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 Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 24 Jun 2014 (Tuesday) 15:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

uv filter

 
kraig1
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Sep 2013
Location: kettering
     
Jun 24, 2014 15:44 |  #1

Hi, when using a UV filter and a poleriser filter which goes on the camera first or doesn't it matter.
cheers




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,319 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 457
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
     
Jun 24, 2014 15:56 |  #2

Why would you be using both?


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,863 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
Jun 24, 2014 16:05 |  #3

You'll find that not many people here use a UV filter as there is one built in to most Canon DSLR's


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Jun 24, 2014 16:07 as a reply to  @ joedlh's post |  #4

Polariser on the lens, then put the UV in the bag. Personally, I would leave it in the bag permanently, but if you feel it gives you some benefit then put it back on when you take the polariser off. There is absolutely no reason to have both on, and it could degrade your images, or cause vignetting on a wide angle.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rral22
Senior Member
885 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
     
Jun 24, 2014 18:10 |  #5

sandpiper wrote in post #16992176 (external link)
Polariser on the lens, then put the UV in the bag. Personally, I would leave it in the bag permanently, but if you feel it gives you some benefit then put it back on when you take the polariser off. There is absolutely no reason to have both on, and it could degrade your images, or cause vignetting on a wide angle.

What he said. Digital photography gets no benefit from a UV filter.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,506 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 277
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Jun 24, 2014 22:30 as a reply to  @ rral22's post |  #6

I was kind of missing this famous UV filter thread :lol:


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Jun 24, 2014 22:42 |  #7

kf095 wrote in post #16992794 (external link)
I was kind of missing this famous UV filter thread :lol:

Which UV filter thread? Gosh, we'd have to go a LOOOONG way back!!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kraig1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Sep 2013
Location: kettering
     
Jun 24, 2014 23:41 |  #8

Thanks all, I've only just looked into buying filters and reading about uv filters it say's they improve the photo but i will take your advise and not bother with one.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Jun 25, 2014 03:59 |  #9

kraig1 wrote in post #16992877 (external link)
Thanks all, I've only just looked into buying filters and reading about uv filters it say's they improve the photo but i will take your advise and not bother with one.

Not with digital they won't, digital cameras deal with UV themselves. It can improve the image when shooting on film though, maybe you were reading an old book. The only possible effect on your shots with a digital camera is a negative one, as there is potential for loss of contrast, flare and soft images.

Some people do like to put one on anyway, as they feel it gives some slight protection to the lens glass, but this is a personal thing and most photographers I know don't do this. The slight protection has to be balanced against the possibility of the filter breaking (quite easy to do) and the sharp bits of glass scratching the lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
battletone
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jun 25, 2014 06:45 |  #10

sandpiper wrote in post #16993101 (external link)
Not with digital they won't, digital cameras deal with UV themselves. It can improve the image when shooting on film though, maybe you were reading an old book. The only possible effect on your shots with a digital camera is a negative one, as there is potential for loss of contrast, flare and soft images.

Some people do like to put one on anyway, as they feel it gives some slight protection to the lens glass, but this is a personal thing and most photographers I know don't do this. The slight protection has to be balanced against the possibility of the filter breaking (quite easy to do) and the sharp bits of glass scratching the lens.

Which from what I have gathered, to buy a high enough quality UV filter to limit the loss in quality would actually end up costing as much or more than the front element of even most L lenses... So really, on the off chance you do damage it, then you can invest the money fixing it rather than basically prepaying and getting all the negatives of having a UV filter on 24/7.
That made it much easier to throw it in a drawer and never look back.


Cameras: 5D Mark IV, EOS 3, Elan 7
Lenses:15mm 2.8 fisheye, 16-35mm 2.8L II, 24-70mm 2.8L II, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L, 70-200L II IS
Tripod: Gitzo GT2531, Arca-Swiss Z1, RRS PC-LR
Lights: Photogenic PL1250 x2, 1500SL x1, Canon 580ex, YN 568ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jun 25, 2014 10:48 |  #11

sandpiper wrote in post #16993101 (external link)
Not with digital they won't, digital cameras deal with UV themselves. It can improve the image when shooting on film though, maybe you were reading an old book. The only possible effect on your shots with a digital camera is a negative one, as there is potential for loss of contrast, flare and soft images.

Some people do like to put one on anyway, as they feel it gives some slight protection to the lens glass, but this is a personal thing and most photographers I know don't do this. The slight protection has to be balanced against the possibility of the filter breaking (quite easy to do) and the sharp bits of glass scratching the lens.

Modern films are largely insensitive to UV light, anyway.

If I'm shooting film (which I'm doing 98% of the time), it's generally with an 81A warming filter, not a UV filter.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

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

1,138 views & 0 likes for this thread
uv filter
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
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 gabrielkmusic
1003 guests, 202 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.