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 Accessories 
Thread started 14 Jun 2014 (Saturday) 08:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

UV filters

 
blair1955
Member
Avatar
79 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: SE USA
     
Jun 14, 2014 08:44 |  #1

Is there really a difference in UV filters I’ve seen them for sale from a few dollars to over a hundred and is UV and UV haze the same? ...thanks :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 221
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Jun 14, 2014 09:20 |  #2

Yes there is. The cheap ones may not be optically flat, so can introduce distortion to your pictures. The expensive ones are multi-coated to reduce internal reflection (which causes flare and ghosting, as well as light loss). The difference in light loss between uncoated and the best multicoated filters can be in the neighborhood of 7% (typically 93% for uncoated, 99+% for the best multicoated).

UV and UV Haze are the same thing.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blair1955
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
79 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: SE USA
     
Jun 14, 2014 09:27 |  #3

Jon wrote in post #16971090 (external link)
Yes there is. The cheap ones may not be optically flat, so can introduce distortion to your pictures. The expensive ones are multi-coated to reduce internal reflection (which causes flare and ghosting, as well as light loss). The difference in light loss between uncoated and the best multicoated filters can be in the neighborhood of 7% (typically 93% for uncoated, 99+% for the best multicoated).

UV and UV Haze are the same thing.

thanks for the reply ... maybe I'll look at B+W UV...I've had good luck with their circular polarizing filters..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jun 14, 2014 15:23 |  #4

blair1955 wrote in post #16971102 (external link)
thanks for the reply ... maybe I'll look at B+W UV...I've had good luck with their circular polarizing filters..

Why do you think you need a UV filter? Are you shooting film? That's about the only reason I can think of to use a UV filter.

If you insist on having a piece of glass over your lens for "protection", you can get clear glass filters (as long as they are optically flat and properly multicoated) to do that. You can even find "protection" filters that are much harder to break than most - check out the Hoya HD series (external link).

I have never used filters for anything but the creative capability they can provide. All of my lenses - even the ones I've owned since the mid 1960s - have nearly pristine glass in them.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blair1955
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
79 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: SE USA
     
Jun 14, 2014 16:37 |  #5

SkipD wrote in post #16971585 (external link)
Why do you think you need a UV filter? Are you shooting film? That's about the only reason I can think of to use a UV filter.

If you insist on having a piece of glass over your lens for "protection", you can get clear glass filters (as long as they are optically flat and properly multicoated) to do that. You can even find "protection" filters that are much harder to break than most - check out the Hoya HD series (external link).

I have never used filters for anything but the creative capability they can provide. All of my lenses - even the ones I've owned since the mid 1960s - have nearly pristine glass in them.

yeah I do still shoot film quite a bit I still have three 35mm bodies and also one of the reasons I use a filter is to protect my lens. I've been told many times I'm just wasting money doing so part of it is I'm old school and I have OCD when it comes to taking care of cameras, cars about anything I own..Thanks for the link and the reply I appreciate them..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jaybrams
Member
33 posts
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jun 17, 2014 12:42 |  #6

I used to have UV filters on all my lenses. No longer. I have also never suffered damage to either the lenses or the filters. The only time I could see using a protective filter these days is if I'm shooting at the beach or in inclement weather.


5Dii, 7D, SL1, and a bunch of lenses.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,880 posts
Likes: 2105
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 17, 2014 13:18 |  #7

Jaybrams wrote in post #16977319 (external link)
I used to have UV filters on all my lenses. No longer. I have also never suffered damage to either the lenses or the filters. The only time I could see using a protective filter these days is if I'm shooting at the beach or in inclement weather.

Same here though I use a plain clear filter whenever the environment calls for it, otherwise it's filterless. THIS (external link)article does a very good job at explaining the effect filters have especially for long lenses.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,891 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Jun 18, 2014 13:10 |  #8

If youre going to use a UV filter for protection (as they are not needed with DSLRs for actual UV protection) only buy high quality, multi-coated ones. Otherwise youre better off IQ wise just going without.


