Lens Filters

Alright not sure where to start here... First off I'm an outdoorsman and do all my shooting in outdoor settings. With that being said a UV filter is a must for what my lenses go through. How important is it to have a nice (most likely high dollar) filters? I just recently bought a 24-105 lens for my all around lens and need filters. I am interested in a UV, CPL, and ND that thread on to lens. Do you recommend any kits that are priced reasonably? I purchased a Vivitar kit last night which was cheap, will i be satisfied with these? I am also very interested in purchasing a couple graduated ND filters for sunrise, sunsets, and more intense skies. I have heard Singh-ray is the way to go but hate to spend that much for my first attempt with this type of filter.

The main problem with cheap filters is lack of good coatings (or any coatings) which means they will very likely flare a lot. I use only B+W MRC UV filters and have experienced no perceptible degradation on my images.

This is one of the most contentious issues on the board - 'protection' versus naked glass. You may expect some opinionated posts.

The old nautical adage holds good - Why spoil the ship for a hap'n'worth of tar? In other words, if your shooting circumstances require a protective filter, go for the best. There is little point in investing in good glass then shoving a cheapo filter in front on it.

I belong to the 'naked' school, but retain my UVs for motor rallies (flying pebbles and dust) and the beach (windblown sand and spindrift). And rain.

I don't have any ND filters but found the Hoya Pro-1 CPL to be an excellent polariser; I've yet to provoke flare and I can see no perceptible degradation in IQ.

After-thought - I'm guessing you're aware there's already a UV/IR filter positioned directly in front of the sensor; any UV filter you put on the lens is redundant and useful only for protection.

first thing you need to realize, is that a UV filter is not a must for your lenses...

for the graduated ND you're going to want a square one so you can adjust the horizon level depending on where you need it for the shot

for the ND, and CP you're going to want to spend a bit of money if you don't want the image to be affected

Pretty good chance, those Vivitar filters will be junk.

Spend your money on a decent CPL, and use hoods, not filters to protect your glass. Opinions may vary

I never liked the graduated filters, and quite often a polarizing filter will give much better results for the same effect.

Just an echo of what others have said. Use a hood to protect the glass. The front lens element is a lot harder than people give it credit for. The coatings may scratch but that doesn't do optical damage. The glass itself doesn't scratch easily but one thing that will scratch it is broken glass. Same thing with water. If the filter ring isn't sealed, the it can trap water which is the opposite of what you want. The UV filter doesn't help optically because you already have a UV filter on your sensor. The only time I use a filter for protection is on a beach where blown sand and salt can be an issue.

When you do use filters, buy good ones. If you can't afford B+W, I think marumi makes the best lower cost filters in their Super DHG line. The cheap ones will make your images uglier than any regular lens scratches short of sandpaper.

I use Lee filters. I don't bother with UV filters - they really aren't necessary.

Windsun33 wrote in post #15099444
I never liked the graduated filters, and quite often a polarizing filter will give much better results for the same effect.

No, a polarizer will not give the same effect as a GND. Not even close.

When I got my DSLR, I bought cheap UV filters for the lenses. They really hurt image quality. I switched to good UV filters (Hoya HMC or B&W F-Pro), and those did fine. However, even the best UV filter I could find (Hoya HD) interfered with auto-focus and perhaps IQ on my 100-400 lens. That lens now goes naked. I'm inclined to remove the UV filters from my other lenses now that I'm comfortable without it on my 100-400.

I'm very happy with my Hoya HD circular polarizer.

I use Lee GND filters. The 4x6 rectangular set. I also use the holder that attaches to the front of the lens. Many people just hand-hold the filters, but I'm not comfortable doing that yet. I have found the GND filters to be very helpful with landscape shots. HDR is ok, but I'm one of those people who likes to get the shot "in camera" if I can.

The Lee GND filters are big enough that I can use them as ND filters, too. The filters are 6" tall, so the dark part can fully cover any of my lenses (my biggest uses a 77 mm filter). I have 1, 2, and 3-stop GND filters. I can stack them to get up to 6 stops of darkening. If I pixel-peep, there probably is image degredation. However, I'm very satisfied with the shots I've taken this way.

Regards, Jim

I have purchased Hoya clear filter to protect my 24 - 105
http://www.amazon.com …ef=oh_details_o​05_s00_i00

Windsun33 wrote in post #15099444
I never liked the graduated filters, and quite often a polarizing filter will give much better results for the same effect.

They give nothing like the same effect.

I will sidestep the protection issue and let others argue that.

For a CPL, I am very happy with my Hoya Pro 1. That being said, if I were to buy one now, I would probably go with the B+W.

For a UV, I think the Hoya ones are just fine.

For GND filters, I would go with the Lee system if you can actually get your hands on it.

If you need a 9/10 stop ND filter, the Hoya ND-400 has served me well.

saashka wrote in post #15100856
See with filters, I'd only recommend using the MRC B+W XS-Pro for expensive gear, and F-Pro for cheaper glass. Depending on the focal length of the lens, as some bigger filters are adding to the vignetting effect.

Your decision should be based only on focal length, not whether the lens is cheap or expensive, since the only difference between the xs-pro and f-pro is the thickness of the filter (slim vs standard).