't need it. ???
Why doesn't it make more sense to you to use clear filter.
02-09-2010, 03:03 PM   #19
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,898
I kind of agree with Ben between UV and Clear protectors. I've shot both with Hoya S-HMC filter as well as their Pro1D Clear Protectors and I don't see much difference between them. I don't think UV filters are all that different from clear protectors.

02-10-2010, 02:03 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex00 Quote
I don't understand, my answer was very clear. Why use it if you don't need it. ???
Why doesn't it make more sense to you to use clear filter.
You stated, that a UV filter would degrade the IQ more than a clear one. That is what I don't take!

I am not talking about whether a UV makes more sense or not. I just do not understand, how you could state, that a clear filter would degrade the IQ to a lesser extend than a UV filter.

Ben
02-10-2010, 02:06 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
I think it does because when you zoom in and out, the inside element compartments zoom in and out which contracts and retracts sucking in air, which sucks up dust that is in the air. That's why some lenses have a reputation for being a vaccuum cleaner such as the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS. They have poor sealing between the gaps of the lens, which allows dust to easily suck inside. Putting a filter on top significantly reduces the amount of dust that could get inside and acts as a dust filter/blocker.
You are absolutely right, that some zoom tubings may work as a suction pump. But at least in those cases I know (I don't know many Canon lenses personally, though), a filter would only cover the front lens element and not the tubes, so that any airstream can still freely float, even if a filter is in place. But that might too much of a generalization.

At least I don't know any Pentax lens (but again I never have used all the cheap consumer zooms, Pentax released over time), where the filter would cover the tubes.

Ben
02-10-2010, 02:37 PM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,398
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex00 Quote
2 Filters you must have.

B+W clear filter To protect the lens
I have a foot or more of photography books by excellent, world reknowned photographers. They are split almost exactly 50% between always having a filter and only using the filter when you need one for another purpose.
QuoteQuote:
B+W circular polarizer to remove reflections of shinny surfaces an add contrast to the sky.
I agree whole heartedly that a circular polarizer is the way to go. B+W filters are excellent, but are not the only excellent brand by a long shot.
QuoteQuote:

You Most definitely do not need a UV filter. Most people claim they use it to protect there lens. To protect your lens use clear filter. Digital sensors and modern lenses are not sensitive to UV in any way.
The lenses are not sensitive to UV, but if you are photographing at altitude, UV lenses will reduce the effect of blue haze so that distant features are more clearly seen.
QuoteQuote:
UV filter will not help protect your lens
Why would it not protect as much as the clear glass "protective" filter? This statement makes no sense at all
QuoteQuote:
and can degrade from the quality of your image.
If you use a cheap one. Use a good one, if you need one.
QuoteQuote:
Only use UV filter if you have a non digital film camera.
??????
QuoteQuote:

B+W filters can be expensive, but you pay for what you get. Not having a quality filter can degrade from the quality of your image. You don't want to place a cheap piece of glass in front of your high quality lens.
02-10-2010, 06:23 PM   #23
Senior Member
Alex00's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 294
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
Why would it not protect as much as the clear glass "protective" filter? This statement makes no sense at all If you use a cheap one. Use a good one, if you need one.??????
I was referring to sensor damage and not physical damage. Damage in terms of UV light affecting the sensor.


QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
Only use UV filter if you have a non digital film camera.
Most films cameras do not block UV, so you use a UV Filter here.

02-11-2010, 02:52 AM   #24
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex00 Quote
I was referring to sensor damage and not physical damage. Damage in terms of UV light affecting the sensor.

Most films cameras do not block UV, so you use a UV Filter here.
I cannot see, what filters have to do with "sensor damage" at all, if we are not talking (and we did not) about really dense ND filters to protect sensors from excessive light (shooting directly into the sun for instance). How does a clear filter make a difference compared to a UV filter in protecting the sensor?

UV blocking is not a property of a film camera… Film itself exhibits a certain sensitivity to UV in most cases and the camera won't do anything about it. UV is blocked by glass, even if it is not coated with an ant-UV coating. this coating only makes this UV filtering stronger. – And I can still not see, why this would degrade IQ on a digital camera more, than a clear filter, given that the glass quality and properties are equal.

Ben
02-11-2010, 03:57 AM   #25
Senior Member
TheTenaciousOne's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Adelaide, SA, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 111
Thought the UV filters for film was so your colours were more natural as you couldnt set white balance
02-11-2010, 04:16 AM   #26
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by TheTenaciousOne Quote
Thought the UV filters for film was so your colours were more natural as you couldnt set white balance
The UV filter in film days was mainly about 2 purposes:

1. to reduce the excessive blues, you would get in shadow areas, when shooting under blue skies in the snow or at the sea

2. to reduce UV and deep blues, which lead to unsharpness and a reduction in contrast, as film was sensible to UV and deep blue, but the lenses are not computed to focus this part of the spectrum. This is true, even with modern lenses.

These positive effects are only important today at high altitude or under very clear skies and intense sun, as modern lenses+coating already reduce UV very much and the sensors are not so UV sensitive as some film was.

Ben
02-11-2010, 04:17 AM   #27
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
I think it does because when you zoom in and out, the inside element compartments zoom in and out which contracts and retracts sucking in air, which sucks up dust that is in the air. That's why some lenses have a reputation for being a vaccuum cleaner such as the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS. They have poor sealing between the gaps of the lens, which allows dust to easily suck inside. Putting a filter on top significantly reduces the amount of dust that could get inside and acts as a dust filter/blocker.
Thanks for the example. If the filter covers these gaps, it sure does good!

Ben
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!
camera, dust, filter, image, lens, lenses, pentax help, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax and Albinar 2x TCs, 2 Cokin A filter sets, 49mm Filter and Macro tubes pxpaulx Sold Items 15 02-11-2010 09:09 PM
UV filter and polarized filter mba1971 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 7 11-09-2009 04:23 PM
Infrared Filter help? Bad filter and technique Peter Zack Photographic Technique 13 10-16-2007 06:52 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:53 AM. | 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