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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 13 Jun 2019 (Thursday) 18:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Filter for shooting at a swimming pool

 
Scoobert
Goldmember
1,202 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 319
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Iowa
     
Jun 13, 2019 18:52 |  #1

I have not used filters much but I have a family event coming up and will be shooting the kids playing in the pool.
Last year I was shooting canon and I ending up with splashes of chlorinated water on the lens and some of the spots were hard to get off.
So this year I am shooting my sony 70-200 f4 and want to make sure I dont end up with the same problem.

What type of filter should I be looking for Clear, UV, CP ?

What is a good brand for the $50.00(ish) range?

Thanks




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rwmson
Senior Member
Avatar
740 posts
Gallery: 91 photos
Likes: 1469
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Exit 4, NJ USA
     
Jun 14, 2019 06:49 |  #2

A CP filter would eliminate a lot of the glare in the pool.


yeah, I gots some stuff.
Roger

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drmaxx
Goldmember
1,281 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 569
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jun 14, 2019 07:20 |  #3

CP is great but adds another level of complexity - plus they take about 1 stop of light (if you are talking indoor action shots).
A good review about clear lenses here: https://www.lensrental​s.com …uv-filters-on-the-market/ (external link)
I am happy with Hoya HD protectors.


Donate if you love POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
8,128 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 887
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Jun 14, 2019 07:29 |  #4

If you limit is $50, just a clear is about as good as your going to get. I agree a circular polarizer would be great, controlling the light, but that is a slower more thoughtful thing you use to make photographs, and a decent one isn't cheap. Perhaps making sure you're using your lens hood could also help splashes from getting on your lens. Or just keep a good soft cloth handy to wipe off spots would be handy... and cheap.

Putting cheap glass on front of an expensive lens is always of dubious value in my opinion.... for what it is worth.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
57,710 posts
Likes: 4032
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 14, 2019 08:57 |  #5

Croasdail wrote in post #18877529 (external link)
...Putting cheap glass on front of an expensive lens is always of dubious value in my opinion.... for what it is worth.

Normally I agree but in this case I would go with either a clear or a CP. Even a cheap clear filter isn't going to have much of an impact unless it's really cheap, like a frosted glass filter. :):). A CP isn't going to be that hard to deal with unless your moving around a lot and will offer more to improve image quality than detract from it. Personally I would go with a CP but that's me.


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
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
8,128 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 887
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Jun 14, 2019 09:45 |  #6

gjl711 wrote in post #18877555 (external link)
Normally I agree but in this case I would go with either a clear or a CP. Even a cheap clear filter isn't going to have much of an impact unless it's really cheap, like a frosted glass filter. :):). A CP isn't going to be that hard to deal with unless your moving around a lot and will offer more to improve image quality than detract from it. Personally I would go with a CP but that's me.

And the CP does things you can't really do in LR of PS. So particularly around water, I agree. But for $50? Not sure that's realistic... but I could be wrong.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
57,710 posts
Likes: 4032
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 14, 2019 10:02 |  #7

Croasdail wrote in post #18877571 (external link)
And the CP does things you can't really do in LR of PS. So particularly around water, I agree. But for $50? Not sure that's realistic... but I could be wrong.

Took a quick peek at B&H and they have a 72mm CP for $6. I don't know if I would go that cheap, but they are out there.


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
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,867 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Likes: 1136
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
Post edited over 4 years ago by ejenner.
     
Jun 14, 2019 16:19 |  #8

gjl711 wrote in post #18877580 (external link)
Took a quick peek at B&H and they have a 72mm CP for $6. I don't know if I would go that cheap, but they are out there.

Yea, don't go that cheap. However, a Tiffen, while not great in the flare department (shouldn't be an issue with a hood on a telephoto), should be just fine for that application. They *might* degrade IQ very slightly at the long end, but you're not going to notice it for what I suspect your use is (i.e. online photos or up to 8x10 prints).


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
Avatar
8,128 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 887
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina and Toronto
     
Jun 15, 2019 07:38 |  #9

Yeah..... looked at those listings. Was surprised how cheap some of there were, and how many of those cheap ones had very good reviews. Who knew. For shooting images at the pool, a sub $50 one like a Tiffen would probably be a lot better than nothing. The only thing is that it will also get water marks on it and I am curious how well the coatings on the cheaper version hold up to rigorous cleaning. I am hoping I will be pleasantly surprised. The loss of light through the filter shouldn't be a huge issue in an environment like that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
57,710 posts
Likes: 4032
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jun 15, 2019 08:37 |  #10

Croasdail wrote in post #18877984 (external link)
Yeah..... looked at those listings. Was surprised how cheap some of there were, and how many of those cheap ones had very good reviews. Who knew. ..

I have 2 CPs, one a
B+W Kaesemann MRC, a pretty decent CP and some generic I received as a toss in when I bought a camera package a while ago and honestly, other than the tint of the glass, both are almost indistinguishable from one another unless I start really zooming in and checking micro-contrast. I almost prefer the color of the cheepy 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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
40,862 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8923
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 4 years ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Jun 15, 2019 09:07 |  #11

Cheap filters that seem decent in build can indeed hurt IQ in a very noticeable way. I can post an example of a cheap name brand filter vs a better one if someone wants to see. This filter caused me grief on a 70-200 where I thought I had a lens issue until I took the filter off. I later did a comparison to verify the filter was to blame.

I like the higher end Hoya and b+w filters.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
"Man only has 5 senses, and sometimes not even that, so if they define the world, the universe, the dimensions of existence, and spirituality with just these limited senses, their view of what-is and what-can-be is very myopic indeed and they are doomed, now and forever."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,867 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Likes: 1136
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Jun 24, 2019 22:35 |  #12

Croasdail wrote:
=Croasdail;18877984it will also get water marks on it and I am curious how well the coatings on the cheaper version hold up to rigorous cleaning.

Not as well for sure. Also they can be more of a PITA to clean in the field. However, I have found that with a good amount of tapwater and possibly a very small amount of soap, pretty much anything will come off.

I would also do a quick test to make sure the filter is not complete junk. If you can easily see IQ effects, just return it.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,639 views & 0 likes for this thread, 7 members have posted to it and it is followed by 4 members.
Filter for shooting at a swimming pool
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is griggt
1128 guests, 166 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.