Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 79

Thread: Filters Filters Filters

  1. #41

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Wow, a lens filter fanboy.
    the gearwhorism gets worse and worse everyday, doesn't it?

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Geylang
    Posts
    95

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    not true, not true, not true.

    how long are you going to spout mistruths??
    Which part is not true?

    Many manfacturers?
    People think Kodak the best? (not what I think just what I read online)
    Nikon, Canon do not make their own sensors?

    All not true?
    So this world got 1 holy CMOS maker?
    Nikon and Canon got wafer fab? Hope you know what a wafer fab is, like Chartered Semiconductor which our country lost a lot of money and now it is no longer ours. If they do then there are 2 sensor manufacturer? Ok, granted, they may design and got it OEM, then why we even bother if stuff are made in Japan, Germany or Russia.

    Google is leaving China but still here, so let your finger do the walking.

    U r right http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/...mos_sensors.do
    Canon makes its own.
    http://www.nikon.com/about/technolog...cmos/index.htm
    Nikon develops but not clear if they manufacture it. There are other articles that claims they are dependent on SONY to make for them but that was in 2007
    Last edited by ttmmfast; 25th March 2010 at 07:33 AM. Reason: Mistake

  3. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Geylang
    Posts
    95

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Here are other makers for those who are interested. These are all home pages of the company and of course everyone say they are the best:

    http://www.foveon.com/article.php?a=67
    http://www.samsung.com/us/news/newsR...eq=8054&page=4

    Samsung ones I think is in Pentax Camera.

  4. #44
    Member tortise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Commonwealth
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Wow, a lens filter fanboy.
    aiyah, i'm no fanboy... i only have 1 UV filter for each lens i own (and not many to talk of), just that some of them came thru previous 2nd hand lenses that i bought and subsequently sold (without filter) so that i saved on that for another lens when i got it. Just so happens thread size is same.
    Slow...yeah, steady... not really
    My Flickr | APAD2010

  5. #45
    Member tortise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Commonwealth
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by CS TAN View Post
    Let me just put in my two cents...

    Stack all you want, but if you do that frequently, chances are you will need a pair of filter wrenches because sooner or later, your CPL will get stuck onto your UV or whatever filter you had on the lens. The worse case will be you are able to remove the filters (together) from the lens but is unable to separate them. With your big hands, enjoy trying to separate them...

    BTW, in case you finally give up trying to separate them, give me a PM, I have the filter wrenches that might be able to help...
    hi just to sidetrack a little, i do realise that my CPL is hard to remove sometimes, i have to coax it and just keep trying rotating the 'free' portion till somehow the fixed part (screwed onto lens) starts to free up. This somehow makes me more reluctant to put the CPL on, or if i do, i don't screw it on totally.
    Slow...yeah, steady... not really
    My Flickr | APAD2010

  6. #46
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by tortise View Post
    aiyah, i'm no fanboy... i only have 1 UV filter for each lens i own (and not many to talk of), just that some of them came thru previous 2nd hand lenses that i bought and subsequently sold (without filter) so that i saved on that for another lens when i got it. Just so happens thread size is same.
    Not referring to you.
    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  7. #47

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by ttmmfast View Post
    Which part is not true?
    Quote Originally Posted by ttmmfast
    DSLR have sensors that are made by various companies and supposedly those made by Kodak are the best. Leica and Sigma are the only ones that specify their sensor's origin; guess the rest wants us to believe they design and manufacture the sensors themselves.
    kodak sensors are best? that's like saying canon or nikon is best brand. nonsensical.

    only leica and sigma specify sensor origin? hogwash!

    it is easy to sound like a professor on camera subjects, but please, at least bother to make statements based on facts, instead of hearsay and your own cloud fantasies. it is not nice to spread mistruths and mislead people who don't know better.
    Last edited by night86mare; 25th March 2010 at 10:06 AM.

  8. #48

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    on uv filters and sharpness:

    http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...ns-filters.htm

    Nowadays UV filters are primarily used to protect the front element of a camera lens since they are clear and do not noticably affect the image. With film cameras, UV filters reduce haze and improve contrast by minimizing the amount of ultraviolet (UV) light that reaches the film. The problem with UV light is that it is not visible to the human eye, but is often uniformly distributed on a hazy day; UV therefore adversely affects the camera's exposure by reducing contrast. Fortunately, digital camera sensors are nowhere near as sensitive to UV light as film, therefore UV filtration is no longer necessary.

    However, UV filters have the potential to decrease image quality by increasing lens flare, adding a slight color tint or reducing contrast. Multicoated UV filters can dramatically reduce the chance of flare, and keeping your filter very clean minimizes any reduction in image quality (although even invisible micro abrasions will affect sharpness/contrast). High quality UV filters will not introduce any visible color cast.
    http://www.tiffen.com/camera_filters.htm

    Film, as well as video, often exhibits a greater sensitivity to what is to us invisible, ultraviolet light. This is most often outdoors, especially at high altitudes, where the UV-absorbing atmosphere is thinner; and over long distances, such as marine scenes. It can show up as a bluish color cast with color film, or it can cause a low-contrast haze that diminishes details, especially when viewing far-away objects, in either color or black-and-white. Ultraviolet filters absorb UV light generally without affecting light in the visible region.

