A few misc questions

[mrgtturbo]

1. I bought filters for my lenses. The biggest reason I went looking for some was to protect them from the possibility of scratches, dirt... whatever, (even bad breath). For my135mm lens the only thing I found was a polorized filter. I figured this would be a benifit to have for IQ as well as protection. For the 300mm the only filter available where I went was a UV filter. Fine with me... it's protection I wanted, (though I would think a polorized filter would be better). Now I am wondering several things;

a. Since my lens caps still snap on with the filters on the lens, (and one of them gave me some grief tring to line the threads up), I've left them on all the time. Are there shooting times the filters are better off the lenses? Or since I manually set my white ballance, will it make no difference if they are on or off? (mostly thinking the polorized one).

b. What is common practice here... on and off or just on and leave it?

2. I've noticed people selling cameras and mentioning how many photos they have taken. I'm sure the low shutter use is a selling point of how new the camera is. However it leads me to question, how many clicks of the shutter does one make before they should think to bring their cam into the "doctors" for a check-up. Or is there no routine for this... and it's only done when something goes wrong?

a. If there are times one should bring their camera in, is there some sort of check list of things one should be sure is offered before paying for an incomplete job?

b. Would these things be easily learnt to be done at home by the camera owner? If so... where is the best information for a beginner, and what products are recommended?



I know these questions may sound a bit silly to some.
I'm just trying to learn all I can.

Thanks.
Aaron

[PhotosGuy]

For my135mm lens the only thing I found was a polorized filter. It's going to cost you 2 f-stops of light, so I wouldn't leave it on in low light situations. Actually, I wouldn't leave it on at all.
Luminous Landscape - The Filter Flare Factor (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml)

2. Use it until it quits. ;)

[mrgtturbo]

I didn't know it was killing off that much light. It's definatly coming off now. I guess it's best use would be when everything is overlit with glare.

What would be the best to put on the lens to simply protect it?

[Samanax]

What would be the best to put on the lens to simply protect it?Lens hood. And just be aware of how you're handling the camera.

:) Samanax

[mrgtturbo]

Samanax, I was not so worried about how I handel the camera. I was more concerned with things like my ferrets getting to the lens, (since the best way to shoot them playing around the room seems to be by laying on the floor with them). Another worry is blowing sand at the beach, or ATV trail dust... things like that.

About the hood idea, I thought those were mostly used on lenses with an inturnal zoom, (Lenses that let in a more than adaquate amount of light). Do they affect the incoming light much?

[sapearl]

Absolutely - sometimes they are even more beneficial that a CPL for reducting glare, flare and unwanted reflections. Mine are on all the time for that purpose as well as physical protection against, bumps, "surprise intrusions" , branches, furniture and knocks.

.......About the hood idea, I thought those were mostly used on lenses with an inturnal zoom, (Lenses that let in a more than adaquate amount of light). Do they affect the incoming light much?

[SkipD]

Aaron, I agree with others that the polarizing filter is a special-purpose-only thing. There are two primary uses for polarizing filters. One is to get richer colors in an outdoor scene - darker blue skies and often improved greens in foilage. The other, and the most important for me, is reducing reflections on non-metallic surfaces. This is actually what seems to make the improved foilage thing happen, by the way.

If you have anything but the absolute best quality multicoated UV filters mounted to your lenses for "protection", you are very likely losing much of the optical quality that your lenses are capable of.

I don't own any UV filters, even for my cameras that I have had since the 1960's. Every lens I use is always fitted with a properly designed (by the lens manufacturer) rigid lens hood. ALL of my lenses, even the 40-year-old ones, have pristine glass in them. All of my lenses have been frequently used in less-than-ideal conditions many times, though I do take reasonable care of my equipment.

For me, cameras and lenses are tools, not some sort of trophies to be polished every day and kept in glass cases. Good equipment and good maintenance techniques are all I have found necessary to have tools (of all types) that do everything I ask of them for many years.

[DStanic]

You should be able to find UV filters on ebay with no problems. I can recommend some ebay stores that I've had good experiences with (and good prices). If you must deal with a local shop as them to order them. I like to have UV filters on my good lenses. It makes cleaning them that much easier.

[sapearl]

Make sure when you shop the Ebay filters they are multicoated. If they are super inexpensive they either have no coatings or poor coatings, and will seriously degrade your image quality.

[DStanic]

I really like B+W filters. They are built well (better than Hoya) I've had several B+W F-pro UVs and like them.

What size UV filter do you need for your other lens anyways?

[mrgtturbo]

Thanks to everyone who responded. :)

The Lenses I have are;

1. Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (This obviously is the one that came with the camera.. and have a strong feeling from using it that it's glass is higher quality than the other I bought). This one is takes a 72mm filter.

2. Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III This one takes a 58mm filter. (This lens was the best I could afford to get with a little zoom).

There are no real camera shops around here. There are a couple of decent photo shops in Maine, (nearly 100 miles away from me), and they carry a variety of lenses and other stuff. Though it may seem it... it' not like I am that far out in nowhere land, The State capitol is only 17 miles away. Maine just seems not to be a very photo-friendly state. (It's probably due to the lack of money here for the adverage family).

So for my camera, lenses, filters, ect... I am kind of limited to buying at Circuit City or Best Buy. (To have any ease in knowing that if there is something wrong with what I buy, that I can return it). Their instore selection is quite low. They have a wide selection of cameras, but acessories for each are few. (and the 40D is the best they sell). Best Buy has the biggest selection for the 40D, and once I get a flash... there is nothing more to get from them. (and I have a feeling better flashes can be found elsewhere for less money). So anyways... these are, and this is where I bought my lens filters.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8006374&st=lens+filter+72mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1155848385977

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7668534&st=lens+filter+58mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1134701342637

Are these a decent quality? Or were they pretty much a waste of money?
Trust worthy options?

Where would I go to find a worth while hood?
And what size would I need... does it follow the mm size of the lens like the filters do, (even though it seems they would screw on over the lens rather than into the lens)?

DStanic, Yes... I would be very happy to find a trustworth ebay seller. So far I've not dared to place a bid on anything camera related that I see on there.

Thanks again.
Aaron

[mrgtturbo]

What size UV filter do you need for your other lens anyways?

Sorry if I did not clearly add this to the other post. (I linked them instead).

The filters I have...
72mm is polorized.
58mm is UV.

So I guess the UV filter needed would be a 72mm.

[sapearl]

I can't imagine these filters are much good at that price, other than for throwing a physical barrier over your. I don't see any mention about any sort of coating on the glass, let alone MRC. They will probably cause reflections, and a loss of contrast and desaturation in demainding lighting situations.


http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8006374&st=lens+filter+72mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1155848385977

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7668534&st=lens+filter+58mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1134701342637

Are these a decent quality? Or were they pretty much a waste of money?
Trust worthy options?.....

[crn3371]

Don't waste your time buying on Ebay, or limit yourself to Circuit City and Best Buy. There are many reputable online vendors out there. B&H being the biggest and best of them. There's probably not a member on this forum (except for yourself) that hasn't dealt with B&H or one of the other major online vendors. Without getting in to the filter/no filter debate, all you need is a decent UV filter for protection. One of the mid-grade Hoya multi coated filters would be just fine for your lenses.

[SkipD]

So for my camera, lenses, filters, ect... I am kind of limited to buying at Circuit City or Best Buy. (To have any ease in knowing that if there is something wrong with what I buy, that I can return it). Their instore selection is quite low. They have a wide selection of cameras, but acessories for each are few. (and the 40D is the best they sell). Best Buy has the biggest selection for the 40D, and once I get a flash... there is nothing more to get from them. (and I have a feeling better flashes can be found elsewhere for less money). So anyways... these are, and this is where I bought my lens filters.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8006374&st=lens+filter+72mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1155848385977

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7668534&st=lens+filter+58mm&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1134701342637

Are these a decent quality? Or were they pretty much a waste of money?
Trust worthy options?I would classify those as a waste of money.

Shop at places like B&H or Adorama on line and you will have the necessary options to get the kind of quality you need.

[mrgtturbo]

OK guys, so I consider the filters I have at the momment are junk.
I'm fine with that. :cry: No... really I am. I want to do things right, (spending less doesn't always mean saving money).

Let's make sure I am mistake free with my next set of filters....

Going B&H...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/23740-REG/Hoya_588036_58mm_Ultraviolet_UV_0_Super.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/94133-REG/Hoya_728036_72mm_Ultraviolet_UV_0_Super.html

Good middle of the road options?

Thanks.
Aaron

[crn3371]

Perfectly good choices.

[mrgtturbo]

Great!!! :D

Now how do I secretly get my parents to stumble onto my wish list? j/k LOL

About $90- for the both of them shipped really isn't so bad. After all... I did spend $30- or so for the 'junk' filters. It's kind of too bad the 72mm is a bit too small to use as a coffee cup coaster. Maybe I'll pick up some smaller bottomed cups while I'm at it. ;)

AS far as the hoods go, can filters, and caps still be used with all of them?
I have seen crown shaped, solid, ect... metal, plastic, and rubber. (the metal ones seem a weird idea to me).
What is recommended here?

Thanks.
Aaron

[SkipD]

AS far as the hoods go, can filters, and caps still be used with all of them?
I have seen crown shaped, solid, ect... metal, plastic, and rubber. (the metal ones seem a weird idea to me).
What is recommended here?Aaron, I highly recommend using hoods that the lens manufacturer designed for the lens.

