? about cheap UV filters

[pony]

I ordered and will be receiving my new camera and lenses on wednesday (yay!)
I do not have a lot of $$ to invest in filters right now but would like to keep something on the lenses for protection sake.
Are the $4 UV filters going to mess up or distort the photos in any way?
Is there a particular affordable filter that you like?
Thanks

 

[Eco]

I was having problems with the cheap ones giving me a bunch of glare. Lol, my local camera store showed me the difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones and it cost me some $$ to switch over. For me it was worth paying the money for the expensive ones for when my lens need protection.

 

[KmH]

Protection from what?

Lenses come with a lens cap to protect them when they're not in use.

Most lenses come with a lens hood that when used improves contrast and provides a buffer safety zone from slight impacts when the camera and lens are in use.

Filters promote lens flare, decrease contrast, get stuck on the front of the lens, shatter and damage the front of the lens they were supposed to 'protect'.

In short, the best filter for protection is the one you don't buy.

 

[BoxPhotographer]

Good quality filters make a difference. Trust me.

But if you have to go with cheap filters, the go for it, I would rather have a cheap $5 filter broken than a $800 lens broken.

 

[pony]

Protection from what?

Scratches etc.
I am outdoors a lot. The filters on my current lenses have saved them from lots of small scratches (sand, twigs etc). Scratches that would seriously bum me out on my lens, but not bad enough to shatter the filter and ruin my lens completely.
If I was just out shooting landscapes all by myself a hood would probably do...but I am often cruising around with a toddler, a couple of dogs, the random horse...

I have been looking around and have seen some Hoya ones at low prices. Any opinions?

 

[pony]

I was having problems with the cheap ones giving me a bunch of glare. Lol, my local camera store showed me the difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones and it cost me some $$ to switch over. For me it was worth paying the money for the expensive ones for when my lens need protection.

Good quality filters make a difference. Trust me.

But if you have to go with cheap filters, the go for it, I would rather have a cheap $5 filter broken than a $800 lens broken.

Which ones do you guys like?
Thanks

 

[rvaphotographer]

I've been using a Digital Concepts UV filter with my camera. It works fine for me. It was only 20 bucks.

 

[Eco]

Promaster Digital for UV and circular polarizing filters. I have not tried any other brands excluding the POS that they sell at Best Buy.

 

[TJ K]

But if you have to go with cheap filters, the go for it, I would rather have a cheap $5 filter broken than a $800 lens broken.

I don't agree with this. I would rather shoot without one and get good picture quality then get a 5 dollar filter and have low contrast, a lot of flare and ghosting, and just an overall reduction in quality. It isn't worth it at all. You get what you pay for most of the time.
TJ

 

[chip]

I would say either use a good filter or no filter. A bad filter can reflect some of the light. I have been using the Hoya SMC Skylight 1B filters and find them work very well. They are not cheap but are reasonably priced.

 

[HikinMike]

Protection from what?

Lenses come with a lens cap to protect them when they're not in use.

Most lenses come with a lens hood that when used improves contrast and provides a buffer safety zone from slight impacts when the camera and lens are in use.

Filters promote lens flare, decrease contrast, get stuck on the front of the lens, shatter and damage the front of the lens they were supposed to 'protect'.

In short, the best filter for protection is the one you don't buy.

+1. :mrgreen:

 

[DerekSalem]

Protection from what?

Lenses come with a lens cap to protect them when they're not in use.

Most lenses come with a lens hood that when used improves contrast and provides a buffer safety zone from slight impacts when the camera and lens are in use.

Filters promote lens flare, decrease contrast, get stuck on the front of the lens, shatter and damage the front of the lens they were supposed to 'protect'.

In short, the best filter for protection is the one you don't buy.

+1. :mrgreen:

Disagree. I don't think anyone should buy a cheap filter, but a good filter can actually make the pictures look quite a bit better in different conditions. I use a Hoya Pro1 on my Sigma and the difference is noticeable. I have no coloration, saturation, contrast, or glare issues with it at all. The Hoya was around $55 I think (my dad bought it for me for my birthday this year).

I use a Canon UV filter for my 50mm and pictures look identical (it was only $12 too).

 

[TJ K]

A 1000 dollar UV filter isn't going to make your shots look better on a digital camera. All it is doing is protecting the front element of the lens. You are paying so much because it is multi coated and all that good stuff to try and keep it from affecting the image and making it worse. The cheap ones flare the expensive ones don't and just do nothing unless you are in some crazy environment where things are bouncing off the front of the lens.
TJ