    It is important to distinguish between UV-generated haze and that of air-borne particles, such as smog. The latter is made up of opaque matter that absorbs visible light as well as UV, and will not be appreciably removed by a UV filter.
    http://photo.net/equipment/filters/

    this article does address your "our skin does know uv blah blah blah" moot point:

    Now there isn't usually a huge amount of UV around at sea level. There is some (that's what gives you a suntan or a sunburn) but most of it is scattered by the atmosphere. However as you gain altitude, for example by going up a mountain, the amount of UV increases. Under these conditions a UV filter can prevent a blue cast in photographs.

  9. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    here
    Posts
    1,350

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    I reckon it's time to close the thread.

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East
    Posts
    293

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by aspenx View Post
    I reckon it's time to close the thread.
    I agree. This argument is going nowhere and there will be no ending...

  11. #51
    Member tortise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Commonwealth
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Not referring to you.
    oh i see, so blur me...
    Slow...yeah, steady... not really
    My Flickr | APAD2010

  12. #52

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Haha, just like which brand is better ... keke
    7D . 10-22 . 17-55 . 50 1.8 . 18-200 . 70-200 2.8 II . EX580 II
    潜水高尔夫球手 Sunchaser

  13. #53

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by aspenx View Post
    I reckon it's time to close the thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by kutten View Post
    I agree. This argument is going nowhere and there will be no ending...
    Not necessary so, it might be useful to clear up long standing misconceptions on the topic. So far, at least to me, the discussion is still civil.

  14. #54
    Senior Member Numnumball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central
    Posts
    13,914

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by tortise View Post
    hi just to sidetrack a little, i do realise that my CPL is hard to remove sometimes, i have to coax it and just keep trying rotating the 'free' portion till somehow the fixed part (screwed onto lens) starts to free up. This somehow makes me more reluctant to put the CPL on, or if i do, i don't screw it on totally.
    General rule of thumb, never screw "too tight" onto ur thread..

    I having a hard time removing it at times as well..

    and never never attempt to screw one over another, be it ND over UV or CPL over ND..

    I am one of those culprits when i asked for trouble by stacking my ND on my UV just becos i m too lazy to remove the UV in the middle of the shot. Ultimately need wrenches to remove..
    I turned PRO in diaper chg!
    My Flickr|My Son

  15. #55
    Senior Member Numnumball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central
    Posts
    13,914

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by aspenx View Post
    I reckon it's time to close the thread.
    My sentiments exactly.. This is never gg to end...
    I turned PRO in diaper chg!
    My Flickr|My Son

  16. #56
    Member tortise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Commonwealth
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by aspenx View Post
    I reckon it's time to close the thread.
    hmm, but the points and information shared here are enlightening, especially the information quoted with sources. Of course we need discretion when reading. I remember sometime back there was also a thread when someone asked if CCD or CMOS sensor is better, and the debate was also very interesting.
    Slow...yeah, steady... not really
    My Flickr | APAD2010

  17. #57

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by tortise View Post
    hmm, but the points and information shared here are enlightening, especially the information quoted with sources. Of course we need discretion when reading. I remember sometime back there was also a thread when someone asked if CCD or CMOS sensor is better, and the debate was also very interesting.
    Exactly, I agree. Just because not everyone agrees on the same thing doesn't mean the argument is going nowhere, there are still good information coming up here.

  18. #58
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    3,268

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    Quote Originally Posted by Numnumball View Post
    My sentiments exactly.. This is never gg to end...
    One day you will see me

    "Oh no, my ND110 cannot remove from 17-55"

    but first, I have to have a 17-55.

  19. #59

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    With most things that are controversial, there are always interest groups giving their own arguments either side of the coin. Am sure filter manufacturers do pay for researches into the advantage of using filters etc ... One thing for sure, as long as we use and we are happy .... hosei liao ....
    7D . 10-22 . 17-55 . 50 1.8 . 18-200 . 70-200 2.8 II . EX580 II
    潜水高尔夫球手 Sunchaser

  20. #60

    Default Re: Filters Filters Filters

    so much comments, albeit a little ot but i am fine. this thread does not deserve to be closed as there is still much to be discussed (imo). of those who believes that filters are unnecessary, fine. of those that use filters, seems at least to have two groups (to stack or not to stack).

    i gather that unless deemed necessary, i shouldnt be stacking them. and if i should, i keeped them stacked all the time, otherwise seizing occurs? so back to the question, if i stack, is it UV between lens and CPL or CPL between lens and UV? any comments?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

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
  •