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 24 Oct 2010 (Sunday) 11:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 f4L - Clear or UV filter?

 
RafaPolit
Goldmember
Avatar
1,668 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Quito, Ecuador
     
Oct 24, 2010 11:05 |  #1

Friends,

I was unsure if this belongs on the accessories or the EF section, sorry if it's in the wrong place.

I was wondering if, given the built-in filtering of light on modern DSLRs (I have a T2i) whether the better purchase for an (incoming) 70-200 f4L non-IS would be a Clear Filter or a UV filter (I'll be purchasing Hoya).

I mainly use them as protection, but a small 'haze' filtering for when outdoors would be welcome... that said it will stay on the lens all the time, indoor or outdoor, so indoor must not be affected.

Is there really any significant difference?

On a side note, is the Pro1 line really that much better to justify almost double the price? Currently I'm using a Hoya HMC UV on my 18-55 IS and it has proven to be really good, I have not seen any diminished behavior on my pictures, I leave it on all the time. Would I be better off with the Pro1 line?

Thanks a lot for any feedback,
Rafa.


Rebel T2i | EF-S 17-55 IS | EF 70-200 f4L | EF-S 10-22 | 430EX II |
Picture Galleries at:
www.rafaelpolit.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
EL_PIC
Goldmember
Avatar
2,028 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Austin Texas - Lucca Italy
     
Oct 24, 2010 11:07 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

I use Hoya HMC UV as protection on all lenes.
If you want better use no filter and a lens hood.
Little delta between filters.


EL_PIC - RIT BS Photo '78 - Photomask Engineering Mgr
Canon DSLR - Nikon SLR - Phase One 60MP MFDSLR
http://www.Photo-Image-Creations.com (external link)
http://www.musecube.co​m/el_pic/ (external link)
http://www.facebook.co​m/PhotoImageCreations (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
g3org3y
Senior Member
Avatar
553 posts
Joined Jun 2008
     
Oct 24, 2010 11:46 |  #3

Neither and use the lens hood.

Done. :)


EOS 400D, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 17 -50, Nifty Fifty f/1.8, Canon 100 f/2, 70-200L f/4, Speedlite 430EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
windpig
Chopped liver
Avatar
14,887 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 1194
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Just South of Ballard
     
Oct 24, 2010 11:50 |  #4

g3org3y wrote in post #11155405 (external link)
Neither and use the lens hood.

Done. :)

This.


Would you like to buy a vowel?
Go ahead, spin the wheel.
flickr (external link)
I'm accross the canal just south of Ballard, the town Seattle usurped in 1907.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,513 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Oct 24, 2010 11:59 |  #5

g3org3y wrote in post #11155405 (external link)
Neither and use the lens hood.

Done. :)

Here is your answer!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kaydawgy
Member
160 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:00 |  #6

I would say UV filter.


Canon 7d gripped, Canon 550d gripped, Canon 17-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 28-135mm, Tokina 11-16mm, Sigma speedlite DG-ST 530, Yongnuo 560 (x2) and 460
http://www.huffakerpro​ductions.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,341 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 580
Joined Aug 2009
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:02 |  #7

UV filters are clear and digital cameras aren't sensitive to UV so there's really no difference. BTW I just use the hood too.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jason ­ C
Goldmember
4,726 posts
Gallery: 149 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 1198
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Calabasas, CA
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:10 |  #8

g3org3y wrote in post #11155405 (external link)
Neither and use the lens hood.

Done. :)

I concur...

Jason C


Equipment & Feedback
"I am not interested in shooting new things-I am interested to see things new"--Ernst Haas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
halitime
Goldmember
Avatar
1,271 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Lantzville B.C. Can.
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:13 |  #9

Kenko Pro 1D UV and CPL's work for me.


Gear List : 1D MK II n,Gripped XSi,70-200 f4,300 f4 IS,Canon 24-105 f4,35 f2 IS,EF 50 1.8 MK I,EF-S 10-22,Canon 1.4 II Extender,Canon 25mm Ext Tube,YN 468/460 II,RF 602's
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/halitime/sets/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
richardfox
Goldmember
Avatar
1,883 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bellbrook, Ohio, USA
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:20 |  #10

My oh my, yet another "filter versus no filter" thread!
For optimum protection, use both. If you have expensive, multi-coated filters, there will be minimal, if any, loss of IQ. If you use filters that cost 10 bucks on your $1000+ lens, you get the dummy award!

I used to be one of the "always have a filter" people. Now, I use filters when in less than good conditions such as dust, sand, rocks, hurricanes and when riding in boats. Just common sense! I'd rather lose a millionth of percent of sharpness and contrast than a front element!


