Your thoughts on UV/Protective filters
A friend lent me their 16-85mm to try, after taking quite a few shots I realized it had a UV filter on the front, I took it off. In my opinion it was better without, there was a small difference and I don't think It was a cheap filter.
Why not try it, take some with and without the filter and see what you think.
... but apparently sensors are receptive to the UV part of the spectrum whereas film isn’t.
It's the other way round!
The new kids on the block are the clear lens protection filters. UV can be seen at high altitudes so a UV filter should help cut through it and reduce the blueness.
Filters aren't generally necessary with digital though the effect of a polarizer can't be simulated in camera should one wish to reduce reflections. The effect of ND grads can be reproduced from raw files. Do I use filters? Sometimes!
Stuart..
... but apparently sensors are receptive to the UV part of the spectrum whereas film isn’t.
It's the other way round!
The new kids on the block are the clear lens protection filters. UV can be seen at high altitudes so a UV filter should help cut through it and reduce the blueness.
Filters aren't generally necessary with digital though the effect of a polarizer can't be simulated in camera should one wish to reduce reflections. The effect of ND grads can be reproduced from raw files. Do I use filters? Sometimes!
Film is certainly comparatively more sensitive to UV, but silicon sensors are sensitve to some UV & IR. Because of this camera makers fir a hot mirror in front of the sensor (sometimes removed by photographers who want to photograph IR). With standard digital cameras the sensor/hot mirror combination is pretty insensitive to UV. Even with the hot mirror removed it's difficult to capture images in UV it needs special lenses (modern lenses typically stop transmitting slightly above 400nm) as well as complicated filters to pass UV & block visible & NIR. If you use a filter designed for photographing UV with a film camera (such as 'woods glass' or Schott U330) the camera image will be comprised mainly of IR.
In extremely dusty environments etc a UV filter has a benefit, but most of the time it's a waste of space.
.
Pentax:K5ii, K7, K100D, DA18-55, DA10-17, DA55-300, DA50-200, F100-300, F50, DA35 AL, 4* M50, 2* M135, Helicoid extension, Tak 300 f4 (& 6 film bodies)
3rd Party: Bigmos (Sigma 150-500mm OS HSM),2* 28mm, 100mm macro, 28-200 zoom, 35-80 zoom, 80-200 zoom, 80-210 zoom, 300mm M42, 600 mirror, 1000-4000 scope, 50mm M42, enlarger lenses, Sony & micro 4/3 cameras with various PK mounts, Zenit E...
Far to many tele-converters, adapters, project parts & extension tubes etc.
.[size=11:].Flickr• WPF• Panoramio
By keeping a filter on a lens, you only need to clean the filter, thus you won't scratch the front element by attempting to clean it. The vast majority of front element damage is caused by incorrect/over zealous cleaning.
* Even my FA 43Ltd wears a filter full time - this is one of the best FA lenses Pentax make, any IQ lost is insignificant compared to most peoples technique.
** My P67 lenses require huge filters - good ones are really expensive, however there's so much surface area that it takes a big scratch to make a significant difference to the results (unless it's at just the wrong angle).
John.
The hood does offer protection and I'd not use any filters unless there is a specific reason. Protection from salt spray could be one, or the use of a polariser as that can't be duplicated in software.
I would thoroughly recommend a hood for protection instead. Not only are they very cheap and made of plastic or rubber, which will better absorb any shock, but they should improve image quality by increasing contrast and preventing flare.
As John states, filters are best used for their filtering properties or to protect from risk of spray/mud, but not from falls or general dust etc.
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
231 posts
6 years
Do you still, either out of habit or otherwise, fit a protective filter or UV filter to your lenses, or are you happy to rely on the lens hood as enough of protection for the front element?
Also, if using a clear filter, is there any particular brand you are happy with?
Cheers