 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / January 2008Using UV filter for lens protection
I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. This will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering what everyone thought of the practice of using a UV filter to protect the lens? I know there may be a risk of vignetting at 10mm although I believe some filters are quite thin.  SignaturePaul Giverin British Jet Engine Website:- www.britjet.co.uk My photos:- www.pbase.com/vendee > I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. This > will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering what > everyone thought of the practice of using a UV filter to protect the > lens? I know there may be a risk of vignetting at 10mm although I > believe some filters are quite thin. Yes You can get very slim filters now and its certainly worth it to use a uv or even a plane glass one That some makers are doing think I would be happy with the uv. If you notice any vignetting at 10mm you can always unscrew it But it will probably cause nomore then what may be present in the lens at full stretch SignatureTrev You can always tell a Yorkshire man, But you can't tell him much. > > I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. This > > will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering what [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > If you notice any vignetting at 10mm you can always unscrew it But it will > probably cause nomore then what may be present in the lens at full stretch I have always fitted a UV, or Skylight filter to every. Of course it's meant I've never even damaged a filter as yet, but that could be all part of sod's law! You can get around the vignetting, which seems pretty common on many DSLR wide angle lenses. Try not to use a wide aperture at the shortest zoom. Photoshop (even Elements can) can also deal with it at the RAW processing stage too. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. This > will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering what > everyone thought of the practice of using a UV filter to protect the > lens? I know there may be a risk of vignetting at 10mm although I > believe some filters are quite thin. Occasionally flare can be a problem with filters but I always use a UV/Skylight filter and just take it off when I notice that flare is a problem. Roger > I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. This will > easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering what everyone > thought of the practice of using a UV filter to protect the lens? I know > there may be a risk of vignetting at 10mm although I believe some filters > are quite thin. I think Andy has probably summed it up when he said he's never damaged a filter. IMHO, it's not worth it. The idea of always fitting a 'protection' filter was probably started by the retailers to increase their profits. I used to use them until I really thought about why I did it, then I stopped and haven't used one for years. A lens hood is a good idea and also gives some protection from knocks etc. Nothing will protect a lens from being dropped. Any dust/dirt can usually be cleaned off with a brush or lens tissue. The only time a filter might be useful is to protect from sea spray/salt etc. Bear in mind that, having spent all that money on the lens, do you really want to degrade the image by putting another piece of glass in front of it? Signaturewww.monopix.co.uk >> I'll be taking delivery of a Canon 10-22mm in the next few days. >> This will easily be the most expensive lens I own. I was wondering [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > want to degrade the image by putting another piece of glass in front > of it? I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to take it of. SignatureTrev You can always tell a Yorkshire man, But you can't tell him much. > I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to take > it of. Yes, and I have my camera kit insured, but I don't expect to have to make a claim. The difference is, a filter will always degrade the image to some extent. Can you accept that more than the risk of damage. I will accept it if the filter is doing some good - maybe to improve the image in other ways or, as I already said, in environments like by the sea, but generally I won't. It depends on what you perceive the filter is protecting against and whether you are prepared to accept the risk. >> I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to take >> it of. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >It depends on what you perceive the filter is protecting against and whether >you are prepared to accept the risk. Thanks to everyone who replied. Obviously there isn't one consensus but I have given it some further thought. I tend to be quite careful with my camera and lenses. I haven't managed to damage one yet. I'll probably give the filter a miss and just rely on the lens hood to give some degree of protection against knocks etc. SignaturePaul Giverin British Jet Engine Website:- www.britjet.co.uk My photos:- www.pbase.com/vendee > >> I have anti virus and Not recived one for years. But Im not going to take > >> it of. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > to damage one yet. I'll probably give the filter a miss and just rely on > the lens hood to give some degree of protection against knocks etc. Just avoid sandstorms and any event that may spray gunk into the lens :) Roger >Just avoid sandstorms and any event that may spray gunk into the lens :) > >Roger If I was using the lens in that sort of environment, I'd probably buy a filter. Trouble is, I wouldn't want to buy a cheap filter that would compromise image quality and I wouldn't want to lash out on an expensive filter if I was going to use it infrequently :) SignaturePaul Giverin British Jet Engine Website:- www.britjet.co.uk My photos:- www.pbase.com/vendee >>Just avoid sandstorms and any event that may spray gunk into the lens :) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > compromise image quality and I wouldn't want to lash out on an expensive > filter if I was going to use it infrequently :) I have Hoya filters on all my Canon lenses( FD/EOS) ,I see them as safety glasses for camera lenses. I drooped my old 300mm FD lens on concrete while on holiday 3 years ago.The filter is no more , but the lens being plastic survived as did the fromt element of the lens. This is the first lens I have ever drooped in over 30 years of photography ,but you can bet that my eos lenses have Hoya filters on them Ian Grindey Output certified microsoft free checked with Suse 10.3 Paul Giverin <paul@giverin.co.uk> opined >>Just avoid sandstorms and any event that may spray gunk into the lens :) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >compromise image quality and I wouldn't want to lash out on an >expensive filter if I was going to use it infrequently :) If you were using the camera in those conditions, there's more than the lens surface to worry about, especially the adjustment rings. If they start grating or sticking, you've still got problems. Put it in a polythene bag (and don't take any photos!!!). Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis Pictures at http://www.flickr.com/photos/watchman/ <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <>< > If you were using the camera in those conditions, there's more than the > lens surface to worry about, especially the adjustment rings. If they > start grating or sticking, you've still got problems. Put it in a > polythene bag (and don't take any photos!!!). You can still take photos with the lens poking out of a polythene bag, I've done it many times with an elastic band holding the polythene tight. Roger > > If you were using the camera in those conditions, there's more than the > > lens surface to worry about, especially the adjustment rings. If they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You can still take photos with the lens poking out of a polythene bag, I've > done it many times with an elastic band holding the polythene tight. So do you put the other laccy band around your neck? :-) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.