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

 
POTN forums are closing 31.12.2023. Please see https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1530921 and other posts in that thread for details.
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Weddings & Other Family Events 
Thread started 30 Oct 2010 (Saturday) 23:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Lens filters or not?!

 
Evilfooker
Senior Member
Avatar
257 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Acworth, GA
     
Oct 30, 2010 23:38 |  #1

Ok so I've gotten into a little debate about the use of lens UV and other filters for wedding shots..

His debate was to want total control and not to want to have a "cheap" filter between his lens and subject.

Mine is using ads complete control w/ canceling out other outside unwanted flare ups and other shot inconveniences. Plus using the so called "cheap" filters to protect you $1500+ lenses form unwanted debris (even though I carry my Rocket Blower in my camera bag)

so thoughts and opinions please. .


James C. | Canon EOS 50D | | EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III AF Lens | EF 50mm f/1.8 | Vivitar 730AFC | Canon AE-1 | 50mm f/1.8 | 28mm f/2.8
JMCromartie Portfolio (external link)

Makes Evil Look Good

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Red ­ Tie ­ Photography
Goldmember
Avatar
3,575 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2009
Location: San Diego
     
Oct 31, 2010 01:52 |  #2

This has been beaten to death. It comes down to ... Are you willing to give up picture quality for perceived protection?


Bryan
Gear List (external link)
San Diego Wedding Photography - Red Tie Photography (external link)
Red Tie Photography Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tfd888
Goldmember
Avatar
1,816 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2009
Location: CA, USA
     
Oct 31, 2010 01:56 as a reply to  @ Red Tie Photography's post |  #3

Beaten...beaten...beat​en

IMAGE: http://fc91.deviantart.com/fs6/i/2005/064/c/0/Beating_A_Dead_Horse_by_livius.gif

I used to have protective filters on my lenses when I first started out, and then wisened up and got rid of those flare ridden, softening, degrading things :lol:

Alexander R.O.
1D-Mark III ~1D-Mark II ~ 60D ~ 20D (Gripped)
(70-200mm L 2.8 IS) ~ (17-40mm L 4.0) (Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro RIP) ~ (50mm 1.8 MKII) ~ (Alpex 35mm f/2.8 M42 mount) ~ (430EX II) ~ (Yongnuo YN-560 III)
My Website (external link) - My Blog (external link)
- My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,010 posts
Likes: 375
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Oct 31, 2010 04:34 |  #4

I own them but don't use them any more. They provide no useful advantages to me. I've not yet damaged a lens front element, and if I ever do they're not that expensive to have replaced. Cheaper than filters for all my lenses anyway. Plus no degraded image quality.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
highway0691
Senior Member
Avatar
672 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2006
     
Oct 31, 2010 06:49 |  #5

Never used them for the reasons listed above. I have however made small scratches on the front element of a couple of my lenses, the only downside to this is poor resale, they do not affect the image quality. I have a healthy disrespect for my equipment and always have, to me the photo is so much more important. Gear is a means to an end - albeit an expensive means.

PS I wouldn't buy second-hand equipment off myself.:)


There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept. Ansell Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peacefield
Goldmember
Avatar
4,023 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2008
Location: NJ
     
Oct 31, 2010 10:25 |  #6

I would only use them for a beach wedding to protect against sand, salt, and spray. I'm careful enough with my gear where, other than that circumstance, there's no value in the protection offered in exchange for the IQ loss.