A rigid hood is far superior to a folding rubber hood when it comes to providing physical protection for the lens (and the camera it's mounted to).

All of the hoods for my Nikon F cameras are made of metal and they have done their job quite well - including the one that folded up after taking the impact of a 4-foot fall onto concrete, totally saving the lens and body by absorbing the crash slowly while it folded up.

[mrgtturbo]

Thanks for the advice.

I found the canon hoods made for each of lenses. They may cost a hair more than the universal hoods, but correct is correct I guess.

I didn't know there would be a difference beyond how well they shaded and protected. After your reply and I looked them up I found this at the bottom of the description. "This dedicated lens hood is designed to match the specific focal length of the lens it was designed for."

Now I see that there must be a difference.
I did not notice that claim on any of the others I looked at.

Thanks.
Aaron

Edit: Before I was looking them up by mm.

[DStanic]

Here are some ebay sellers that I bought filters from in the past that I had good experience with:

http://stores.ebay.com/Quality-Filters_W0QQssPageNameZstrkQ3amefsQ3amesstQQtZkm

http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZjkQ2dconsultantsQQssPag eNameZSTRKQ3aMEFSQ3aMESOI

I also have a 58mm B+W F-pro UV filter and Hoya Polarizer that I am not using anymore. Let me know if you are interested.

[mrgtturbo]

DStanic, I could be.

I sent you a PM.

[mrgtturbo]

When it comes to filters... what is the difference between "Muti-Coated", "Muti-Coated X# Layers", and "Digital Multi-Coated"?

I assume the more layers the better, but the "Digital Multi-Coated" is something I just came across.

Thanks.
Aaron

[mrgtturbo]

Example....

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/391184-REG/Hoya_XD72CRPL_72mm_Circular_Polarizing_Pro.html

[DStanic]

The Hoya pro 1 are their top of the line filters. IMO you don't need to spend that much (especially for a polarizer, since you use it occationally).

[sapearl]

That's very true, the Hoya Pro-1 is quite pricey. For me it was well worth it though as I usually spend several hours each week outdoors with it on. Actually it only comes off when I'm indoors doing wedding or event work.

The Hoya pro 1 are their top of the line filters. IMO you don't need to spend that much (especially for a polarizer, since you use it occationally).

[mrgtturbo]

Oh.... I wasn't actaully thinking of buying any that epensive.
I was more just interested in knowing what makes them so different?

Thanks to you guys I've learnt that when one buys a filter, they wish to find one that is "multi-coated".

From pricing I've seen it appears that the more layers to the multi-coating, the better the filter, (or atleast higher the price-tag).

Then I came across the digital multi-coated and the price takes a huge jump upwards, (yet now they make no claim to number of layers). I was just curious what makes these so special. They are far out of my price range at the moment, and even if they were not.. I myself could not justify spending so much on them. Expecially to cover the 75-300, (which I've now found selling for about $150- at B&H :o ). Well... I did gt it on sale for about $220- with the 2 year warrentee included, and $30+ of it was state tax.

I need no conviencing that this digital one is not my best choice for now.
But thanks for watching out for me. ;)

This was mearly a question of curiousity and understanding something more.

Aaron

[mom22]

Don't waste your time buying on Ebay, or limit yourself to Circuit City and Best Buy. There are many reputable online vendors out there. B&H being the biggest and best of them. There's probably not a member on this forum (except for yourself) that hasn't dealt with B&H or one of the other major online vendors. Without getting in to the filter/no filter debate, all you need is a decent UV filter for protection. One of the mid-grade Hoya multi coated filters would be just fine for your lenses.


What would you consider "mid-grade"? From what I have read we should steer toward multi-coated UV and NOT polarizing ones to protect without degrading the exposure. Is this correct?

Sorry, a newbie here. Just trying to learn about filters!

[xenomorphic]

What would you consider "mid-grade"? From what I have read we should steer toward multi-coated UV and NOT polarizing ones to protect without degrading the exposure. Is this correct?

Sorry, a newbie here. Just trying to learn about filters!

mrgtturbo posted two links to B&H above that probably fit nicely in the "mid-grade" range - they are multicoated without being top-of-the-line alternatives.

You are correct: Good UV-filters protect your lenses without influencing exposure.

Polarizing filters generally result in more saturated, vivid colours by reducing the amount of reflected light coming off your subject. Say you are photographing flowers and green foliage on an overcast day: Using a polarizer will cut much of the white light from the sky that is reflected from the surface of the leaves, while allowing unreflected light through. This results in greater colour saturation and vividness - simply greener greens - at the expense of blocking some of the light, thus requiring a stop or two longer exposure. See an example HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_filter#Polarizer).

More on polarization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization)

Cheers!