Search results for 'uv filter' - page 136
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
Just clicked that shopping button... Thanks for all the advice, I know its the right purchase. Can't wait to force myself to leave the zooms at home:D Now should I use a Protective/uv filter. Don't bother on the dirt cheap zooms.
Posted by smegg on 17/11/2011 - 19:18
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
I've never seen anything that shows UV filters doing anything other than improving image quality. These two sites confirm that and Not sure that either of the tests at those links confirm an improvement in image quality with the filter. They look at the transmission of visible light, and ...
Posted by ChrisA on 20/11/2011 - 11:04
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
The balconies are clearer on the Lenstip photos with a UV used. Mmmm... perhaps, for the top two filters in the line up. For the ones at the bottom they're a lot worse. It's incredibly marginal, even with a 100% crop. In real world photographs you'd be hard pressed to see a difference. I t...
Posted by ChrisA on 20/11/2011 - 11:52
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
It was the Hoya HMC (0) I was looking at quite a common filter, but the balcony shot isn't a very good example. The Leica M8 has problems with IR and needs an additional filter So if M8 users don't mind filters on their lenses I certainly don't :mrgreen: Anyone with Sultan of Brunei gold...
Posted by Algernon on 20/11/2011 - 12:04
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
Got a step up ring + rubber hood of another lens so think this will be enough outside. Will look for a better hood at somepoint. My old cheap filter will keep the little ones sticky fingers away! I am yet to be blown away by the lens compared to the kit, but I am getting usable shots in low light...
Posted by smegg on 01/12/2011 - 20:16
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
Re the mention of uv filters and so on. I now firmly believe they are placebos. I used to work with an art director who insisted on such nonsense because it was received wisdom. I would ask my assistant to attach the DFA filter. before anyone asks the first word is' 'does' and the third one is...
Posted by gartmore on 02/12/2011 - 13:57
The cheap 2.4 35mm... or spend elsewhere?
I have seen more lenses by broken filters scratching the front element than any filter save a lens. I never use a filter for what its worth...
Posted by cabstar on 02/12/2011 - 14:31
is it worth a punt
Stan, I think the most highly regarded is the Tamron. That one is design to be used with the filters, and does come with a rear filter set, including a clear filter If you want to try out a mirror lens, you can always pop round. I'm in Blyth
Posted by Blythman on 26/11/2011 - 12:07
Voigtlander Nokton 58mm/F1.4 SL II fit Pentax PK
Samples, f1.4 f6.3 f8 f2.5 1/400s ISO1600 (K-7!!!!) f5.6 f6.3 all hand held except the macro And with a +5 achromatic close up filter and 32mm tube (almost 1:1 macro) f8 1/8s
Posted by dougf8 on 27/11/2011 - 07:14
Ultimate collection of lenses that you would like
Looks like one, but I don't think the lens is anything special at least not judging by these photos: If anyone has one of these, it's reported to be sharper wide open with a decent UV filter on the front. (112mm I think).
Posted by Algernon on 10/12/2011 - 14:31
Sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 Aspherical HF
Have a think about your images and what you would use most....(sorry yawn) The 35-70 is a good lens, I'm not sure about the Sigma, PF lens reviews rate it at 7.5 (for what that's worth) comparing it on a par (used well) with the kit lens. From the review it will only give you more on the long en...
Posted by dougf8 on 03/12/2011 - 06:58
Amazon Da 55 -300mm deal
When "a friend" dropped his GX20 with a heavy metal lens on it, the impact ripped the mount out of the front of the camera. My "friend" was gutted and I know he would have preferred a plastic lens and mount to have cushioned the impact, maybe preserving the camera intact. Not that "my friend" is e...
Posted by jeallen01 on 02/01/2012 - 08:51
Hood v quality filter
Having bought the bargain primes on Amazon yesterday, I was wondering if I need to get a hood or is a quality filter (like HOYA HD) to get the most out of the lens (aberrations and flaring)
Posted by Pentaxonian on 14/12/2011 - 14:26
Hood v quality filter
Hood; but I'm biased as I don't use filters after bad experiences with reflections on the DA55-300.
Posted by sterretje on 14/12/2011 - 14:34
Hood v quality filter
Hood - not only does it help to reduce flare it can also improve contrast, a UV filter does neither of these and it could be argued it doesn't really provide any benefit:roll: Simon
Posted by simonkit on 14/12/2011 - 14:53
Hood v quality filter
Hood. It will provide flare resistance, improve the contrast as a result and will take the first knocks should the lens get bumped into anything.
Posted by johnriley on 14/12/2011 - 15:24
Hood v quality filter
definitely hood....
Posted by kingfisher on 14/12/2011 - 16:43
Hood v quality filter
Yes, you need to become a Hoody.:D:D
Posted by snappychappy on 14/12/2011 - 17:28
Hood v quality filter
Hood. And filter if muck / dust / salt water is flying at the lens :wink:
Posted by Pentaxophile on 14/12/2011 - 17:29
Hood v quality filter
Hood. And filter if muck / dust / salt water is flying at the lens :wink: Ditto
Posted by gartmore on 14/12/2011 - 17:38