Robert Wayne Photography (external link)

5D3, 5D2, 50D, 350D * 16-35 2.8 II, 24-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 100-400 IS, 100 L Macro, 35 1.4, 85 1.2 II, 135 2.0, Tokina 10-17 fish * 580 EX II (3) Stratos triggers * Other Stuff plus a Pelican 1624 to haul it all

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
37,971 posts
Gallery: 179 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 13447
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Oct 31, 2010 10:32 as a reply to  @ Peacefield's post |  #7

I use them for an effect but as already mentioned the do little to protect except they do offer some protction in salty, sandy, windy conditions (beach on a windy day)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
howzitboy
Goldmember
2,948 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Hawaii
     
Oct 31, 2010 13:53 |  #8

i use on all my lenses because i shoot in hawaii!! salt spray, suntan lotion, water, dirt, dust, humidity u name it. it also helps when u shooting and its raining. id rather wipe a cheap filter with my shirt to get the water drops off then use my shirt on the lens element.
even on hot humid days they help. my lens fogged up till i couldnt see out of it, i tried to wipe it off and it made it worse. so i just took off the filter and was good to go.

and another point. i have a few lenses the didnt come with a lens shade (hate when they sell them w/out one) and the filter helps protect the lens from bumps.


http://onehourwedding.​blogspot.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tfd888
Goldmember
Avatar
1,816 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2009
Location: CA, USA
     
Oct 31, 2010 15:19 as a reply to  @ howzitboy's post |  #9

There is one other case where using a filter would be wise. Some of Canon's weather sealed lenses are not fully weather sealed until a filter is screwed into place over the front element. There was a list somewhere but I don't have it handy at the moment.

Personally after seeing some of the videos on the web of what the front elements on Canon lenses can take, I really don't have a lot of worries.

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=vzOLbMPe0u8 (external link)

There was another German one somewhere showing what the 17-85 could take.


Alexander R.O.
1D-Mark III ~1D-Mark II ~ 60D ~ 20D (Gripped)
(70-200mm L 2.8 IS) ~ (17-40mm L 4.0) (Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro RIP) ~ (50mm 1.8 MKII) ~ (Alpex 35mm f/2.8 M42 mount) ~ (430EX II) ~ (Yongnuo YN-560 III)
My Website (external link) - My Blog (external link)
- My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TGrundvig
Goldmember
Avatar
2,876 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Colorado
     
Oct 31, 2010 15:25 |  #10

If it is a windy day and I'm up in the Rockies somewhere...yes....I will put a high quality filter on the end. By high quality, I mean it cost me $150 or more. The UV filters that cost less than $100 are made of cheaper glass. If you want to shoot through cheap glass, then just buy cheap glass. Putting a $15 filter on the end of a $2,000 lens is going to give you an image only as good as the filter. You will lose contrast, color, and possibly sharpness. Which are all the same things you lose when shooting with a cheap lens. Cheap filters can turn good glass into bad glass.

If you MUST have a filter, then spend the $150 to $200 and get a very good piece of glass. It's the same with ND filters or CPL filters. The better the glass the better the image.


1Ds Mk II, 1D Mk II, 50D, 40D, XT (for my son), 17-40L, 24-105L, Bigma 50-500 EX DG, Sigma 150 Macro EX DG, Tokina 12-24 AT-X, Nifty Fifty, Tamron 28-300 (for my son), 580ex II, 430ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evilfooker
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
257 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Acworth, GA
     
Oct 31, 2010 18:20 |  #11

some very useful perspectives on use or not, as I said before I mainly use them for a protective element since alot places I've shot at in MA have had to deal w/ the beach and dusty areas. . so there for I prefer to use them. But in alot of place around here in GA I haven't had to worry about the same issues I've had in MA so I'm noticing I'm using them less and less. . except occasionally using my CPL and ND's instead of the UV's I have


James C. | Canon EOS 50D | | EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III AF Lens | EF 50mm f/1.8 | Vivitar 730AFC | Canon AE-1 | 50mm f/1.8 | 28mm f/2.8
JMCromartie Portfolio (external link)

Makes Evil Look Good

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,947 posts
Gallery: 243 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2872
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Oct 31, 2010 21:44 |  #12

If your UV is a high quality item with proper coatings then you should not have any issues when using it harsh environments. My one UV is MRC and performs quite well - but I rarely use it anymore. The hood gets worn all the time though.


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

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

3,585 views & 0 likes for this thread, 10 members have posted to it.
Lens filters or not?!
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Weddings & Other Family Events 
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 was a spammer, and banned as such!
3445 guests, 137 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.