FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

UV filter image degrading

 Page  <12
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 7272 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 19:30
Originally posted by EarthQuake EarthQuake wrote:

Here's a worst case scenario... I would say 95% of my photography does not involve shooting directly into bright light sources though, so I'm not going to worry about it, for everything else even a dirt cheap filter has little or no perceivable impact on IQ, just my opinion and observation though of course.

Logic tell us that a typical photographer should routinely encounter an infinite range of shooting situations between 'no visible effect' and 'very obvious visible effect'. If you leave your filters on as a habit, there will eventually be some consequences that are between the extremes. The consequences of leaving them off as a habit are either 'no impact' or 'impact' - although the impact might range from an easily cleaned water spot to a shattered front element. Again, it's all a probability game.
TheSyberSite
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
EarthQuake View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 23 July 2011
Location: Iowa City, IA
Status: Offline
Posts: 714 		Post Options Post Options   Quote EarthQuake Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 19:48
Right, I think those situations can generally be summed up in "little perceivable impact" ie: you would need to be making very large prints to tell the difference. Perception gets very subjective though, I was mostly sharing my experience with my own gear, I can't ever really remember a situation where I was cursing myself for using a UV filter.

Though I would be happy to see/read of any other example situations that are less extreme but which still show obvious IQ degradation.

Edited by EarthQuake - 09 July 2012 at 19:51
Back to Top
smf View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 05 August 2011
Country: Canada
Status: Offline
Posts: 181 		Post Options Post Options   Quote smf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 20:15
Wow, this reminds me of a religious debate.

I just want to know if there's a difference. I have a hard time seeing one, it's not a good test, but I don't shoot in a studio, so it's a reasonable approximation of lighting conditions I might encounter. A good friend took a look at it and said "Yeah, looks like the one UV filter is robbing you of some sharpness". Ok, I didn't see it. But he has both better eyes and a superior display.

I don't perceive enough degradation to cause me to NOT use either of those filters when I would normally do say, say shooting at a beach.
-Scott
*Sony a57, 18-55kit, 18-70kit *Minolta 70-210/4, 50/1.7, 28/2.8, 35-105/3.5-5.6 *KMZ Helios 44-2 *Sigma 90/2.8 Macro *Vivitar 7/3.5 Fisheye *Tair-11a *Tamron 17-50/2.8
Back to Top
robertsmx View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 January 2012
Country: United States
Location: Dallas, TX
Status: Offline
Posts: 488 		Post Options Post Options   Quote robertsmx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 20:18
To me, the greater concern is reduction of visible light. Overall, I favor use of clear or UV filter for the reason, and reduce the risk of having small marks on the front element, from having to clean the lens regularly, than to do that to a filter and replace it. Of about a dozen lenses in my bag, only one doesn’t have a filter (my collection is primarily B+W, Hoya and Marumi). It appears, this lens never did. But I picked it up used for only $18 (Minolta 28mm MD) so it mattered little that there is a slight blemish on the front element. I would hate to see that fate to any of my other lenses. In fact, my Takumar 50mm/1.4 has got a flawless front element and it came with an old filter (since replaced). The filter itself was full of scratches.

I don’t think with quality UV (or, in case of my 200mm G APO HS, Minolta Clear filter), loss of IQ is as much a concern whereas having to subject the front element to the elements is a guarantee without it. Well made UV filters appear capable of letting 98% or more of visible thru, a minor compromise IMO.
A55|16-50mm SSM|18-250mm HSM|35mm SAM|70mm Macro|135mm STF|200mm HS||NEX-3|18-55 E|8mm E|50mm Planar|LA-EA2
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 7272 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 20:42
Originally posted by smf smf wrote:

I just want to know if there's a difference.

Very few photography decisions can be boiled down to a simple yes/no answer. I think we have adequately demonstrated that use of filters is not one of those.
TheSyberSite
Back to Top
EarthQuake View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 23 July 2011
Location: Iowa City, IA
Status: Offline
Posts: 714 		Post Options Post Options   Quote EarthQuake Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 21:09
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by smf smf wrote:

I just want to know if there's a difference.

Very few photography decisions can be boiled down to a simple yes/no answer. I think we have adequately demonstrated that use of filters is not one of those.


Yeah absolutely, I don't think the question should be "is there a difference?" but "when is there a difference?".
Back to Top
Silver View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 September 2006
Country: Sweden
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Posts: 1361 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Silver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 22:12
Is Hoya noticably worse compared to B+W ?

Also is Sony/Zeiss and B+W about the same quality wise ?

And anyone know where the Sony/Zeiss filters can be purchased from ?
Looking for a Swedish or European website.

Are these the Zeiss filters ??
http://www.sony.se/product/dsl-filters



Edited by Silver - 09 July 2012 at 22:16
Alpha77, 11-18mm, 16-50mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 macro, HVL-F58AM.
Back to Top
robertsmx View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 January 2012
Country: United States
Location: Dallas, TX
Status: Offline
Posts: 488 		Post Options Post Options   Quote robertsmx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 22:16
Hoya filters are said to be among the best. I'm sure Sony Zeiss filters are wonderful too. The difference between them: price!

Hoya Multi-coated filters are good enough, with B+W multi-coated right there as well. They are also among the best in visible light transmission. Cheap filters, however, can bring in issues.
A55|16-50mm SSM|18-250mm HSM|35mm SAM|70mm Macro|135mm STF|200mm HS||NEX-3|18-55 E|8mm E|50mm Planar|LA-EA2
Back to Top
sye46 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 07 June 2010
Country: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 112 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sye46 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 22:21
hoya is rated top 3 from the lensip tests.

http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html
Back to Top
utcreeper View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 October 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1150 		Post Options Post Options   Quote utcreeper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 July 2012 at 22:49
Originally posted by Silver Silver wrote:


Are these the Zeiss filters ??
http://www.sony.se/product/dsl-filters


No, the Zeiss filters are labeled Carl Zeiss T*, not Sony.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Brand_Zeiss&ci=112&N=4277997902+4291107378
Me @ flickr
Various A-mount gear
Back to Top
Silver View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 September 2006
Country: Sweden
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Posts: 1361 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Silver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2012 at 13:56
Nice to know that my Hoya filters are not that bad
Mostly bought Hoya because it was avalible locally.
Alpha77, 11-18mm, 16-50mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 macro, HVL-F58AM.
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the Minolta / Alpha-mount dSLR photographer.

Feel free to contact us if needed. You can support future development by making a donation.

Links monetized by viglink VigLink