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jun 18, 2014 13:22 |  #9

Would you be happy if you paid a thousand bucks and found out that canon was putting inexpensive framing glass as their front element? Thats what you end up with when you add a cheap UV filter. There are proponents of inexpensive and moderately priced filters but its only when they see the results between bare and the mediocre glass do they realize what damage they are doing in certain shooting situations.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,880 posts
Likes: 2105
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 18, 2014 13:23 |  #10

ben_r_ wrote in post #16979612 (external link)
If youre going to use a UV filter for protection (as they are not needed with DSLRs for actual UV protection) only buy high quality, multi-coated ones. Otherwise youre better off IQ wise just going without.

Your always better off quality wise to go without but I agree, a high quality multi-coated filter has a much smaller impact than a cheap one.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blair1955
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
79 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: SE USA
     
Jun 18, 2014 21:57 |  #11

thanks for the information I never knew UV filters caused distortion to this degree.. I'll want to replace the ones on two of my film cameras..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
georgebowman
Goldmember
Avatar
1,510 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Verona, WI
     
Nov 19, 2014 23:08 |  #12

I have Hoya Digital Pro 1 UV filters on all of my lenses. Unfortunately, I dropped my 7d, not once but twice while in Oregon last month. On drop # 2 the UV filter on my 17-55 f2.8 EF-S lens shattered. The good news is the front element of the lens was undamaged. The question is, should I replace the filter or go without? From what can tell from this thread, the overwhelming recommendation is to go without a filter. My thought now is to get a UV filter and only use it when I'm on the beach or in an environment where the lens could be damaged. What would you recommend if I do get a UV filter for occasional use?


My Gear: 7d, XTi, 17-55f2.8 EF-S, 70-200f4L, 28-135 Kit lens, 2-580EXii
_______________
My Flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/gtbowman (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Nov 19, 2014 23:18 |  #13

georgebowman wrote in post #17282734 (external link)
I have Hoya Digital Pro 1 UV filters on all of my lenses. Unfortunately, I dropped my 7d, not once but twice while in Oregon last month. On drop # 2 the UV filter on my 17-55 f2.8 EF-S lens shattered. The good news is the front element of the lens was undamaged. The question is, should I replace the filter or go without? From what can tell from this thread, the overwhelming recommendation is to go without a filter. My thought now is to get a UV filter and only use it when I'm on the beach or in an environment where the lens could be damaged. What would you recommend if I do get a UV filter for occasional use?

Uv or clear filters are fine for splash, spray, blowing dust protection. So on the beach or other similar situations it might be worth the effort. But for all around use you dont really gain protection.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
georgebowman
Goldmember
Avatar
1,510 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Verona, WI
     
Nov 19, 2014 23:26 |  #14

gonzogolf wrote in post #17282739 (external link)
Uv or clear filters are fine for splash, spray, blowing dust protection. So on the beach or other similar situations it might be worth the effort. But for all around use you dont really gain protection.

Thank you for the response. Before I shattered my UV filter I visited the ship wreck at Fort Stevens State Park in Oregon. We had high winds and by the time I left the beach my glasses and UV filter were covered in salt spray. It was my first experience shooting the near the ocean. I'm glad I had the filter on my lens. I doubt I'd have that kind of problem in Wisconsin. I'll go without but I'll pick up an extra filter for those "just in case" situations. Thanks again.


My Gear: 7d, XTi, 17-55f2.8 EF-S, 70-200f4L, 28-135 Kit lens, 2-580EXii
_______________
My Flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/gtbowman (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Nov 19, 2014 23:29 |  #15

georgebowman wrote in post #17282755 (external link)
Thank you for the response. Before I shattered my UV filter I visited the ship wreck at Fort Stevens State Park in Oregon. We had high winds and by the time I left the beach my glasses and UV filter were covered in salt spray. It was my first experience shooting the near the ocean. I'm glad I had the filter on my lens. I doubt I'd have that kind of problem in Wisconsin. I'll go without but I'll pick up an extra filter for those "just in case" situations. Thanks again.

If you have a filter on another lens of the same size you can swap out as conditions merit. How did you have 2 drops? Might be time to rethink your straps.




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

3,157 views & 0 likes for this thread
UV filters
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
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 samsson
630 guests, 279 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.