Just ordered my next lens....(few questions)

[Kabz]

A 17-40L

I'm excited as hell....but had one small question about the hood. Is it ok to keep it on all the time?
I ordered an ultra-thin UV multicoated HOYA filter also....but not the polarizing as it was $150.
Is a cheaper option goign to be detrimental? I always hear the arguments about putting a $50 piece of glass in front of a $700 lens which makes no sense...and I can see the point in that, but not everyone feels normal paying $150 for the filter.
Also is there anything I need to know about the difference in lens type in terms of functionality? I am used to the EF-S 18-55 thats wh.

Those are all the questions I can think of now. Thanks for your help

[GPR1]

It's okay to leave the lens hood on all the time, as long as it's convenient for you.

The general rule regarding filters is use the best you can afford. The Hoya multicoat is a good filter -- the super multicoat is better, but you haven't made a bad choice. Whether or not to keep a filter on the lens is like discussing religion: people get passionate about all sides.

As for the polarizer, it does a different job than a UV filter. While you might want a UV filter on your lens all the time, you certainly wouldn't want a polarizer all the time. Hence, it's best to start with a UV. If you do a lot of landscape work a polarizer becomes invaluable.

I have that lens and love it! Enjoy!

Greg

[cactusclay]

If you leave the hood on all the time, it's liable to get sort of loose after awhile, when the felt wears down. I would just go with the UV filter for now and see how you like it. It's a great lens and it will spoil you away from the kit lens, or most any other consumer grade lens. Congrats.

[tim]

I bought a mid priced polarizing filter and it's made a huge difference to my photography - I can take photos between 10am and 4pm again now! Without the polarizer I don't even bother trying, the dynamic range is just too great. I don't bother using the UV filter I bought (Hoya super something I think).

[Groundworxs]

If you are having a filter on to use the functions of the filter get the best you can afford. If you are getting a filter to protect the lens don't bother. As a photojournalist I shoot in all kinds of situations. I know many people in the field who never use a filter and always keep the hood on. They have never runied a lens where a thin filter could have saved it. These are shooters who are at the Superbowl, the Olympics on the ground in Afghanistan and in some of the most extreme locations the world has to offer.

well that's my .03 cents (inflation)
Groundworxs

[timmyquest]

Of my lenses this is the only one where i'm never comfy shooting without the hood, at 17mm it's just too likely to get flair, it all depends on your lighting though, but i never shoot without the hood.

[DaveG]

A 17-40L

I'm excited as hell....but had one small question about the hood. Is it ok to keep it on all the time?
I ordered an ultra-thin UV multicoated HOYA filter also....but not the polarizing as it was $150.
Is a cheaper option goign to be detrimental? I always hear the arguments about putting a $50 piece of glass in front of a $700 lens which makes no sense...and I can see the point in that, but not everyone feels normal paying $150 for the filter.
Also is there anything I need to know about the difference in lens type in terms of functionality? I am used to the EF-S 18-55 thats wh.

Those are all the questions I can think of now. Thanks for your help


I always have a lens hood mounted whenever I'm using the lens. In a lot of ways it doesn't make any difference in the life of the "felt" since I reverse most of my lens hoods for storage. The hood for the 17-40 (which is the same for the 16-35 and the 10-22) is so large that it can't be stored that way, at least in the camera bag that I have, so I slip it over the top of my stored 70-200 and so far it hasn't been lost.

You don't really need the ultra slim UV filter for the 17-40 assuming that you aren't using it on a 1Ds of some kind. I have a regular filter on my 10-22 and it doesn't vignette so there is nothing to worry about on the 17-40.

I'd like to get a 77mm circular Polarizer in the spring and do want a slim version. The Nikon was the best value the last time I looked. Then I'll get some step down rings so I can use it with my other lenses.

Other than being a lot bigger and heavier I don't think that you'll notice much difference between your two lenses, at least in use.

[Kabz]

Thanks for the replies

they have been tremendously helpful...

Now its just a waiting game!