Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Jan 2014 (Wednesday) 18:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Today my heart broke..24-105 problem

 
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,591 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3799
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Feb 09, 2014 14:45 |  #61

ItsJustEd wrote in post #16673413 (external link)
My purpose for a filter is cheap insurance. With or without a filter Im always careful - but again,no matter how careful you may think you are,sooner or later there will be a mishap and THEN you will say "if I had only used a filter"... But dont focus on the filter issue - anything could happen. Anything from handing your camera to another person to fumbling with trying to remove a lens from your bag - skies the limit with what 'could' happen. Point is,sooner or later it WILL happen,and when it does you WILL be p*ssed and heart broken.

I use actual insurance on all my gear, costs me a whopping $50 a year for nearly $5000 worth of protection.

I think it's silly how much people fret over filters, if it makes you feel better, use them. There's no "right" answer here. I don't use them partly because I've seen them give me issues in the past (ghosting and flare) and because I find that the front element is usually easier to clean than filters are and I'm lazy :p

I've used lenses with horribly scratched up front elements and they produced great shots, it's seriously not as big a deal as people think it is.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 09, 2014 18:51 |  #62

marcosv wrote in post #16629814 (external link)
As it is, lens caps do pop off from time to time. You don't always get them clip on securely when you are in a rush and I have had caps pop off on their own as things move around in bags.

Dealing with lens hoods also make it easier to not get the caps on securely.

my caps have popped off dozens of times in my old photo backpack. seems more prone in some bags than others. to be fair, i don't think i've ever had one pop off when the hood was in position. anyway, every time i took out my camera from the bag and found the lens "naked" i have always thanked mr. dude-up-there that there was a filter on.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gfspencer
Member
179 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 17
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 09, 2014 19:35 |  #63

speedync wrote in post #16673047 (external link)
For 150 bucks, I'd rather replace a front element every time I damaged a lens, than muck around with UV/protection filters. Haven't scratched a lens yet, so I'm still way way in front :)

Same here . . . and I use a hood.


Canon 50D - Canon 7DII - Canon 6D - 16-35mm f/2.8L - 24-105mm f/4[COLOR="red"]L IS - 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - 50mm f/1.2L - 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS - 100-400mm II f/4.5-5.6L IS - Extender EF 2x

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Feb 09, 2014 20:45 |  #64

Xyclopx wrote in post #16676994 (external link)
[...] every time i took out my camera from the bag and found the lens "naked" i have always thanked mr. dude-up-there that there was a filter on.

And have the filter been scratched? If not, then no need to thank anyone since the front element would most probably not have been scratched either if you hadn't used a filter.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 09, 2014 21:11 |  #65

pwm2 wrote in post #16677242 (external link)
And have the filter been scratched? If not, then no need to thank anyone since the front element would most probably not have been scratched either if you hadn't used a filter.

um...... the op's lens was scratched, hence this thread??? <--- :confused:

I've bought lenses that have been scratched (the sellers didn't know that they were scratched though until I pointed it out to them.) there are other lenses in the fs forum that are sold as scratched. plenty of mentions of "cleaning scratches." many "big white" lenses with "cleaning scratches" or what the seller claims to be "insignificant scratches." so, yeah, lenses get scratched during normal use. most of these small scratches would not happen if a filter was on.

so........... ???

well, anyway, to answer your question, no, most of my filters have not been scratched. I found small insignificant scratches on maybe 2 of them (out of dozens). but yeah, that's it. but... those 2 scratches would have been on the lenses instead.

if the next response is something about how these small scratches would not make a difference in the image, yeah, I agree... but then you're going to complete the circular argument. the point is, we don't want scratches, and if a filter was there, there would be no small scratches.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Feb 09, 2014 23:19 |  #66

Xyclopx wrote in post #16677289 (external link)
um...... the op's lens was scratched, hence this thread??? <--- :confused:

um... yes... so..???

Back to you - do you often scratch your filters? If you don't then you will probably not scratch your lens either? And good filters are very expensive, while the need to replace front elements happens very, very seldom.

I've bought lenses that have been scratched (the sellers didn't know that they were scratched though until I pointed it out to them.) there are other lenses in the fs forum that are sold as scratched.

Hrm. I'm pretty sure most sellers knows if they are selling a scratched lens.

But what relevance does that have? That still doesn't mean that a filter on the lens saved your lens from a scratch in case the cap comes off. It's first when you find your filter scratched that it might be meaningful to feel lucky you had a filter on. Except, of course, that replacing a high-end filter also costs lots of money.

And I suspect a very large number of lens scratches on all the used lenses floating around are caused by inexperienced beginners trying to be too clever with their lenses, and explicitly grinding the lens with sand.

well, anyway, to answer your question, no, most of my filters have not been scratched. I found small insignificant scratches on maybe 2 of them (out of dozens). but yeah, that's it. but... those 2 scratches would have been on the lenses instead.

if the next response is something about how these small scratches would not make a difference in the image, yeah, I agree... but then you're going to complete the circular argument. the point is, we don't want scratches, and if a filter was there, there would be no small scratches.

If a hood was there, there wouldn't be any scratch. So neither a front element nor a filter to replace. It's just that filters are a very expensive way to avoid scratches. At least if using filters that doesn't seriously impact the image quality.

You say "out of dozens" about your filters. Either these filters are extremely bad. Or they are costing much, much more than the replacement of two front elements.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 09, 2014 23:31 |  #67

pwm2 wrote in post #16677554 (external link)
um... yes... so..???

Back to you - do you often scratch your filters? If you don't then you will probably not scratch your lens either? And good filters are very expensive, while the need to replace front elements happens very, very seldom.


Hrm. I'm pretty sure most sellers knows if they are selling a scratched lens.

But what relevance does that have? That still doesn't mean that a filter on the lens saved your lens from a scratch in case the cap comes off. It's first when you find your filter scratched that it might be meaningful to feel lucky you had a filter on. Except, of course, that replacing a high-end filter also costs lots of money.

And I suspect a very large number of lens scratches on all the used lenses floating around are caused by inexperienced beginners trying to be too clever with their lenses, and explicitly grinding the lens with sand.


If a hood was there, there wouldn't be any scratch. So neither a front element nor a filter to replace. It's just that filters are a very expensive way to avoid scratches. At least if using filters that doesn't seriously impact the image quality.

You say "out of dozens" about your filters. Either these filters are extremely bad. Or they are costing much, much more than the replacement of two front elements.

look... at the top of this forum is a link to a thread talking about filters. plenty of info there for each side of the debate. so there's no need to go through the whole argument.

the plain point of this thread is that the op left the cover off, and while the lens was bouncing around in his pack it got scratched. if he had a filter on, the lens would not be scratched. it's that simple.

my point is taking that further, there's plainly hundreds if not thousands of lenses that have been sold through our own FS forum that have it noted the glass is at least slightly scratched. most of those smaller scratches would have been prevented if a filter was on.

that's it. that's all I wanted to say--just to support the op's final conclusion.

if you're saying that the op's conclusion is incorrect, that the op's lens would STILL be damaged even with a filter on, okay, then that's a valid response that's on topic. but everything else you said I have heard before and disagree with most of it. but that's fine that we have different points of view. :)


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 09, 2014 23:32 |  #68

pwm2 wrote in post #16677554 (external link)
um... yes... so..???

The point being that if OP had had a filter on, the lens would not have been scratched. It doesn't matter that xyclopx isn't the OP and that his filters have not been scratched. The point is that it can happen, and filters can protect the lens from scratches, and would have in the OP's case.
As for the hood thing, that is only a valid point if you have a bag big enough to store all your lenses with hoods on in the forward-facing position, and that you have nothing else to store in there which would be more useful than storing the lens hoods "on".


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Feb 09, 2014 23:41 |  #69

Sirrith wrote in post #16677572 (external link)
The point being that if OP had had a filter on, the lens would not have been scratched. It doesn't matter that xyclopx isn't the OP and that his filters have not been scratched. The point is that it can happen, and filters can protect the lens from scratches, and would have in the OP's case.
As for the hood thing, that is only a valid point if you have a bag big enough to store all your lenses with hoods on in the forward-facing position, and that you have nothing else to store in there which would be more useful than storing the lens hoods "on".

If you actually read what I write, you would see that I'm not contending the fact that a filter can protect a lens from a scratch.

What I'm pointing out is that a filter is often a very expensive way to avoid scratches on lenses, when the bottom-line costs have been all added together. Alternatively cheap filters can be used. Which then is a great way to waste an even larger amount of money since that makes expensive lenses perform like cheap lenses.

In the end, it can be much more economical to allow a front-element scratch every 5-10 years or however often it happens and just fix that lens. Too much people are too busy thinking "yes, the filter saved my lens" that they forget to keep a closer look at the money.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 09, 2014 23:51 |  #70

pwm2 wrote in post #16677588 (external link)
If you actually read what I write, you would see that I'm not contending the fact that a filter can protect a lens from a scratch.

What I'm pointing out is that a filter is often a very expensive way to avoid scratches on lenses, when the bottom-line costs have been all added together. Alternatively cheap filters can be used. Which then is a great way to waste an even larger amount of money since that makes expensive lenses perform like cheap lenses.

