Which filter and brand do you use for your Tamron 17-50?


Epleng

New Member
Oct 26, 2012
13
0
0
33
Singapore
#1
Just want to know what you are using in your system to get an idea. I usually shoot casual like scenery and people. Any brand to recomend? Just want to "protect" my lens. Thanks. :)
 

luckyorange

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2011
2,840
0
36
Ang Mo Kio
#2
Epleng said:
Just want to know what you are using in your system to get an idea. I usually shoot casual like scenery and people. Any brand to recomend? Just want to "protect" my lens. Thanks. :)
A hoya uv filter will do the "protection"
 

sin77

New Member
Nov 28, 2004
1,865
3
0
#3
Normally for slightly more expensive lenses, I will use at least pro1 digital grade. Otherwise I just leave it exposed. So far my thousand dollar leica lens is still exposed after one year of usage.
 

SkyStrike

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 29, 2010
3,444
11
38
Somewhere
#4
Just get a Clear Filter or a UV filter. Reading this post: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/newbies-corner/803029-newbie-guide-filters.html will give you the idea of what are some of the brands to avoid. In short, those brands to avoid will easily introduce flares or lower contrasts of the overall picture (don't mean that more expensive ones won't flare).

On another note, when using UV/Clear (etc) filters, please do take special care when shooting night scenery as ghosting may occur.
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#5
good filter or no filter. (Good: Nikon, highend Hoya, B+W etc..)

you can use cheap filters, but do remember to remove it when you do important shots.
 

JasonB

Deregistered
Jun 2, 2009
871
9
0
#6
If protecting lenses, use a multi coated UV or clear or neutral filter.

In current times they are also called 'Digital' filters coz they don't have color tint and is neutral.

Multi coated are better to reduce glare and flare, ghosting, etc.

The cheap ones are single coated or non coated, it won't says in the box coz it doesn't sound nice but they can't claim it's multi coated.
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,539
33
48
Pasir Ris
#7
The lens does not need any filter protection. Use the lens hood that comes with the lens. Protected my lens in some bumpy occasions. Everything else is scaremongering and profits of sales men.
 

TWmilkteaTW

Senior Member
May 30, 2011
2,251
1
0
#8
This is like asking..which or what kind of fuel you pump into your vehicle.

If u can afford and wish to pay.. go for the high end 1..If not or just for protection seek..the cheapest will do.
 

Feb 7, 2010
120
0
16
Singapore
#9
TWmilkteaTW said:
This is like asking..which or what kind of fuel you pump into your vehicle.

If u can afford and wish to pay.. go for the high end 1..If not or just for protection seek..the cheapest will do.
Better not to have than put a cheap one on. Lower light transmission and even cause ghosting on your image.
 

Oct 27, 2012
39
0
0
Singapore
#11
Better to get a cheap one like Hoya to protect your lens from scratches..

If really kena scratched, lens resale value become zero haha
 

Sep 17, 2008
3,656
0
0
#12
Just want to know what you are using in your system to get an idea. I usually shoot casual like scenery and people. Any brand to recomend? Just want to "protect" my lens. Thanks. :)
no filter. i found it useless and only degrades my image. i prefer to always keep the lenscap in my pocket and cover the lens as a habit
 

Epleng

New Member
Oct 26, 2012
13
0
0
33
Singapore
#13
Thanks for the overwhelming response. I think I might go for a Hoya UV. :)
 

JasonB

Deregistered
Jun 2, 2009
871
9
0
#14
Pet photogr shooting when that dog decided to lick the lens, cleaning filters better than cleaning lens.
Wedding photogr get sprayed with champagne, or party photog when drunk people starts hurling cakes at you, again prefer to clean filters than actual lens.
Industrial photogr documenting men at work doing welding doing wide angle shots fire sparks flying into the lens, I had personally wipe off soot and burn marks off my filter, beats doing it in actual lens.
Another industrial situation documenting a aerosol spray procedure, paint and chemical literally flying in the air that lands and solidify on your filter, instead of lens.
Photojournalist outside courthouse shooting an emotional and aggressive defendant who threw his handphone straight into the lens.
Sea sprays and saltwater, volcanic ashes in the air.

Things people never experienced, they never know.

Filter degrading images is overrated, a thing for pixel peepers, really matters for large print landscapes probably. But most of the time filter will not degrade the contents of a news story, will not degrade your composition, will not degrade your creative idea, will not make emotions captured less emotional or stories less meaningful.

I don't use filter for my 14-24 for obvious reasons, I don't use filter when in studio too, coz I and frequently lighting the background and filters sometimes coz ghosting or contrast problems.

Not wise to take a sweeping stand. Do whatever that works.
 

Sep 17, 2008
3,656
0
0
#15
Pet photogr shooting when that dog decided to lick the lens, cleaning filters better than cleaning lens.
Wedding photogr get sprayed with champagne, or party photog when drunk people starts hurling cakes at you, again prefer to clean filters than actual lens.
Industrial photogr documenting men at work doing welding doing wide angle shots fire sparks flying into the lens, I had personally wipe off soot and burn marks off my filter, beats doing it in actual lens.
Another industrial situation documenting a aerosol spray procedure, paint and chemical literally flying in the air that lands and solidify on your filter, instead of lens.
Photojournalist outside courthouse shooting an emotional and aggressive defendant who threw his handphone straight into the lens.
Sea sprays and saltwater, volcanic ashes in the air.

Things people never experienced, they never know.

Filter degrading images is overrated, a thing for pixel peepers, really matters for large print landscapes probably. But most of the time filter will not degrade the contents of a news story, will not degrade your composition, will not degrade your creative idea, will not make emotions captured less emotional or stories less meaningful.

I don't use filter for my 14-24 for obvious reasons, I don't use filter when in studio too, coz I and frequently lighting the background and filters sometimes coz ghosting or contrast problems.

Not wise to take a sweeping stand. Do whatever that works.
he already said
I usually shoot casual like scenery and people. Any brand to recomend? Just want to "protect" my lens.
how often do you think TS is going to get into the sea, get into a volcanic region, or even a wet dog?

that's why i recommended him to just pass on the filter. no point spending extra on something unnecessary.
 

Last edited:

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,539
33
48
Pasir Ris
#16
Sea sprays and saltwater, volcanic ashes in the air.
Been there, done that, lens is still working fine. Since the lens is not sealed at all there is little value in putting on a filter. Turn the zoom ring a few times and you got the ash particles behind the front element :)
 

heshanj

New Member
Aug 18, 2009
744
0
0
30
Ho Chi Minh City
pixelogist.me
#17
i see its already been mentioned, and im starting to agree too - no use putting a protective filter. expensive, and can be pointless. lens hood is the way to go if u wanna be careful. and comes with most quality lenses too. my current lens, i already got a good B+W filter, but i think for my next setup, i wont be busting up cash on a clear/UV filter.
 

zpbuff

Deregistered
Oct 26, 2012
10
0
0
bukit panjang
#18
i prefer to use filter as protection, at least only need to clean the filter no need to worry damage the lens. get a cheap one and later upgrade to B+W(easy let go).
 

Top Bottom