filter?

[rockos]

Hi guys...
i am very new to photography. I am have drebel with my 18-55mm lense. i am ordering a 70-200 f4L tomorrow.

but what filter to get. Should i go polorized or UV. I am mostly outside with my camera over 95% of the time. In the mountains on a snowy day or just a great summer day of hiking in the rockies. what do you all recommend.
as well as what mm of the filter. does a 77mm any better than a 67mm for landscape mountain photos etc.

an brand of filters better than others?

thanks for all your help. as you can see i am new.

rockos

[Vegas Poboy]

Congrats on the lens it's a good lens & my favorite. On this lens I have the B+W UV and carry the CPL for those bright days or shoots where this is alot of reflection. Use the 67 unless you plan on getting a lens with the ring size of 77 if so then buy a ring step up 67 to 77. You may also want to look into getting a ND grad filter for the type of landscape shots you want.
This is just what works for me.

[rockos]

are tiffen filters good overal?
sorry for the stupid question. i have seen filter prices from high $160 to practially nothing in price. i agree with the saying you get what you paid for but right now i think $160 on filter is a little much for me being so new to photography. i have seen tiffen filters for around $60 for a 67mm polorized is this about right?


any suggestions on a different brand you recommend.

thanks again
rockos

[G3]

Tiffen filters are pretty good. They offer a couple of different grades...the multi-coated filters are good. Not as good as something like a Singh-Ray, but good and much less expensive.

By the way, the 70-200 f/4L takes a 67mm filter, the 70-200 f/2.8L takes a 77mm filter. The size of the filter depends on the size of the objective (front) lens. A faster lens generally has a larger objective, therefore will need a larger filter.

[rockos]

Tiffen filters are pretty good. They offer a couple of different grades...the multi-coated filters are good. Not as good as something like a Singh-Ray, but good and much less expensive.

By the way, the 70-200 f/4L takes a 67mm filter, the 70-200 f/2.8L takes a 77mm filter. The size of the filter depends on the size of the objective (front) lens. A faster lens generally has a larger objective, therefore will need a larger filter.

thanks for the info. i learn something new everyday.

[rockos]

i have come across this filter kit.

is anyone using any of these filters or have this kit. being a novice to photography i want something that is better than average.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=136014&is=REG

i have on order a 70-200 f4L lense by canon.

thanks for all the help

rockos

[Ken Fong]

I think I purchased this kit before (77mm)...it seems to be a good value. Although you probably won't use the warming filter (photoshop can do it), it is still cheaper than buying the UV, polarizer and pouch separately (at least at the time I made that decision). The UV filter is what 'lives' on my lens. Be aware that you will lose some light with the polarizer, so I wouldn't leave that one on the lens by default.

You can also look for inexpensive name-brands on eBay.

The other critical thing is to get the right hood for your lens to keep the stray light out...this will improve your contrast.

One final tip if you are doing a lot of outdoor shots, get some graduated neutral density filters (hand held resin filters)...it really helps when your range is too extreme (mountain shadow with sky highlights)...but don't overdo it or it will look unnatural.

[rockos]

thanks for the tips.

i will probably end up going with this kit unless you all have any other suggestions.

thanks again
mike