In the end, it can be much more economical to allow a front-element scratch every 5-10 years or however often it happens and just fix that lens. Too much people are too busy thinking "yes, the filter saved my lens" that they forget to keep a closer look at the money.

yes... I believe you are correct in saying that filters cost more than they save. I only use the very best protective filters I know of: b+w xs-pro clear's. they cost me $80-150 a pop depending on size. I got like 20 of those. that's $2000+ just in protective filters. and as you've asked and I responded, I never had any scratches large enough to warrant replacement of any of these filters, and thus as you pointed out it can be concluded I would also likewise not have any lens elements that needed replacement. and if I did, it would be rare and the $200-400 it costs to replace one still costs less than all the filters.

so yeah, I agree with this economics-oriented view. so on that standpoint, it isn't wholly logical to use filters. I admit that.

but... there are still good reasons for me. all my lenses are the best I've found, and many of them are the best of many copies tested. also many of them have been CPS/Canon repair many times over to be calibrated and recalibrated. I do not want to go through all the trouble I go through again to get a good lens back after repair.

also, as noted by sirrith, sometimes it's nice to just be able to subject your lens to the environment, like maybe hastily using your shirt to clean it, without caring too much about scratching the glass.

but yes, you are right, from a $ standpoint, filters do not make sense. but I still will use them.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 10, 2014 00:23 |  #71

pwm2 wrote in post #16677242 (external link)
And have the filter been scratched? If not, then no need to thank anyone since the front element would most probably not have been scratched either if you hadn't used a filter.

Xyclopx wrote in post #16677289 (external link)
um...... the op's lens was scratched, hence this thread??? <--- :confused:

pwm2 wrote in post #16677554 (external link)
um... yes... so..???

I was replying to this line of conversation. I didn't read the rest of your post, no.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ from ­ PA
Cream of the Crop
9,272 posts
Likes: 837
Joined May 2003
Location: Southeast Pennsylvania
     
Feb 10, 2014 08:47 |  #72

In post #26, the OP's problem was resolved. Pretty much since then, this thread has been about the mrrits of filters and lens hoods. Can people realize that this is a personal choice? There is little need to shoot a dead horse...

I might add that the OP has "member" status so has been on POTN likely for some time and is fully aware of all the arguments.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ItsJustEd
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
433 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Jan 2012
Location: St. Petersburg FL
     
Feb 17, 2014 14:49 |  #73

I just read thru posts 61-72 and it made me think of the element I removed from the lens. I have a B&W filter on my 17-55 (should have had it on the 24-105). When I hold the element in my hand then hold the filter oddly enough there seems to be a different 'feel' or 'texture' to the 2 different glasses. Ofcourse the element is 'glass' but it feels like a 'soft' glass (if that makes sense). The filter 'feels' hard when flicked with my fingernail. Element is different - perhaps the result of the much thicker glass. Could it be the coating on the element (lens glass does have a special coating,yes?) or maybe just the thickness gives it a different feel?

And John from PA,you are correct. I have surfed around and read both sides (to filter or to not filter...same for the hood) and up till this incident I alwas said if I were careful it would be a dead issue - today I have a new perspective. I will use a hood when a filter is going to surely give me a problem (sunset/sunrise),but will mostly use the filter. And finally John,I agree that "....people realize that this is a personal choice? There is little need to shoot a dead horse..." For me,ANYTHING is better than NOTHING.

That IS my story,and I WILL stick to it :)


I used to think I was indecisive,but now I'm not too sure.
5DMkI 60D Canon 24-105 Canon 17-55mm Tamron 70-300
More of me http://www.flickr.com/​photos/77024467@N03/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Feb 18, 2014 01:29 |  #74

Different surface coatings gives totally different feeling when you touch the glass.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ItsJustEd
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
433 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Jan 2012
Location: St. Petersburg FL
     
Feb 18, 2014 05:21 |  #75

pwm2 wrote in post #16698155 (external link)
Different surface coatings gives totally different feeling when you touch the glass.

I was thinking the same thing. And if Im right that would explain why the glass scratched so easily. Which is just to say it doesnt take much to scuff or scratch an element - 'L' glass doesnt mean invincable.


I used to think I was indecisive,but now I'm not too sure.
5DMkI 60D Canon 24-105 Canon 17-55mm Tamron 70-300
More of me http://www.flickr.com/​photos/77024467@N03/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,502 views & 0 likes for this thread
Today my heart broke..24-105 problem
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is LaurensW
2258 guests, 309 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.