Canon 50D gripped, EF 50/1.8, EF-S 10-22, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 100/2.8 macro, 100-400L, 300 2.8L, Canon 500 f8 mirror with chipped EF mount, 580EX, 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters, Canon EF Life-Size converter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RafaPolit
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,668 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Quito, Ecuador
     
Oct 24, 2010 12:30 |  #11

Thanks everyone for the input. I may be a bit 'old school' but I am finding it hard not to use a filter! I'll weigh all the input given.

richardfox wrote in post #11155563 (external link)
My oh my, yet another "filter versus no filter" thread!...

For what is worth, I started a 'Clear vs. UV filter'... I never even considered the option of not using anything, so it was not a filter vs. no filter thread originally. :)

Rafa.


Rebel T2i | EF-S 17-55 IS | EF 70-200 f4L | EF-S 10-22 | 430EX II |
Picture Galleries at:
www.rafaelpolit.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnJ80
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,442 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2006
     
Oct 24, 2010 18:34 |  #12

RafaPolit wrote in post #11155185 (external link)
Friends,

I was unsure if this belongs on the accessories or the EF section, sorry if it's in the wrong place.

I was wondering if, given the built-in filtering of light on modern DSLRs (I have a T2i) whether the better purchase for an (incoming) 70-200 f4L non-IS would be a Clear Filter or a UV filter (I'll be purchasing Hoya).

I mainly use them as protection, but a small 'haze' filtering for when outdoors would be welcome... that said it will stay on the lens all the time, indoor or outdoor, so indoor must not be affected.

Is there really any significant difference?

On a side note, is the Pro1 line really that much better to justify almost double the price? Currently I'm using a Hoya HMC UV on my 18-55 IS and it has proven to be really good, I have not seen any diminished behavior on my pictures, I leave it on all the time. Would I be better off with the Pro1 line?

Thanks a lot for any feedback,
Rafa.

Digital cameras do not respond to UV the way that film used to. You don't need a UV filter.

That said, you don't need a filter at all. Use the hood. Why would you buy such great glass and than put another piece of glass in front of it? You get all the protection you need from the hood.

In the event that you scratch the outermost element even that is easily replaced and costs not much more than a quality filter. Filters for "protection" has got to be one of the biggest profit centers in the entire camera business.

J.


Obsessive Gear List
"It isn't what you don't know that gets you in trouble; it's what you know for sure that isn't so." - Mark Twain

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roroco
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Oct 24, 2010 18:52 as a reply to  @ JohnJ80's post |  #13

If you are going to use a protective lens, I would recommend a B+W MRC UV filter. To me this is the best I can find and have not heard anyone complain about image degradation with this filter. They are a bit expensive, but I think worth it.

I understand the side of the fence that says use a hood and not glass protection, but honestly, any lens is going to get dirty and will need to be cleaned. I feel much better cleaning disposable UV filters out in the dusty, dirty world with my t-shirt, than the front element of any of my $300+ dollar lens.

It is a convenience thing and a piece of mind.


Roger
Gear List: 5D Mark III -- 50mm f/1.4 -- 85mm f1.8 -- 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro -- 17-40mm f/4L -- Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC -- 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II -- 2.0X III TC

Lights -- Alien Bees B800 -- 580 EX II -- Yongnuo YN-560 II & YN-568EX -- Mother Nature -- RF 602s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RafaPolit
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,668 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Quito, Ecuador
     
Oct 24, 2010 18:55 |  #14

Friends, thanks again,

I have to admit a full surprise on my behalf with these suggestions. Of all the possible options, it never occurred to me that 'no filter' would be the prevailing suggestion. Considering there are even lenses that are stated as 'requiring filters for seal', I was almost sure everyone used high-grade filters on their good lenses.

I have to reevaluate my stand on this, thanks for opening a whole new front of ideas! :)

Rafa.


Rebel T2i | EF-S 17-55 IS | EF 70-200 f4L | EF-S 10-22 | 430EX II |
Picture Galleries at:
www.rafaelpolit.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
richardfox
Goldmember
Avatar
1,883 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bellbrook, Ohio, USA
     
Oct 24, 2010 19:24 |  #15

RafaPolit wrote in post #11155615 (external link)
Thanks everyone for the input. I may be a bit 'old school' but I am finding it hard not to use a filter! I'll weigh all the input given.


For what is worth, I started a 'Clear vs. UV filter'... I never even considered the option of not using anything, so it was not a filter vs. no filter thread originally. :)

Rafa.

This is what happens when one gets old! BTW, all my "safety" filters are UV Haze. Really don't think the difference is MUCH of a difference.


Canon 50D gripped, EF 50/1.8, EF-S 10-22, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 100/2.8 macro, 100-400L, 300 2.8L, Canon 500 f8 mirror with chipped EF mount, 580EX, 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters, Canon EF Life-Size converter.

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

8,825 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 f4L - Clear or UV filter?
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 dayuan99
1291 guests, 312 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.