UV or not UV

iceblinker
Posted 07/02/2010 - 11:36 Link
grahamwalton wrote:
Over the years I have had to replace a number of filters for scratches, chips, and breakages. I am glad I did not need to replace the lenses. Only this week I replaced a scratched filter.
Filters scratch and break much more easily than lenses, in my experience.
~Pete
Edited by iceblinker: 07/02/2010 - 11:37
Greytop
Posted 07/02/2010 - 11:59 Link
bforbes wrote:
I was pointed at this test and article. link
Interesting, so it goes to show that if you are using filters it's probably worth investing in the top quality Hoya SMC Pro range.
Regards Huw

flickr
Posted 07/02/2010 - 12:17 Link
bforbes wrote:
I was pointed at this test and article. link
Thanks - very useful link - was surprised at the high prices quoted but then realised they were in zloty...
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...
Anvh
Posted 07/02/2010 - 16:50 Link
bforbes wrote:
I was pointed at this test and article. link
supplement link
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Roscoe
Posted 07/02/2010 - 17:02 Link
iceblinker wrote:
womble wrote:
We will never get agreement over this one. It is always going to be a personal preference based on circumstances.
I do agree with that statement, and I wouldn't try to disuade anyone who is happy to use a filter for protection. That's not the point of the arguments. The point is hopefully to help undecided people. They should hear all the arguments for and against and make up their own minds. It's not a subject to be taken personally.
Absolutely!

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo