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 10 Dec 2009 (Thursday) 10:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

UV filters: any difference?

 
Valleyboy
Member
Avatar
54 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Niagara region, Canada
     
Dec 10, 2009 10:42 |  #1

Just wondering if there are any differences, performance-related or otherwise, between various UV filters, or if they are more-or-less all the same. Reason being my local camera shops have some wildly varying prices on UV filters (same size) ranging from $25 to $85.

Any reason I should be selective when buying a UV filter, or should I just go for the cheapest?

thanks,


40D / Tamron 17-50 2.8 / Nifty Fifty / 70-200 F4 L / 430EX / Manfrotto 055XPROB + 486RC2
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
oaktree
Goldmember
1,835 posts
Joined Mar 2007
     
Dec 10, 2009 11:12 |  #2

If you do decide to buy UV filters (there are great debates about this), do not buy the cheap ones. They will affect your photo's image quality. I usually buy B+W filters for all my lenses, but I'm sure POTNers can tell you about other good brands.


Too much stuff, not enough shooting time.

Canon T4i (2 lenses), Fuji X100s, Olympus OM-D EM-1 (3 lenses)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
2,845 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Sep 2009
     
Dec 10, 2009 11:45 as a reply to  @ oaktree's post |  #3

In terms of doing anything to your photos a UV filter is already pointless and has no use on a digital camera. This is why I recommend protection filters if anything. There is no reason to pay more for an aspect of a filter that has no purpose anymore.

Personally, I recommend the Hoya HD protection filter as its very easy to clean and good quality.


Please visit my Flickr (external link) and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 5D III, Canon 24-70L F4 IS, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6 IS, Canon 100mm F2.8L IS Macro, Canon 35mm F2.0 IS, Canon 430EX II-RT, Canon 600EX II-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fibrepunk
Senior Member
461 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: City of Angels
     
Dec 10, 2009 15:40 |  #4

Multi-coated, Hoya Super or B+W MRC. Watch out for FAKE filters and buy from reliable sources.


My Gears l HeatWare (external link)
- For Sale: Broken cameras for CLP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ainoko
Stupidest Question Award 2008
Avatar
1,406 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, Washington
     
Dec 10, 2009 15:44 |  #5

Cheap filters can degrade image quality. If anything, they can add bad flare to your images. Get the best you can afford, and make sure they are multi-coated. And if they DON'T affect your image quality like many people argue, then they offer great protection for your camera lens.

Personally I use Hoya Multi-coated. They're about $50.


Full Gear List
https://photography-on-the.net …?p=4846834&post​count=1005

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TSY87
Senior Member
637 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Dec 10, 2009 15:56 |  #6

wow... those protection filters are BANK!!

My cheapy sunpack filters give off some nasty glare but i cant afford to buy those filters right now since i just bought some lenses.


D700 Gripped, Nikkor 20 2.8D, Sigma 50 1.4, Rokinon 85 1.4, Nikkor 105 2.8 Micro VR, Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR2, SB-900
Myflickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheFloridaShooter
Senior Member
713 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 27
Joined Nov 2008
     
Dec 10, 2009 16:04 |  #7

I purchased cheap filters to start figuring cheap was better than nothing. It was a mistake. Now the cheapest UV filter I have is over $150.00 I just gave away a handful of cheap filters to a friend starting out. He's a poor college student paying his own way. My wife and I help him out from time to time.


1Dx MKII | 1Dx | 5D MKIV | 5D MKIII | 5Ds r | 5Ds | 7D MKII | 7D | G16 | G3x | EOS M & M3 | 800 f5.6 | 600 f4 | 400 f2.8 | 300 f2.8 | 200-400 f4 | 100-400 f4.5 - 5.6 II x 2 | 70-200 f2.8 | 14 f2.8 II | 50 f1.2 | 50 1.4 | 85 f1.2 | 135 f2 | 24-70 f2.8 II | 11-24 f4 | 35 f1.4 II | Pentax 645Z | SMC Pentax-DA 645 25mm F4 AL | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 55mm F2.8 AL | Pentax 90mm f/2.8 D FA 645 Macro ED AW SR | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 200mm f/4 IF | SMC Pentax-D FA 645 300mm f/4 ED IF | SMC FA 645 400mm f/5.6 ED IF Lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Dec 10, 2009 16:34 |  #8

Cheap filters can come in very handy... as coasters to protect your coffee table from that icy cold beer.. or when you run out of clays skeet shooting... or when the kids lose their hockey puck.

"Air" filters are what I use most of the time. They're the most affordable by far. (From the same company that makes "air" guitars.)

When I do need a filter, and yes I do have a stack of them in my camera bag - UV and polarizing - it's a Hoya Pro SHMC, or B+W MRC or Heliopan SH-PMC.

