L Glass & Haze Filter

[cwolfrom]

I would like to have your opinion on this question:

<BR><BR>

Do haze filters compromise the image quality produced by "L"

lenses? Ie. Here we are spending $1000 or more on L glass and then

$30+ on a haze filter to protect that glass from scratches,

etc...but does the image quality go down with this inexpensive

filter on?

<BR><BR>

Thank you in advance, -CW

[picturesque]

Maybe, but that's why you buy the $150 B+W super multi coated haze filter.

[pturton]

Yes, cheap and uncoated filters compromise the image. The following site demonstrates well the problem with inferior filters: http://www.kenandchristine.com/gallery/1054387

[jon wilson]

Did they stop including lens caps with L series lenses?

[gdanmitchell]

My feeling is that it is generally better to avoid adding unnecessary filters, but to use the lens

cap and - when appropriate - a hood to protect the front element.

 

Of course, I recognize that for some kinds of photography it isn't possible to keep snapping

the cap on and off. In these cases a high quality filter makes sense.

[emwalker]

Thanks for the link, that is very interesting. I just asked this question to the guy at my local shop the other day, but his answer was much more nebulous. Now, the idea of putting a $150 filter on a $350 lens seems a little iffy to me, but after this it seems I may be better off chancing it without the cheap one... hmmmm......

[digitmstr]

I NEVER use filters unless there is a reasonable expectation that the location is likely "dangerous" (sand, construction sites, shooting range...;p).

 

It's worth noting that if you like to walk around the city with your lens at "the ready" cars and trucks do kick small rocks and pieces of asphalt into the air.

[bongeiste]

Wow, Paul! It looks like I'll have to start budgeting more for my filters.

[pjmeade]

I think the lens cap and lens hood is the best option.

[dmanthree]

Unless you live in a vaccuum, use a good quality filter. Judging by the amount of crap I clean off the filter on a daily basis, I wouldn't shoot without one. I've done the test shots, and I cannot detect any difference between the two shots (with and without filter). I only use B&W multicoated. No point spending a grand on a lens and skimping of the filter.

[carnagex_carnagex]

Here is a quick photo comparison of three filters. The first is a Canon brand UV Filter, the

second is a Hoya UV Filter, and the third is a Hoya S-HMC UV Filter.

<A HREF="http://homepage.mac.com/summergirl007/.Pictures/Jerry%20/MISC%20/filter%

20test/test%

202.jpg">1.Canon 2.Hoya 3.Hoya S-HMC</A>

[lovcom_photo]

The only problem I've found with filter usage is lens flare, but this has not happened often.

[desmond_kidman]

Wow, the whole filter thing is the greatest scam I've seen. Owners of photo stores just smile about "protective filters". Are you that worried about dropping your lenses or getting damaging dirt on them? I've not scratched, caused a wipe mark, or done any other damage to any of the many lenses I've owned for many camera systems.

 

For those who say the filters don't make any difference in their images, how do they know? Do they shoot every image with and without filters?

 

Being flat, filters are are a much worse problem for reflections than elements. And don't fool yourself into thinking that if you're not seeing obvious reflections that you are not losing contrast by using a filter. You are without knowing it, unless you are always shooting in diffused light with no bright sky or bright cloud cover. For the best images drop the filters.

[carnagex_carnagex]

Im one of those who lives by filters. I go hiking and climbing, and when getting the shots I

want, I leave the cap off all the time, even when pushing through brush, and I will say my

hands, face, camera body, lens body, and filter get pretty scratched up, if I did not have those

filters on, my lens would be as blurry as a softar filter. (filters are only a "scam" if you use

them in the studio or light work)

[dogbert]

"Wow, Paul! It looks like I'll have to start budgeting more for my filters."

 

Yes especially if you intend to shoot a lot of black briefcases in front of light boxes. You will need the most expensive filter you can possibly get!

 

BTW the 50f1.8, which is optically close to some L zooms has six elements and costs about $75. That is about $12 per piece of glass, assuming the plastic, motor and assembly cost nothing.

 

Even a $1000 lens, often has as many as 17 or more elements, and that works out to only $60 per piece of glass.

 

I don't think $30 is too little to spend on a multicoated piece of flat glass. And if you want to spend $150 on a filter be my guest, but you will rarely if ever see any difference compared to a cheap multicoated one.

[desmond_kidman]

Obviously, hiking through heavy brush and getting all scratched up is a far cry from how and where the VAST majority of users will be using their equipment. Let's knock out the 1% exceptions. Heavy brush scratching cameras and elements hardly makes a case for the statement that filters should be used in studio and in light use situations.

[dogbert]

Several of Canon L lenses are only properly weather sealed once a filter has been added.

[dave_nelson___atlanta__ga]

Cleaning the front element of my L glass makes me more nervous than cleaning the sensor on the body. Without a "Haze" filter I would need to clean that front element after every 200 shots or so and I am afraid that I would end up with a scratched up lens in no time. I would rather wreck a handful of $100 filters than a single lens.

 

But for night photography I do remove the filter. And I do buy the highest quality filter that I think is reasonable.

[lester_wareham]

You will find almost everyone will entrenched oposing views on protective filters.

 

For my part I fit Hoya Pro 1 UV filters to all my lenses. These are good quality multi-coated filters. I have ISO tested tele and ultra wide lenses and convinced myself that there is no affect on sharpness or AF accuracy.

[daniel_taylor]

"For those who say the filters don't make any difference in their images, how do they know? Do they shoot every image with and without filters?

 

I've shot enough with/without to know that Hoya S-HMC do not make a noticeable difference.

 

"Being flat, filters are are a much worse problem for reflections than elements."

 

I guess we should all avoid Canon teles with flourite up front. The front elements are flat elements that are there only to protect the flourite right behind them.

 

Moving on...why is it that Canon and Nikon can put excellent coatings on lenses but ship sub-par UV filters? Or could our lens element coatings be better if they licensed technology from Hoya? The test above with the Canon and Hoya S-HMC filters is telling.

[bellavance]

Never a filter (except a Polarizer) and always a Lens Hood on all my lenses.

 

Pierre

[mvw photo]

Never a filter (except when needed for photography, like a polariser). And in spite of using SLRs for over 25 years, I have never yet danaged a lens.