Question re. filters

[anslea]

Hi Folks,
I'm a beginner and would like to know if there are different UV filters that should be used on super zoom lenses -- that is, different than a filter you would buy for use on a DSLR fixed lens? I've read the thread on whether to use a filter at all, but will probably err on the side of protecting from scratches by using one and want to know what folks would recommend for my Tamron 18-250 mm lens.
THANKS in advance!

 

[Plato]

Hi Folks,
I'm a beginner and would like to know if there are different UV filters that should be used on super zoom lenses -- that is, different than a filter you would buy for use on a DSLR fixed lens? I've read the thread on whether to use a filter at all, but will probably err on the side of protecting from scratches by using one and want to know what folks would recommend for my Tamron 18-250 mm lens.
THANKS in advance!

The UV protection accomplishes nothing with digital sensors. If you're concerned about protecting your lens, buy a high quality multi-coated clear glass protector filter. I emphasize high quality because, in addition to whatever good things that a filter will do, it always has the potential to cause harm. You're adding two flat glass surfaces, which is not a good thing.

 

[PhotoXopher]

Same filters, zoom vs fixed (prime) makes no difference. If you're only getting it for this purpose get the cheapest one you can find and buy a few while you're at it to throw in the case in the event one should be overwhelmed with flying stones - then you'll have a spare or two.

 

[Big Mike]

If you're only getting it for this purpose get the cheapest one you can find

I wouldn't recommend this at all.

The quality of your images is dependent on the glass that the light travels though, before getting to your camera. If you put crappy glass in front of your lens, chances are that it will negatively affect the light, and thus affect your images.

A lot of people do use UV filters as protection filters.

 

[Plato]

A lot of people do use UV filters as protection filters.

Most likely because UV filters did have a benefit with film. The UV protection doesn't hurt but, with digital sensors, it's about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.

 

[DWS]

DO NOT cheap out and use inexpensive filters unless you enjoy expanded lens flare and soft photos

 

[PhotoXopher]

If their only purpose is 'protection' then why not? If you keep buying expensive filters why not just use the lens cap and hood for protection? Replacing expensive filters would cost more than the lens

 

[Big Mike]

With that attitude, what's the point of using an expensive camera then? Might as well just use a disposable camera.

 

[Derrel]

Expensive protective filters are made by the B+W company. They makes some very good quality protective filters that are really easy to clean. Hoya HMC filters have long had a reputation as being difficult to clean--with a cleaning tissue or even a microfiber seemingly making a smeary mess of things, even as fresh,new cleaning material is used to try and keep the 'smearies' under control.

I dunno...I quit using UV and clear filters about a decade ago,after having been absolutely paranoid about keeping filters on all my lenses except when shooting right toward the sun. The results have been good.

Just as I have not poked myself with a fork in the eye while eating in over 45 years, neither have any of my lenses been scratched by the "tree branch" some people keep introducing into their argument in favor of filters.

 

[anslea]

Thanks, all
Guess some folks have pretty strong feelings on to use/not to use. But I gather there is no distinction between filters made for film cameras and digital cameras--one made for one will work on the other? Subject to all the caveats listed, of course.

 

[PhotoXopher]

You bet, as long as the size is right - rock it.

 

[dry3210]

So what are some good companies that make UV filters and what are some to stay away from?

 

[chammer]

i bought some really nice uv filters for my 50mm and 17-50mm when i got them and used them from the time they were unpacked from the boxes...until a couple days ago. even though i've been pleased i have still been going back and forth as to whether or not its worth the chances of my images coming out fuzzy (even though i dont notice a difference personally between the filter on and off). if i ever get to a more hostile environment to shoot then i may reconsider putting them back on, but for around the house/backyard, and the park...i just dont see the point anymore.

 

[Plato]

If their only purpose is 'protection' then why not? If you keep buying expensive filters why not just use the lens cap and hood for protection? Replacing expensive filters would cost more than the lens

It's difficult to get a good picture when the lens cap is on. :lmao:

If my filters cost more than your lens, I don't want to see your pics. :smileys:

 

[Plato]

Expensive protective filters are made by the B+W company. They makes some very good quality protective filters that are really easy to clean. Hoya HMC filters have long had a reputation as being difficult to clean--with a cleaning tissue or even a microfiber seemingly making a smeary mess of things, even as fresh,new cleaning material is used to try and keep the 'smearies' under control.

I dunno...I quit using UV and clear filters about a decade ago,after having been absolutely paranoid about keeping filters on all my lenses except when shooting right toward the sun. The results have been good.

Just as I have not poked myself with a fork in the eye while eating in over 45 years, neither have any of my lenses been scratched by the "tree branch" some people keep introducing into their argument in favor of filters.

I'm in the middle ground. I have high-quality clear glass protector filters that I use only when the circumstances warrant. Most of the time, I'm simply too lazy to put them on. I honestly can't say that they've ever saved my glass.