TheMissouriShooter wrote in post #9172809 (external link)
I purchased cheap filters to start figuring cheap was better than nothing.

Yeah, actually you just got it backwards... Nothing is better than cheap, actually. Easy mistake to make, since there's often some salesperson telling you that you need one for the new lens you just bought.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raymond ­ Lin
Senior Member
Avatar
458 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Jul 2005
     
Dec 10, 2009 16:42 |  #9

I buy filters as protection, yes i do use a hood but I know one day the day I didnt use a hood is the day i get something knock against the front element.

£40 filter is cheaper than £1k lens.


_______________
My Website (external link) / SN (external link) / mail (external link) / Flickr (external link) / Blog (external link)
Canon 5DMk4 | Sony A7III | Zeiss 35/1.4 Distagon | Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar | Sony 85/1.8
16-35L | 24-70L | Sigma 20A | 24LII | 35LII | 45TSE | Sigma 50A | 85LII | 100L Macro | 135L | 600EX-RTs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jeromego
Goldmember
Avatar
3,906 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Florida
     
Dec 10, 2009 16:45 |  #10

TSY87 wrote in post #9172767 (external link)
wow... those protection filters are BANK!!

My cheapy sunpack filters give off some nasty glare but i cant afford to buy those filters right now since i just bought some lenses.

Just don't use a filter and use your lens hood. I don't use any UV filters unless I have to (extreme environment conditions).


Jerome
Gear List
Canon CPS Member
www.lightsandimages.co​m (external link)
facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
Dec 10, 2009 16:54 |  #11

I had a guy at a camera store demonstrate the "white paper test"

He set down a $24 filter on a sheet of white paper, and then a B+W filter on the same sheet. whoa! I don't know if this means anything in terms of quality degredation or loss of light, but damn, there certainly was a difference.


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OpenTrackRacer
Member
Avatar
79 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2009
     
Dec 10, 2009 17:02 |  #12

My UV/protection filters didn't cost a dime. You've probably already figured out why. I really can't see a need in most cases. All my lens have hoods (and yours should too) and the front elements are very tough to begin with. It's not worth the money for the high end filters or the loss in image quality for the low end ones.

Mike


Underground Explorers
MSHA Part 48 Certified Underground Miner
National Cave Rescue Commision Certified Search and Rescue

http://www.underground​explorers.com (external link)
http://www.facebook.co​m/undergroundexplorers (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Dec 10, 2009 17:31 |  #13

Cheap filters are definitely NOT worth the money. Its good money you should be putting towards quality filters.

I only use Hoya SuperHMC Pro-1 filters. Don't mistake the Hoya Pro1 Digital (a.k.a. Hoya Pro1D's) for Hoya SuperHMC Pro-1's ... they are NOT the same. The SuperHMC coating formula (available on Hoya SuperHMC and Hoya SuperHMC Pro-1 filters, the Pro-1 refers to the thinner rings 3mm vs. 5mm on standard filters and 5mm vs. 8mm on Circular Polarizers) is 12 layers of coatings - 6 layers per side and transmits 99.7% of the visible light spectrum. Pro-1 Digital is the same coating formula as the old HMC which is 6 layers total - 3 per side and 95% of the spectrum.

As for the white paper test... its not as convincing or demonstrative as the "hold it in your hand" test. If you hold a clean high quality filter in your hand you will NOT see glass AT ALL - no reflections, no glare, no nothing. You'll swear the glass is missing.


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
anthony11
Goldmember
Avatar
2,148 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Seattle
     
Dec 10, 2009 17:50 |  #14

OpenTrackRacer wrote in post #9173158 (external link)
My UV/protection filters didn't cost a dime. You've probably already figured out why. I really can't see a need in most cases. All my lens have hoods (and yours should too) and the front elements are very tough to begin with. It's not worth the money for the high end filters or the loss in image quality for the low end ones.

I wonder if you'd feel differently with a 24-105L in your collection -- the hood is pretty dinky.


5D2, 24-105L, 85mm f/1.8, MP960, HG21, crumbling G6+R72, Brownian toddler

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jeromego
Goldmember
Avatar
3,906 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Florida
     
Dec 10, 2009 17:56 |  #15

anthony11 wrote in post #9173360 (external link)
I wonder if you'd feel differently with a 24-105L in your collection -- the hood is pretty dinky.

I have the 24-105L. don't use any filters on that or any of my lenses. I just use the lens hood, unless i have to use a CPL or ND or dusty conditions.


Jerome
Gear List
Canon CPS Member
www.lightsandimages.co​m (external link)
facebook (external link)

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

1,752 views & 0 likes for this thread
UV filters: any difference?
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 Birdie760
591 guests, 299 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.