Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

  1. #21

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Quote Originally Posted by windwaver View Post
    , window pane. I only use the Circular PL in real bright outdoor conditions when the picture I want to shoot requires a PL but it's a real pain removing the UV filter & replacing it with the PL. So I'm wondering if putting the PL in front of the UV filter (for convenience sake) affects the picture quality (again, I see no difference in quality whether if there's a UV filter behind or not).

    Either that, or my eyes are just plain lousy in picking details out
    You would want the cokin P system. Just drop your filter of choice into the holder and fire away. if I use that, I'll forgo the UV filter. But for general purposes, I still use the UV filter especially if I'm at the seaside or in some rough and tumble areas.

    Samuel
    f/8 and be there.

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    north
    Posts
    1,310

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    besides scratches, there are also other elements like old/chemical that can eat into the coating. not a line but more like a smudge patch.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    10,596

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Put it this way:

    Replace a filter - $15-80
    Replace a lens front element group - $100-$800 or so.

    It's cheaper to replace a scratched filter than a front element group, so I'd rather just be safe than sorry.

    I might add, as a testament to using a filter for protection. I once dropped my Canon 35mm f/2 on the ground from waist height, while it was in a lens case. The lens was perfectly fine but the filter's element cracked. Without the filter as the first surface meeting the ground, I think my lens' internals would have been more badly affected.
    Last edited by calebk; 31st May 2008 at 09:34 AM.

  4. #24

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    uv filter in a way works as the first line of defense against the **** the world throws at you, be it scratches, dirt, oil, unidentified fluids or any corrosive stuff that eats through the delicate coatings of the front element. there are times u realise u cant really clean certain stuff off the filters, imagine those kena your front element of your unprotected $$$ lens. tio filter just throw and buy new one, tio unremovable stuff on front element of expensive lens = shiok only LLST go service centre and burn wallet

    but for stuff like 50mm 1.8 i wont really be bothered with protective filter (buy 10 dollar filter which screw IQ might as well dont buy, buy 50 dollar filter also not justifiable) as its front element is rather recessed, spoil just throw n buy new one


    well if you only shoot inside a cleanroom, i doubt you will need one
    :devil:Flick Her

  5. #25
    Senior Member giantcanopy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    SG
    Posts
    6,232

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Quote Originally Posted by keast View Post
    but for stuff like 50mm 1.8 i wont really be bothered with protective filter (buy 10 dollar filter which screw IQ might as well dont buy, buy 50 dollar filter also not justifiable) as its front element is rather recessed, spoil just throw n buy new one
    Woa. Treating the 50mm prime as a disposable. Atas

    Quote Originally Posted by keast View Post
    well if you only shoot inside a cleanroom, i doubt you will need one
    Still can fall the lens.

    Ryan

  6. #26

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    i said spoil can throw because if you can do any actual damage to this tough little lens it would be totally gone case already. or imagine paying repair cost of probably 3/4 of the cost of a new unit. 70-80 dollars i might as well get a new unit for 125 or a 2nd hand for 110.
    Last edited by keast; 1st June 2008 at 07:35 PM.
    :devil:Flick Her

  7. #27

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    i have 2 lenses now.

    18-200 costs me $1200, so i use 72mm Kenko Pro1 Digital UV filter ($50) and CPL ($100).

    For my $160 50/1.8, u think i bother?? no filter in front
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    10,596

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post
    i have 2 lenses now.

    18-200 costs me $1200, so i use 72mm Kenko Pro1 Digital UV filter ($50) and CPL ($100).

    For my $160 50/1.8, u think i bother?? no filter in front
    I wouldn't go by lens cost, but rather by image quality. I have a 35mm f/2 (that is worth S$450) but it has a B+W filter on it, because it is so darn sharp that I want to retain as much of its resolving power as possible, while still protecting it. My more expensive 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 meanwhile, has a Hoya filter on it.

  9. #29
    Senior Member wranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    UK | TWN
    Posts
    3,477

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Quote Originally Posted by sytan81 View Post
    stacking filters will also contribute to internal flares.. if you're serious abt taking a good photo, then do take the time to remove the UV..
    I got no problem with stacking filters and it doesn't cause any flare.
    UK HMS Photojournalist

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Yio Chu Kang
    Posts
    196

    Default Re: Is a UV filter 'protection' necessary in modern days?

    Quote Originally Posted by wranger View Post
    I got no problem with stacking filters and it doesn't cause any flare.
    And your point being? Pls elaborate. Seems like you're trying to share your experiences, but without any conclusion?

    Then again, even if you don't encounter it, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. The world doesn't just revolve around you.

    Top two Google links for stacking filters:

    Link 1
    Link 2
    Sony ɑ55V || Sony 16-105mm F3.5-5.6 || Minolta 28mm F2.8 || Minolta 50mm F1.4 || Minolta 70-210mm F4

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •